HomeMy WebLinkAbout050118 - Agenda - Regular Meeting
City Council Agenda
Tuesday, May 1, 2018
Study Session – 5:00 p.m., Room CC-8
Regular Meeting - 6:30 p.m.
The Government Center
South Coast Air Quality Management District/
Main Auditorium
21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
RUTH M. LOW
Mayor
CAROL HERRERA
Mayor Pro-Tem
JIMMY LIN
Council Member
NANCY A. LYONS
Council Member
STEVE TYE
Council Member
City Manager Dan Fox • City Attorney David DeBerry • City Clerk Tommye Cribbins
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 requested, the agenda will be made available in an alternative format to a person with
disability as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. If you have questions regarding an agenda
item, please contact the City Clerk at (909) 839-7010 during regular business hours.
In an effort to comply with the requirements of Title II of the Americans with Disabilitie s 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 schedul ed meeting.
Have online access? City Council Agendas are now available on the City of Diamond Bar’s web site at
www.diamondbarca.gov
Please refrain from smoking, eating or drinking in the Council Chambers. The City of Diamond Bar uses recycled
paper and encourages you to do the same.
DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING RULES
Welcome to the meeting of the Diamond Bar City Council. Meetings are open to the public and
are broadcast live on Spectrum Cable Channel 3 and Frontier FiOS television Channel 47. You
are invited to attend and participate.
PUBLIC INPUT
Members of the public may address the Council on any item of business on the agenda during
the time the item is taken up by the Council. In addition, members of the public may, during the
Public Comment period address the Council on any Consent Calendar item or any matter not on
the agenda and within the Council’s subject matter jurisdiction. Persons wishing to speak
should submit a speaker slip to the City Clerk. Any material to be submitted to the City Council
at the meeting should be submitted through the City Clerk.
Speakers are limited to five minutes per agenda item, unless the Mayor determines otherwise.
The Mayor may adjust this time limit depending on the number of people wishing to speak, the
complexity of the matter, the length of the agenda, the hour and any other relevant
consideration. Speakers may address the Council only once on an agenda item, except during
public hearings, when the applicant/appellant may be afforded a rebuttal.
Public comments must be directed to the City Council. Behavior that disrupts the orderly
conduct of the meeting may result in the speaker being removed from the Council chambers.
INFORMATION RELATING TO AGENDAS AND ACTIONS OF THE COUNCIL
Agendas for regular City Council meetings are available 72 hours prior to the meeting and are
posted in the City’s regular posting locations, on DBTV Channel 3, Spectrum Cable Channel 3,
Frontier FiOS television Channel 47 and on the City’s website at www.diamondbarca.gov. A full
agenda packet is available for review during the meeting, in the foyer just outside the Council
chambers. The City Council may take action on any item listed on the agenda.
ACCOMMODATIONS FOR THE DISABLED
A cordless microphone is available for those persons with mobility impairments who cannot
access the podium in order to make a public comment. Sign language interpretation is available
by providing the City Clerk three business days’ notice in advance of a meeting. Please
telephone (909) 839-7010 between 7:30 a.m. and 5:30 p.m. Monday through Thursday and 7:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on Fridays.
HELPFUL PHONE NUMBERS
Copies of agendas, rules of the Council, Cassette/Video tapes of meetings: (909) 839-7010
Computer access to agendas: www.diamondbarca.gov
General information: (909) 839-7010
Written materials distributed to the City Council within 72 hours of the City Council meeting are
available for public inspection immediately upon distribution in the City C lerk’s Office at 21810 Copley
Dr., Diamond Bar, California, during normal business hours.
THIS MEETING IS BEING BROADCAST LIVE FOR VIEWING ON
SPECTRUM CABLE CHANNEL 3 AND FRONTIER FiOS TELEVISION
CHANNEL 47, AS WELL AS BY STREAMING VIDEO OVER THE INTERNET
AND BY REMAINING IN THE ROOM, YOU ARE GIVING YOUR PERMISSION
TO BE TELEVISED. THIS MEETING WILL BE RE-BROADCAST EVERY
SATURDAY AND SUNDAY AT 9:00 A.M. AND ALTERNATE TUESDAYS AT
8:00 P.M. AND ARE ALSO AVAILABLE FOR LIVE AND ARCHIVED VIEWING
ON THE CITY’S WEB SITE AT WWW.DIAMONDBARCA.GOV.
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
May 01, 2018
Next Resolution No. 2018-15
Next Ordinance No. 02(2018)
STUDY SESSION: 5:00 p.m., Room CC-8
POTENTIAL TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX (TOT) MEASURE -
STATUS UPDATE
DRAFT FY 18/19 GENERAL FUND AND INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
BUDGET
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
CALL TO ORDER: 6:30 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor
INVOCATION: Shaykh Nomaan Baig,
Institute of Knowledge
ROLL CALL: Lin, Lyons,Tye, Mayor Pro Tem
Herrera, Mayor Low
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Mayor
1. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS:
1.1 Proclaiming May, 2018 as Water Awareness Month.
MAY 1, 2018 PAGE 2
1.2 Certificate of Recognition to General Manager Michael Holmes upon his
Retirement with the Walnut Valley Water District.
1.3 Proclaiming May 6 – May 12, 2018 as Safety Seat Checkup Week.
1.4 Proclaiming May, 2018, as Lupus Awareness Month.
1.5 Presentation of Certificates of Recognition to members of the “Odyssey of the
Mind” Team for winning 1st place in the State Competition.
1.6 Presentation of City Tile to McDonald’s Restaurant, 205 South Diamond Bar
Boulevard, as Business of the Month for May, 2018.
1.7 Presentation by Bob Huff, regarding “Safe, Clean Water LA”.
2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
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 no t
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. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Under the Brown Act, members of the City Council may briefly respond to public
comments but no extended discussion and no action on such matters may take
place.
5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1 Parks and Recreation Open House – (ConnectwithRec) – May 2,
2018 – 5:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m., Diamond Bar Center, 1600 Grand
Avenue.
5.2 Coffee with a Cop – May 8, 2018 – 7:00 a.m. – 9:00 a.m., It’s a Grind
Coffee Shop, 1223 South Diamond Bar Boulevard.
5.3 Planning Commission Meeting – May 8, 2018 - 7:00 p.m., Windmill
Community Room, 21810 Copley Drive.
5.4 Traffic and Transportation Commission Meeting – May 10, 2018 –
MAY 1, 2018 PAGE 3
7:00 p.m. Windmill Community Room, 21810 Copley Drive.
5.5 City Council Meeting – May 15, 2018 – 6:30 p.m., Government
Community Center Auditorium, 21810 Copley Drive.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR:
All items listed on the Consent Calendar are considered by the City Council to be
routine and will be acted on by a single motion unless a Council Member or
member of the public request otherwise, in which case, the item will be removed
for separate consideration.
6.1 APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES.
6.1.a Special Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission of
January 30, 2018.
6.1.b Study Session Minutes of April 17, 2018.
6.1.c Regular Meeting of April 17, 2018.
Recommended Action: Approve as submitted.
Requested by: City Clerk
6.2 RECEIVE AND FILE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES.
6.2.a Regular Meeting of February 13, 2018.
Recommended Action: Receive and file.
Requested by: Community Development Department
6.3 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES.
6.3.a Regular Meeting of March 8, 2018.
Recommended Action: Receive and file.
Requested by: Public Works Department
6.4 RATIFICATION OF CHECK REGISTER DATED APRIL 12, 2018
THROUGH APRIL 25, 2018 TOTALING $ 1,195,454.20.
Recommended Action: Ratify.
Requested by: Finance Department
6.5 TREASURER'S STATEMENT FOR MARCH 2018.
Recommended Action: Approve.
Requested by: Finance Department
MAY 1, 2018 PAGE 4
6.6 VOTING DELEGATE FOR THE 2018 SCAG REGIONAL CONFERENCE
AND GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
Recommended Action: Appoint Council Member Jimmy Lin to serve as the
voting delegate at the 2018 SCAG Regional Conference and General
Assembly.
Requested by: City Manager
6.7 PURCHASE OF VARIOUS SITE FURNISHINGS FOR PANTERA PARK
AND STARSHINE PARK.
Recommended Action: Approve, and authorize the City Manager to issue,
a purchase order for new site furnishings in the amount of $56,978.33 to
Outdoor Creations Inc.
Requested by: Public Works Department
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE.
8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
8.1 2017 PUBLIC SAFETY ANNUAL REPORT.
Recommended Action: Receive and file.
Requested by: City Manager
9. COUNCIL SUB-COMMITTEE REPORTS AND MEETING ATTENDANCE
REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS:
10. ADJOURNMENT: THIS EVENING'S MEETING WILL BE ADJOURNED IN
MEMORY OF DR. DAVID K. HALL PAST CHAIRMAN/BOARD MEMBER OF
THE INDUSTRY MANUFACTURES COUNCIL (IMC).
Agenda #:
Meeting Date: May 1, 2018
CITY COUNCIL STUDY S ESSION REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Daniel Fox, City Manager
FROM: Ryan McLean, Assistant City Manager
TITLE: POTENTIAL TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX (TOT) MEASURE - STATUS
UPDATE
Staff will provide a verbal update to the City Council on the status of the potential
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) ballot measure item.
Packet Pg. 7
Agenda #:
Meeting Date: May 1, 2018
CITY COUNCIL STUDY S ESSION REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Daniel Fox, City Manager
FROM: Dianna Honeywell, Finance Director
TITLE: DRAFT FY 18/19 GENERAL FUND AND INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
BUDGET
Introduction
Each year, the City prepares an annual Operating Budget and Capital Improvement
Program for City Council consideration that implements the Council’s priorities and
Strategic Plan Goals, and provides the financial resources to deliver first -rate services
to the community. The preparation of the annual budget is a significant and important
undertaking that takes place over the course of more than four months. Below is the
schedule for the preparation of the FY 18/19 City Budget:
FY 17/18 Mid-Year Budget Review – City Council Completed on 2/20/2018
2017 – 2020 Strategic Plan Review – City Council Completed on 4/3/2018
Council Study Session on Draft FY 18/19 Operating Budget – 5/1/2018
Council Study Session on Draft FY 18/19 Capital Improvement Project
Budget – 5/15/2018
Adoption of FY 18/19 City Budget – 6/5/2018
The purpose of this Study Session is to provide the City Council with an opportunity to
review the Draft FY 18/19 Operating Budget. Based on any direction received,
appropriate revisions and refinements will be made and presented to the Ci ty Council
for adoption at the June 5, 2018 City Council meeting.
Budget Overview
The City Manager’s Draft Recommended FY 18/19 Operating Budget continues to be
conservative in revenue and expenditure growth, while maintaining all existing service
levels to the Community. Using the FY 17/18 mid -year budget levels as a baseline, the
FY 18/19 expenditures were maintained at or below previous levels to the greatest
extent practical. The use of special funds and outside funding sources have also been
Packet Pg. 8
utilized to the maximum extent practical to provide additional relief to General Fund
resources.
The Recommended Budget as currently drafted reflects the following estimated
resources and expenditures:
Estimated Resources $29,592,171
Estimated Expenditures $29,532,906
Estimated Surplus/(Deficit) $59,265
Included within these estimates is the use of $3,922,835 in Fund Balance Reserves
(discussed in more detail below). Of that amount, $2,147,908 represent carryover
projects currently underway that were included in the FY 17/18 Budget.
While the local economy continues to show growth, there are signs that this growth may
be slowing. Diamond Bar resale housing prices have exceeded pre -recession highs.
The current median price of a home in Diamond Ba r is 11.2% higher than the peak
median before the Great Recession. However, interest rates have increased over the
past year, and further interest rate increases are expected through the balance of 2018.
Keeping a watchful eye on property values as they reach all-time highs will be important
factor in realizing on-going growth in property tax revenue.
Sales tax may already be exhibiting signs of leveling off with 4 th quarter 2017 results
showing decreases in the industrial and building material sectors. Because of this, a
modest increase of 2.2% in sales tax is projected over the anticipated results from FY
17/18. Even with the addition of new businesses at the renovated Diamond Bar Ranch
Center with Sprouts and Ross, sales tax revenue in FY 18/19 is expected to come in at
the same level as FY 16/17. As a point of reference, the Consumer Price Index has
increased 3.9% for the Los Angeles area from March 2017 -March 2018. Over the past
year, the City has experienced increases in a variety of contract services and
construction costs for Capital Improvement Projects.
The City has benefited from the fiscally conservative practices of the current and
previous City Councils over the years. The City has sound reserves in place for times
of economic uncertainty. Moving forward, it will become important to continue the
prudent and careful consideration as to the use such reserves to prioritize and balance
desired service levels, along with making investments in new Capital Improvements
Projects and the maintenance of existing facilities.
Revenue Overview – Estimated Resources: $29,592,171
The following are noteworthy revenue items that have been incorporated into the
proposed FY 18/19 Operating Budget:
Property Taxes
o The assessed valuation of parcels in the City increased by 4.35% during FY
17/18. It is anticipated that there will be an increase in the assessed valuation of
3.83% in FY 18/19. This will result in an overall increase to property tax revenue
Packet Pg. 9
of 2.7% over the anticipated FY 17/18 amount of $5.2 million.
o Property Tax In Lieu of VLF is anticipated to increase 3.83% to $6.2 million
during FY 18/19.
Sales Tax
o Sales tax revenue in projected to increase by 2.2% over the expected FY 17/18
results to $5.2 million.
From Other Agencies
o It is proposed that the City sell $1.2 million in Proposition A funds in exchange for
$840,000 in General Fund funds. This is an estimated exchange rate of $0.70.
Proposition A funds are very restrictive transit funds for which the City has limited
ability to use on current projects. It is proposed that these funds be exchanged
for General Fund funds to be used for park improvement projects.
Current Service Charges
o With the remainder of the South Pointe housing development permits being
issued by the end of FY 17/18, it is anticipated that FY 18/19 building activity will
return to pre-development levels which means significantly lower revenue than
the City has seen during the last few budget cycles. Revenue from all sources of
service charges (which include Building, Planning, Engineering and Recreation
fees) are estimated to be down 40.1% or a total of $1.4 million.
Expenditures Overview – Estimated Appropriations: $29,532,906
The following are noteworthy appropriation items that have been incorporate d into the
proposed FY 18/19 Operating Budget:
City Administration (City Attorney, City Council, City Manager/City Clerk)
o City Attorney – Includes $500,000 for continued as-needed Special Legal
Services (General Fund Reserves).
o City Clerk – Provides $233,750 for LA County Registrar of Voter administration
cost related to the November 2018 Elections.
Administration & Support (Finance, Human Resources, Health & Safety
Programs, Information Systems, Civic Center, Public Information, Economic
Development)
o Human Resources
- Cost of Living/Benefit Allotment: Each year, the City Council adopts the
Compensation and Benefits Plan for the upcoming fiscal year which includes
employee positions, associated salary ranges and benefits. The City’s
Personnel Rules and Regulations specify that the City Manager may request
Packet Pg. 10
that the City Council authorize a Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) for
employees based on the March to March rates of the federal Consumer Price
Index (CPI) for Wage Earners and Clerical Workers in Los Angeles/Orange
Counties. This year’s CPI for the established period is 3.88%. Although CPI
is 3.88% during the established measurement period, the recommendation is
for a 2.0% COLA for all benefitted classifications of employment including all
executive positions such as Department Heads, Assistant City Manager and
the City Manager position. In addition, it is recommended that a $50 per
month increase to the Benefit Allotment be approved for all benefitted
classifications of employment including the executive positions and the
members of the City Council to keep up with corresponding health premium
rate increases. With the monthly Benefit Allotment increase, full -time non-
exempt staff will receive $1,320 and full-time exempt staff and City Council
Members will receive $1,350 to be used towards health benefits. The
approximate annual cost to implement both of these actions is $162,875.
Additionally, it is recommending that the City Council approve that City
facilities will be closed in observance of Martin Luther King, Jr. day which is
the third Monday of January. A recent survey of the 88 cities in Los Angeles
County revealed that the City of Diamond Bar is one of only five cities that
does not currently observe this holiday. The disruption to public service, by
closing City facilities for this holiday, will be very minimal as many members of
the public assume the City is closed and many employers in both the private
and public sector already recognize this day as a holiday. There is no
additional cost to the City to close City facilities and observe Martin Luther
King, Jr. day.
- Personnel: The City Council has made the development and maintenance of
a professional and effective workforce to serve the public a priority. It is the
duty and responsibility of the City Manager to periodically review
departmental operations and staffing structures for efficient, cost effective,
and economical delivery of services to the public and to conduct long-term
organizational and succession planning. Based on such review, it is
recommended that the City Council approve a Flexible Staffing Program that
would authorize the City Manager to hire or promote qualified individuals from
an entry-level position to a professional level classification where a job series
exists. This program would provide a merit-based flexible staffing policy to
allow for movement of employees within a designated series to more
effectively staff the organization and serve the public in an efficient and cost -
effective manner where budgetary authorization is available without
increasing head count. This program would also allow a vacancy to be filled
at the lowest level possible providing potential salary savings, as well as
professional growth opportunities. This policy would not apply to posit ions that
require supervisory responsibilities or where a job series does not exist. The
applicable job classifications are proposed as follows:
Part-time Non-Benefitted Positions
Entry Level Higher Level Highest Level
Recreation Leader I Recreation Leader II Recreation Leader III
Maintenance Worker I Maintenance Worker II
Packet Pg. 11
Full-time Benefitted Positions
Entry Level Higher Level
Maintenance Worker Senior Maintenance Worker
Assistant Engineer Associate Engineer
Assistant Planner Associate Planner
Neighborhood Improvement Officer Senior Neighborhood Improvement Officer
Management Analyst Senior Management Analyst
Hiring and/or promotional decisions would be based on Council-approved
personnel head counts and within adopted budgetary appropriations . A
promotional opportunity between the Entry and Higher Level positions would
typically range between $5,000 and $7,000 annually.
o Economic Development – Has been incorporated into overall operating expenses
(not reserves). Amount is down $32,100 based on estimated as-needed
services. Includes $25,000 allocated for Restaurant Week.
Public Safety (Law Enforcement, Volunteer Patrol, Fire Protection, Animal
Control, Emergency Preparedness)
o Law Enforcement - The annual increase to the FY 18/19 law enforcement
contract rates is 2.57% which represents $149,087. The law enforcement
contract amount based on the current service levels will be $5,950,164. The
Liability Trust Fund rate for FY 18/19 is 10.5% which represents at total of
$613,739. An additional $100,000 is proposed from the Law Enforcement
Reserve Fund for as-needed special assignments and suppression patrols which
have proven to be a cost effective approach to reducing crime and responding to
specific public safety issues throughout the year. The FY 18/19 LA Sheriff
Contract Budget totals $6,574,190, or approximately 22.2% of the operating
budget expenditures.
o Crossing Guards – The City currently provides Crossing Guards at 10
elementary and middle schools. Two additional crossing guards hav e been
requested, which have been supported by the appropriate warrant studies, at
Walnut and Maple Hill Elementary schools. The total budget for crossing guard
services is $174,000 which is a $24,000 increase over the previous year.
Community Development (Planning, Building & Safety, Neighborhood
Improvement)
o Building & Safety - Decrease in overall expenses of $167,500 is reflective of the
lower permit activity projected.
Parks & Recreation (Diamond Bar Center, Recreation)
o Parks & Recreation Administration - As a result of the previous year’s
consolidation of the maintenance operations under the Public Works umbrella,
the Parks & Recreation Administration division has been combined with the
Packet Pg. 12
Diamond Bar Center and Recreation divisions. The new Parks & Recreation
Director will split his/her time between the Diamond Bar Center and Recreation
divisions.
o Diamond Bar Center - After a year of transition with the janitorial staff at the
Diamond Bar Center, the City is utilizing part-time facility attendants to perform
many of the duties previously handled by a temporary staffing firm. Also included
in the personnel services section is the addition of the Parks & Recreation
Director salary (50%). These changes result in an increase to personnel
services in the amount of $260,000.
o Recreation - Below is a summary of various community special events with their
costs and any revenue that is produced. This chart has been added for a point
for discussion as to how the City can best deliver the programs that reside nts
desire while responsibly managing the rising costs of the various events.
Program Name Expenditure Revenue Surplus/(Deficit)
4th of July 67,720$ -$ (67,720)$
Concerts/Movies 63,000 2,000 (61,000)
Barktober 19,000 - (19,000)
Winter Snow Fest 56,560 7,250 (49,310)
City Birthday Party 110,800 16,900 (93,900)
Easter Egg Hunt 10,600 - (10,600)
Fall Fun Festival 13,350 1,500 (11,850)
341,030$ 27,650$ (313,380)$
- 4th of July Bash: The 2018 4th of July Blast will be held at Diamond Bar
High School for the last time until at least 2023. For the next five years ,
Walnut Valley Unified School District has scheduled major construction
projects throughout the campus, including renovation and replacement of
entire classroom blocks. These projects will require the placement of portable
classroom facilities on the athletic fields, rendering the site unavailable for the
event for duration of the construction. The 4th of July Blast has grown into a
regional attraction drawing thousands of patrons. As such, the event requires
a venue that provides adequate capacity while m eeting minimum safety
requirements. With Diamond Bar High School unavailable beginning in 2019,
the City Council should consider alternate locations or postponement of the
event.
- Winter Snow Fest/Holiday Event: It is proposed that the annual Winter
Snow Fest be moved from January to early December with the rescheduled
event incorporating a distinct holiday theme.
- City Birthday Party: In 2019, the City will celebrate 30 years of
incorporation with the April Birthday Party event. In subsequent years, the
Packet Pg. 13
City Council may wish to consider program adjustment options for milestone
events versus an annual event. In this scenario, the City would hold smaller,
more intimate events in non-milestone years, with the large scale Birthday
Party event being held in milestone years like the 35th, 40th, etc.
Public Works (PW Administration, Engineering, Road Maintenance, Parks &
Facilities Maintenance, Landscape Maintenance)
o Engineering – Includes $150,000 for Safe Routes to School Updates consistent
with the new Strategic Plan Item. Safe Route to School Grants would be sought
to off-set this expense.
o Parks & Facilities Landscape Maintenance
- American Flags: Includes $40,000 for an additional 150 American flags and
new mounting hardware bringing the total to 250 flags. American Flags are
currently randomly hung along Diamond Bar Blvd three times per year around
President’s Day, Memorial Day to Independence Day, and Veteran’s Day.
The proposal would also move all American Flags to Grand Avenue rather
than on Diamond Bar Blvd. The military recognition banners would remain on
Diamond Bar Blvd.
- Holiday Decorations: Also included in the proposed budget, and a topic for
discussion during this study session, is the cost for new holiday street
banners, along with additional garland and decorations at the Grand/Diamond
Bar Blvd intersection, City Hall and the Diamond Bar Center. A proposed
amount of $50,000 has been allocated for these decorations.
o Landscape and Lighting Assessment Districts - As in previous years, the General
Fund has subsidized the Lighting and Landscape Assessment Districts. Every
effort has been made to keep costs down, but with rising maintenance and utility
costs, and a fixed amount of property tax assessment revenue available, General
Fund Reserves are required to fund the deficit in each District. To balance these
budgets, a transfer of $487,042 is required. This is approximately $56,300
higher than the anticipated subsidy for FY 17/18. It should be noted, that
although District 39 increased its assessments a couple of years ago, there is still
a deficit. The District #39 budget also includes $95,000 for tree trimming
consistent with the City’s maintenance schedule.
LLAD
District
Proposed
Expenditures
Est. Assessment
Resources
Est. General
Fund Resources
#38 $375,410 $277,000 $98,410
#39 $540,264 $295,500 $244,764
#41 $266,067 $122,200 $143,867
Total $1,181,741 $694,700 $487,041
As the Council is aware, staff is exploring options to return LLAD #41 to the respective
Homeowners Associations and property owners.
Packet Pg. 14
Use of General Fund Reserves – The following table summarizes the use of
General Fund Reserves for those items mentioned above.
Use of General Fund Reserves $ Amount
Capital Improvement Projects
(carryover)*
$1,526,813
Capital Improvement Projects (new) $757,886
LLADs $487,041
Special Legal Counsel $500,000
New Finance Software System* $591,095
New Land Management System $30,000
Professional Services* $30,000
Total $3,922,835
*Carryover from FY 17/18
Internal Service Funds (Self-Insurance Fund, Vehicle Maintenance &
Replacement Fund, Equipment Maintenance & Replacement Fund, Building
Facility & Maintenance Fund)
o Self-Insurance Fund - CJPIA Premium is lower by $175,533 due to a large
retrospective adjustment to the liability insurance premiums for fewer losses
experienced by the City over the last few years.
o Vehicle Maintenance & Replacement Fund
- Includes the purchase of a new Ford F-450 truck ($57,000) to replace the
2006 F-350 for Public Work Department.
- Includes the purchase of a portable message board ($25,000) for the Street
Maintenance division.
o Equipment Maintenance & Replacement Fund
- Provides $184,000 for scheduled replacement of desktop computers citywide.
- Provides $45,000 for scheduled server replacements which has been split
over the next two years.
- Includes $960,000 for continued efforts for new replacement the Finance
System and Recreation Software System (carryover From FY 17/18). The
funding for these projects includes the use of General Fund and Technology
Reserve Fund reserves in the amount of $621,095 (already mentioned above)
and $338,905 respectively.
Attachments:
1. a FY18-19 General Fund Budget Totals
2. b FY18-19 General Fund and Internal Service Funds Draft Budget
Packet Pg. 15
4/25/2018
FY 2016-17 FY 2017-18 FY 2017-18 FY 2018-19 %
Actual Adjusted Projected Proposed Change
ESTIMATED RESOURCES
Property Taxes $4,920,614 $5,122,000 $5,193,000 $5,329,169 2.6%
Other Taxes 7,747,562 7,761,100 7,806,880 7,831,000 0.3%
State Subventions 5,787,841 6,011,638 6,041,677 6,240,720 3.3%
From Other Agencies 450,000 225,000 - 840,000 0.0%
Fines and Forfeitures 460,325 415,500 405,000 407,500 0.6%
Current Services Charges 2,830,763 3,190,520 3,525,722 2,111,710 -40.1%
Use of Money & Property 917,727 1,405,150 1,488,743 1,524,860 2.4%
Cost Reimbursements 271,453 108,400 121,063 125,000 3.3%
Transfers-In Other Funds 1,155,511 1,160,296 1,127,336 1,259,377 11.7%
Fd Balance Reserves 579,083 4,959,471 1,969,987 3,922,835 99.1%
Total Estimated Resources $25,120,879 $30,359,075 $27,679,408 $29,592,171 6.9%
APPROPRIATIONS
City Council $166,159 $177,397 $170,947 $185,227 8.4%
City Attorney 212,124 770,000 726,000 695,000 -4.3%
City Manager/City Clerk 1,257,519 1,534,616 1,474,217 1,723,625 16.9%
Finance 748,293 759,455 752,804 782,948 4.0%
Human Resources 311,559 417,175 322,970 429,788 33.1%
Safety Program 5,192 19,000 8,150 27,300 235.0%
Information Systems 1,029,688 1,234,907 1,174,040 1,231,444 4.9%
Civic Center 488,419 550,044 544,544 587,038 7.8%
Public Information 645,820 837,633 830,651 696,933 -16.1%
Economic Development 188,719 321,835 327,085 294,968 -9.8%
Law Enforcement 6,336,371 6,691,593 6,631,963 7,033,503 6.1%
Volunteer Patrol 4,939 6,000 5,500 6,000 9.1%
Fire 7,359 15,000 12,359 12,500 1.1%
Animal Control 161,896 174,500 177,438 183,500 3.4%
Emergency Preparedness 56,522 74,700 74,200 72,200 -2.7%
Community Dev./Planning 625,226 668,775 632,196 667,607 5.6%
Building & Safety 830,616 908,550 822,150 654,612 -20.4%
Neighborhood Improvement 291,250 325,070 280,104 301,354 7.6%
Parks & Recreation Admin 24,151 8,040 2,100 - -100.0%
Diamond Bar Center - Oper. 1,036,823 1,266,714 1,122,265 1,383,691 23.3%
Recreation 1,675,514 2,068,372 2,039,955 2,071,650 1.6%
Public Works - Admin 798,361 889,615 808,615 758,007 -6.3%
Engineering 665,102 836,543 702,830 1,150,702 63.7%
Road Maintenance 1,779,037 1,859,930 1,839,930 1,770,533 -3.8%
Park & Facilities Maintenance 1,230,208 1,479,251 1,459,691 1,445,456 -1.0%
Landscape Maintenance 315,685 347,460 347,952 304,313 -12.5%
Transfer-Out Other Funds 1,977,056 5,611,899 2,730,091 5,063,007 85.5%
Total Appropriations 22,869,608 29,854,074 26,020,747 29,532,906 13.5%
Excess Resources over Appropriations $2,251,271 $505,001 $1,658,661 $59,265
Fund Balance Reserves @ Beg of Year 20,796,662 22,468,850 22,468,850 22,157,524
Less Appropriations Carry Over
Less Uses of Fd Bal Reserves (579,083) (4,959,471) (1,969,987) (3,922,835)
Estimated Fd Bal Reserves @ 06/30 22,468,850 18,014,380 22,157,524 18,293,954
Uses of Fund Balance Reserves:
Economic Development 188,719 321,835 327,085 -
Transfer out - CIP 294,941 2,783,262 482,170 2,284,699
Transfer out - LLADS 95,423 424,374 440,732 487,041
Transfer out - Technology Reserve 100,000 100,000 -
Special Legal Counsel - 500,000 500,000 500,000
New Finance System - 450,000 20,000 591,095
New Recreation System - 250,000 - -
New Land Management System - - - 30,000
Professional Svcs - Ballot Measure - 130,000 100,000 30,000
579,083 4,959,471 1,969,987 3,922,835
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
GENERAL FUND BUDGET
FY 2018-19
a
Packet Pg. 16
City of Diamond Bar
ANNUAL BUDGET
Fiscal Year 2018 - 2019
21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91756 l p: 909.839.7000 l www.diamondbarca.gov
b
Packet Pg. 17
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
Property Taxes
30010 Current Secured $4,599,738 $4,802,000 $4,875,000 $5,006,469
30020 Current Unsecured 183,756 185,000 185,000 188,000
30050 Supplemental Roll 128,189 122,000 123,000 124,700
30100 Prior Year Property Tax (7,146)(10,000)(10,000)(10,000)
30200 Misc. Property Taxes —1,000 ——
30250 Interest Penalties & Delinquencies 16,078 22,000 20,000 20,000
Total Property Taxes $4,920,614 $5,122,000 $5,193,000 $5,329,169
Other Taxes
31010 Sales Tax $5,191,608 $5,162,100 $5,082,700 $5,196,000
31200 Transient Occupancy Tax 923,527 950,000 1,050,000 1,050,000
31210 Franchise Tax 1,320,617 1,349,000 1,299,180 1,285,000
31250 Property Transfer Tax 311,810 300,000 375,000 300,000
Total Other Taxes $7,747,562 $7,761,100 $7,806,880 $7,831,000
Subventions - State
31340 Homeowners Exemption $30,418 $30,500 $30,500 $30,500
31700 Motor Vehicle in Lieu (VLF)25,571 —30,039 —
31701 VLF - Property Tax in Lieu 5,731,852 5,981,138 5,981,138 6,210,220
Total Subventions - State $5,787,841 $6,011,638 $6,041,677 $6,240,720
From Other Agencies
31900 Intergovernmental Revenue - Other $450,000 $225,000 $—$840,000
Total From Other Agencies $450,000 $225,000 $—$840,000
Fines & Forfeitures
32150 Vehicle Code Fines $209,737 $185,000 $185,000 $185,000
32200 General Fines 14,334 18,000 15,000 15,000
32210 Municipal Code Fines 4,727 5,000 5,500 5,000
32230 Parking Fines 203,502 185,000 185,000 185,000
32250 Vehicle Impound Fees 10,400 7,500 7,500 7,500
32270 False Alarm Fees 17,625 15,000 7,000 10,000
Total Fines & Forfeitures $460,325 $415,500 $405,000 $407,500
Current Service Charges
Building Fees:
34110 Building Permits $574,605 $479,119 $531,587 $277,520
34120 Plumbing Permits 121,403 63,187 129,191 36,600
34130 Electrical Permits 88,443 69,200 69,200 40,090
34140 Mechanical Permits 59,786 36,556 45,425 21,175
34200 Permit Issuance Fee 89,125 93,343 83,552 54,070
34250 Inspection Fees 15,899 8,835 2,576 5,120
34300 Plan Check Fees 559,203 609,962 498,211 353,300
34310 Plan Retention Fee 24,639 31,171 31,171 18,055
34350 SMIP Fees 7,873 5,381 6,011 3,120
34355 Building Standards Admin Fee 2,472 2,129 1,959 1,235
34415 Waste Reduction Fees 900 —1,500 1,560
Sub-Total $1,544,348 $1,398,883 $1,400,383 $811,845
GENERAL FUND REVENUE OVERVIEW
City of Diamond Bar, California 57 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 18
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
Planning Fees:
34430 Current Planning Fees $129,671 $200,000 $200,000 $192,000
34435 Planning Administration Fees 173 ———
34550 Developer Fees 98,000 ———
34554 Willow Heights Park Improvement Fees 136,500 ———
34556 South Pointe Developer Fees —500,000 890,000 —
34560 Business License Fees 21,219 20,000 20,000 20,000
34561 Business License Late Fees 2,500 2,000 2,500 2,500
Sub-Total $388,063 $722,000 $1,112,500 $214,500
Engineering Fees:
34610 Engineering - Plan Check Fees $39,781 $40,000 $30,000 $30,000
34620 Engineering - Address Change Fee 2,588 5,000 5,000 4,000
34630 Engineering - Encroachment Fees 62,822 50,000 45,000 50,000
34640 Engineering - Inspections Fees 8,398 30,000 25,000 30,000
34650 Soils/Traffic/Misc Engineering Fees 35,950 35,000 35,000 45,000
34660 Traffic Mitigation - Engineering 8,513 ———
34662 Waste Hauler Fees 92,780 190,000 190,000 195,000
34665 Industrial Waste Fees 37,329 30,000 35,000 40,000
Sub-Total $288,162 $380,000 $365,000 $394,000
Recreation Fees:
34720 Community Activities $48,732 $55,117 $60,239 $64,550
34730 Senior Activities 40,520 50,100 45,500 47,350
34740 Athletics 63,799 82,400 51,600 63,750
34760 Fee Programs 225,505 242,020 235,500 260,715
34780 Contract Classes 231,635 260,000 255,000 255,000
34800 Special Event Fees 1,410 ———
Sub-Total $611,601 $689,637 $647,839 $691,365
Total Current Service Charges $2,832,173 $3,190,520 $3,525,722 $2,111,710
Use of Money and Property
Misc Use of Money & Property
36600 Returned Check Charges $105 $150 $200 $460
36630 Sale of Fixed Assets 270 ———
36637 Film Permits —2,500 2,500 3,000
36660 Donations 3,650 4,000 —500
36900 Miscellaneous Revenue 8,052 10,000 10,000 10,000
Sub-Total $12,077 $16,650 $12,700 $13,960
Investments
36100 Investment Earnings $301,672 $325,000 $420,000 $420,900
36110 Unrealized Gain/(Loss) on Invests (404,133)———
36120 Gain/Loss On Sale of Investments 10,466 7,500 7,500 7,500
Sub-Total $(91,995)$332,500 $427,500 $428,400
GENERAL FUND REVENUE OVERVIEW
City of Diamond Bar, California 58 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 19
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
Rents & Concessions
36610 Rents & Concessions $158,095 $147,000 $147,000 $150,000
36615 Diamond Bar Center Rental 703,157 800,000 800,000 825,000
36618 Facility Security 31,380 40,000 39,000 39,000
36620 Heritage Park Building Rental 23,058 25,000 22,000 25,000
36625 Parks & Fields Rental 16,711 16,000 12,000 15,000
Sub-Total $932,401 $1,028,000 $1,020,000 $1,054,000
Taxable Sales
36640 City Store Sales $30 $—$—$—
36650 Sale of Printed Material 1,288 2,500 1,500 2,500
Sub-Total $1,318 $2,500 $1,500 $2,500
Property Damage
36800 Property Damage - Public Works $53,598 $22,500 $27,000 $24,000
36810 Property Damage - Parks 8,917 3,000 43 2,000
Sub-Total $62,515 $25,500 $27,043 $26,000
Total Use of Money and Property $916,317 $1,405,150 $1,488,743 $1,524,860
Cost Reimbursements
36950 Cost Reimbursements $271,453 $108,400 $121,063 $125,000
Total Cost Reimbursements $271,453 $108,400 $121,063 $125,000
Transfers In-Other Funds:
39012 Transfer In - Law Enforcement Fund $—$—$—$100,000
39111 Transfer In - Gas Tax Fund 903,433 992,362 978,852 989,151
39115 Transfer In - Integrated Waste Mgmt.
Fund
112,220 30,000 8,050 10,000
39123 Transfer In - Prop A Safe Parks Fund 40,900 35,000 35,000 50,000
39126 Transfer In - COPS Fund 98,958 102,934 105,434 110,226
Total Transfers In-Other Funds $1,155,511 $1,160,296 $1,127,336 $1,259,377
Fund Balance Reserves
Use of Fund Balance Reserves $579,083 $4,959,471 $1,959,987 $3,922,835
GENERAL FUND TOTAL $25,120,878 $30,359,075 $27,669,408 $29,592,171
GENERAL FUND REVENUE OVERVIEW
City of Diamond Bar, California 59 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 20
Property Taxes
5,329,169
18.0%
Other Taxes
7,831,000
26.5%
Subventions -State
6,240,720
21.1%
From Other Agencies
840,000
2.8%
Fines &Forfeitures
407,500
1.4%
Current Service Charges
2,111,710
7.1%
Use of Money and Property
1,524,860
5.2%
Cost Reimbursements
125,000
0.4%
Transfers In-Other Funds:
1,259,377
4.3%
Fund Balance Reserves
3,922,835
13.3%
Total Resources: $29,592,171
FY 2018/19 GENERAL FUND RESOURCES
City of Diamond Bar, California 60 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 21
City of Diamond Bar, California 61 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 22
Personnel Operating Professional Contract Capital
Department Services Supplies Expenditures Services Services Outlay Transfers Total Percentage
Community Administration
City Council $139,127 $250 $45,850 $185,227 0.63 %
City Attorney 695,000 695,000 2.35 %
City Manager/Clerk 1,059,710 31,000 431,415 201,500 —1,723,625 5.84 %
Finance 583,753 3,000 39,800 156,395 782,948 2.65 %
Human Resources 375,778 3,000 49,010 2,000 429,788 1.46 %
Health & Safety Program 13,000 5,300 9,000 27,300 0.09 %
Information Systems 575,194 32,500 464,950 101,500 32,000 25,300 1,231,444 4.17 %
Civic Center 122,363 44,000 416,175 2,500 2,000 587,038 1.99 %
Public Information 366,218 35,250 194,315 88,650 12,500 —696,933 2.36 %
Economic Development 141,718 11,250 130,000 12,000 294,968 1.00 %
Law Enforcement 6,000 18,500 7,009,003 7,033,503 23.82 %
Community Volunteer Patrol 1,000 5,000 6,000 0.02 %
Fire 7,500 5,000 12,500 0.04 %
Animal Control 183,500 183,500 0.62 %
Emergency Preparedness 20,000 22,200 30,000 72,200 0.24 %
Transfers Out 2,291,267 2,291,267 7.76 %
Use of General Fund Reserves 2,771,740 2,771,740 9.39 %
Community Development
Planning 634,007 1,200 21,400 11,000 —667,607 2.26 %
Building and Safety 129,112 2,500 3,000 520,000 654,612 2.22 %
Neighborhood Improvement 252,904 400 7,050 41,000 301,354 1.02 %
Parks & Recreation - Admin ——————%
Diamond Bar Center 867,316 37,150 279,095 20,250 164,880 15,000 1,383,691 4.69 %
Recreation Services 1,293,915 124,450 241,585 3,700 408,000 —2,071,650 7.01 %
Public Works-Admin 411,707 5,000 53,800 257,500 30,000 —758,007 2.57 %
Engineering 270,952 4,750 875,000 1,150,702 3.90 %
Road Maintenance 410,033 75,500 95,000 —1,110,000 80,000 1,770,533 6.00 %
Parks & Facilities Maintenance 379,103 44,500 497,075 447,278 77,500 1,445,456 4.89 %
Landscape Maintenance 304,313 304,313 1.03 %
GENERAL FUND TOTAL $8,012,910 $479,700 $2,906,520 $1,708,995 $11,156,974 $204,800 $5,063,007 $29,532,906 100.00%
Percentage of Total 27.13%1.62%9.84%5.79%37.78%0.69%17.14%100.00%
FY 2018/19 GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATIONS
City of Diamond Bar, California 62 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 23
City Administration
2,603,852
8.8%
Administration &
Support
4,050,419
13.7%
Public Safety
7,307,703
24.7%
Community
Development
1,623,573
5.5%
Parks &Recreation
3,455,341
11.7%
Public Works
5,429,011
18.4%
Transfers Out
5,063,007
17.1%
Total Appropriations: $29,532,906
FY 2018/19 GENERAL FUND APPROPRIATIONS
City of Diamond Bar, California 63 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 24
CITY ADMINISTRATION
City of Diamond Bar, California 64 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES SUMMARY
Organization #: 001-4010 through 001-4030
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES $1,061,011 $1,122,234 $1,110,549 $1,198,837
SUPPLIES 26,115 24,000 23,950 31,250
OPERATING EXPENDITURES 226,397 263,370 241,665 477,265
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 322,280 1,071,409 994,000 896,500
DEPARTMENT TOTAL $1,635,802 $2,482,013 $2,371,164 $2,603,852
DEPARTMENT INCLUDES:
4010 City Council $185,227
4020 City Attorney 695,000
4020 City Manager/City Clerk's Office 1,723,625
Total Department Expenditures $2,603,852
FY 18/19 Adopted Expenditures
City Council
$185,227
7.1%
City Attorney
$695,000
26.7%
City Manager/City
Clerk's Office
$1,723,625
66.2%
b
Packet Pg. 25
DEPARTMENT:
City
Administration
DIVISION:City Council
ORGANIZATION #:001-4010
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $48,382 $44,760 $44,760 $44,760
40070 City Paid Benefits 3,036 6,010 6,010 5,684
40080 Retirement 5,711 5,318 5,318 2,828
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———1,003
40082 PEPRA Member Retirement ———2,167
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense —358 358 358
40085 Medicare 3,231 1,301 1,301 1,327
40090 Benefit Allotment 74,904 78,000 78,000 81,000
Total Personnel $135,265 $135,747 $135,747 $139,127
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $19 $500 $250 $250
Total Supplies $19 $500 $250 $250
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42112 Photography $22 $750 $750 $1,000
42125 Telephone 2,595 2,700 2,700 2,700
42130 Rental/Lease of Equipment —2,000 ——
42315 Membership & Dues —500 500 500
42320 Publications —200 ——
42325 Meetings 815 1,000 1,000 1,000
42330 Travel-Conferences 12,676 16,000 12,000 22,650
42335 Travel-Mileage & Auto Allow 14,767 18,000 18,000 18,000
Total Operating Expenditures $30,875 $41,150 $34,950 $45,850
DIVISION TOTAL $166,159 $177,397 $170,947 $185,227
CITY COUNCIL
City of Diamond Bar, California 66 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 26
DEPARTMENT:
City
Administration
DIVISION:City Attorney
ORGANIZATION #:001-4020
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
44020 Prof Svcs - General Legal $153,639 $140,000 $146,000 $155,000
44021 Prof Svcs - Special Legal 16,965 555,000 555,000 500,000
44023 Prof Svcs - Sp Lgl Code Enf 41,520 75,000 25,000 40,000
Total Professional Services $212,124 $770,000 $726,000 $695,000
DIVISION TOTAL $212,124 $770,000 $726,000 $695,000
CITY ATTORNEY
City of Diamond Bar, California 68 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 27
DEPARTMENT:City
Administration
DIVISION:City Manager/
Clerk
ORGANIZATION #:001-4030
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $674,838 $702,500 $702,500 $726,774
40020 Over-Time Wages 263 1,000 500 500
40030 Part Time Wages 21,006 36,875 20,000 36,875
40070 City Paid Benefits 6,216 7,592 7,592 7,800
40080 Retirement 117,953 126,500 126,500 111,123
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———39,400
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense 5,943 10,360 10,510 12,253
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 3,204 3,890 3,890 4,292
40085 Medicare 12,034 13,530 13,830 12,168
40087 Social Security ——1,240 2,286
40090 Benefit Allotment 84,288 84,240 88,240 106,239
Total Personnel $925,745 $986,487 $974,802 $1,059,710
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $19,296 $18,000 $18,000 $21,500
41300 Small Tools & Equipment —500 1,700 2,000
41400 Promotional Supplies 6,800 5,000 4,000 7,500
Total Supplies $26,096 $23,500 $23,700 $31,000
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42110 Printing $7,458 $11,000 $8,000 $8,000
42113 Engraving Services 532 2,500 1,500 2,500
42115 Advertising 13,596 17,500 5,000 15,000
42120 Postage 17,670 25,000 25,000 25,000
42124 Technology 3,000 4,500 4,200 4,200
42125 Telephone 1,035 1,100 1,100 1,100
42130 Rental/Lease of Equipment 3,443 500 750 750
42140 Rental/Lease of Real 50,692 52,680 52,700 54,000
42200 Equipment Maintenance 302 5,500 2,800 2,800
42315 Membership & Dues 35,650 40,000 43,225 44,675
42320 Publications 9,507 9,000 9,000 9,750
42325 Meetings 9,300 5,000 7,000 7,000
42330 Travel-Conferences 17,109 13,500 12,000 14,950
42335 Travel-Mileage & Auto Allow 10,611 10,440 10,940 6,440
42340 Education & Training 1,881 2,000 1,500 1,500
42390 Elections 13,736 22,000 22,000 233,750
Total Operating Expenditures $195,521 $222,220 $206,715 $431,415
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
44000 Professional Services $110,156 $301,409 $268,000 $201,500
Total Professional Services $110,156 $301,409 $268,000 $201,500
CAPITAL OUTLAY
46220 Furniture $—$1,000 $1,000 $—
Total Capital Outlay $—$1,000 $1,000 $—
DIVISION TOTAL $1,257,519 $1,534,616 $1,474,217 $1,723,625
CITY MANAGER / CITY CLERK
City of Diamond Bar, California 70 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 28
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES SUMMARY
Organization #: 001-4050 through 001-4096
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES $1,758,470 $1,997,050 $1,906,850 $2,165,024
SUPPLIES 84,658 130,975 119,950 130,750
OPERATING EXPENDITURES 960,839 1,175,254 1,160,753 1,180,800
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 522,138 705,643 651,391 490,045
CONTRACT SERVICES 39,699 76,719 70,000 56,500
CAPITAL OUTLAY 51,480 55,408 51,300 27,300
DEPARTMENT TOTAL $3,417,285 $4,141,048 $3,960,244 $4,050,419
DEPARTMENT INCLUDES:
4050 Finance $782,948
4060 Human Resources 429,788
4065 Health & Safety Program 27,300
4070 Information Systems 1,231,444
4093 Civic Center 587,038
4095 Public Information 696,933
4096 Economic Development 294,968
Total Department Expenditures $4,050,419
Finance
$782,948
19.3%
Human Resources
$429,788
10.6%
Health &Safety
Program
$27,300
0.7%
Information Systems
$1,231,444
30.4%
Civic Center
$587,038
14.5%
Public Information
$696,933
17.2%
Economic Development
$294,968
7.3%
ADMINISTRATION & SUPPORT
City of Diamond Bar, California 71 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 29
DEPARTMENT:
Administration
& Support
DIVISION:Finance
ORGANIZATION #:001-4050
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $407,544 $400,900 $400,900 $413,057
40020 Over-Time Wages 104 1,000 1,000 1,000
40070 City Paid Benefits 5,034 5,380 5,380 5,142
40080 Retirement 74,310 78,560 78,560 64,403
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———22,835
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense 3,248 3,170 3,170 3,262
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 2,213 2,415 2,415 2,487
40085 Medicare 6,407 6,390 6,390 6,573
40090 Benefit Allotment 64,873 62,390 62,390 64,994
Total Personnel $563,734 $560,205 $560,205 $583,753
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $1,446 $3,000 $1,500 $2,000
41300 Small Tools & Equipment 245 1,000 500 1,000
Total Supplies $1,692 $4,000 $2,000 $3,000
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42110 Printing $3,395 $4,600 $4,974 $5,250
42124 Technology 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200
42128 Banking Charges 16,640 21,000 18,600 18,600
42200 Equipment Maintenance 417 950 500 1,000
42315 Membership & Dues 1,504 1,400 1,185 1,250
42320 Publications 418 500 —500
42325 Meetings 204 500 350 500
42330 Travel-Conferences 1,021 4,000 3,200 5,200
42335 Travel-Mileage & Auto Allow 3,404 3,500 3,500 3,500
42340 Education & Training 2,198 2,900 2,000 2,800
Total Operating Expenditures $30,401 $40,550 $35,509 $39,800
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
44000 Professional Services $85,366 $77,200 $77,640 $79,145
44010 Prof Svcs-Acctg & Auditing 67,101 77,500 77,450 77,250
Total Professional Services $152,467 $154,700 $155,090 $156,395
DIVISION TOTAL $748,293 $759,455 $752,804 $782,948
FINANCE
City of Diamond Bar, California 73 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 30
DEPARTMENT:
Administration
& Support
DIVISION:
Human
Resources &
Risk
Management
ORGANIZATION #:001-4060
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $187,446 $265,950 $192,240 $275,590
40070 City Paid Benefits 1,983 2,705 2,705 2,574
40080 Retirement 37,360 52,575 37,950 43,241
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———15,331
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense 1,499 2,120 2,120 1,610
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 1,125 1,170 1,170 1,228
40085 Medicare 2,840 4,025 2,960 4,164
40090 Benefit Allotment 29,642 30,840 30,840 32,040
40093 Benefits Administration 6,228 ———
Total Personnel $268,122 $359,385 $269,985 $375,778
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $917 $1,600 $1,600 $1,500
41400 Promotional Supplies 484 2,000 2,000 1,500
Total Supplies $1,401 $3,600 $3,600 $3,000
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42110 Printing $527 $250 $250 $1,500
42115 Advertising 4,060 1,500 1,000 2,000
42124 Technology 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200
42315 Membership & Dues 4,279 4,950 4,595 5,220
42320 Publications 288 900 100 600
42325 Meetings 2,225 3,500 3,000 3,500
42330 Travel-Conferences 2,175 900 600 2,500
42335 Travel-Mileage/Auto Allow 1,542 1,740 1,740 1,740
42340 Education & Training 5,370 18,500 18,500 15,000
42341 Employee Tuition Reimb —6,500 6,300 3,500
42345 Pre-Employment Screening 12,482 7,500 9,000 7,500
42346 Misc Employee Benefits 2,190 1,500 1,500 1,500
42347 Employee Recognition Prgm.4,443 3,250 1,500 3,250
Total Operating Expenditures $40,781 $52,190 $49,285 $49,010
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
44000 Professional Services $1,254 $2,000 $100 $2,000
Total Professional Services $1,254 $2,000 $100 $2,000
DIVISION TOTAL $311,559 $417,175 $322,970 $429,788
HUMAN RESOURCES & RISK MANAGEMENT
City of Diamond Bar, California 75 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 31
DEPARTMENT:
Administration
& Support
DIVISION:HR - Safety Prog
ORGANIZATION #:001-4065
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $186 $1,000 $850 $1,000
41300 Small Tools & Equipment 2,812 1,500 1,000 10,000
41400 Promotional Supplies —2,000 2,000 2,000
Total Supplies $2,997 $4,500 $3,850 $13,000
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42315 Membership & Dues $135 $500 $300 $300
42320 Publications —500 —500
42325 Meetings —1,500 1,000 1,500
42340 Education & Training 228 2,500 1,500 2,500
42347 Employee Recognition
Program
1,516 500 500 500
Total Operating Expenditures $1,879 $5,500 $3,300 $5,300
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
44000 Professional Services $316 $9,000 $1,000 $9,000
Total Professional Services $316 $9,000 $1,000 $9,000
DIVISION TOTAL $5,192 $19,000 $8,150 $27,300
HEALTH & SAFETY PROGRAM
City of Diamond Bar, California 77 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 32
DEPARTMENT:
Administration
& Support
DIVISION:Info Systems
ORGANIZATION #:001-4070
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $276,642 $373,500 $373,500 $415,900
40020 Over-Time Wages 381 2,000 1,200 1,500
40070 City Paid Benefits 2,647 4,800 4,800 4,777
40080 Retirement 52,988 65,950 65,950 55,587
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———19,709
40082 PEPRA Member Retirement ———3,992
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense 3,966 4,450 4,450 4,825
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 1,471 2,225 2,225 2,449
40085 Medicare 3,904 5,425 5,425 6,038
40090 Benefit Allotment 37,079 55,840 55,840 60,417
Total Personnel $379,079 $514,190 $513,390 $575,194
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $26,379 $35,325 $30,000 $30,000
41300 Small Tools & Equipment 2,210 4,300 2,500 2,500
Total Supplies $28,589 $39,625 $32,500 $32,500
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42100 Photocopying $16,015 $16,000 $19,000 $16,000
42124 Technology 2,000 2,400 2,400 2,400
42125 Telephone 51,702 71,800 71,800 64,800
42200 Equipment Maintenance 1,111 3,500 2,700 3,500
42205 Computer Maintenance 263,881 330,750 329,100 365,100
42315 Membership & Dues 1,269 1,900 1,550 1,550
42320 Publications —200 200 200
42325 Meetings 288 1,000 100 1,000
42330 Travel-Conferences 837 4,200 4,200 4,200
42335 Travel-Mileage & Auto Allow 3,234 3,200 3,200 3,200
42340 Education & Training 2,490 2,600 2,600 3,000
Total Operating Expenditures $342,826 $437,550 $436,850 $464,950
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
44000 Professional Services $141,999 $66,500 $66,500 $54,500
44030 Prof Svcs-Data Processing 68,352 105,742 62,500 47,000
Total Professional Services $210,351 $172,242 $129,000 $101,500
CONTRACT SERVICES
45000 Contract Services $24,363 $28,000 $22,000 $32,000
Total Contract Services $24,363 $28,000 $22,000 $32,000
CAPITAL OUTLAY
46230 Computer Equip-Hardware $5,760 $23,300 $23,300 $20,300
46235 Computer Equip-Software 38,721 20,000 17,000 5,000
Total Capital Outlay $44,480 $43,300 $40,300 $25,300
DIVISION TOTAL $1,029,688 $1,234,907 $1,174,040 $1,231,444
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
City of Diamond Bar, California 79 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 33
DEPARTMENT:
Administration
& Support
DIVISION:Civic Center
ORGANIZATION #:001-4093
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $66,967 $61,500 $61,500 $83,904
40020 Over-Time Wages 3,194 2,500 2,500 2,500
40070 City Paid Benefits 1,000 1,010 1,010 1,216
40080 Retirement 11,908 9,100 9,100 9,621
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———3,411
40082 PEPRA Member Retirement ———1,601
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense 2,084 1,780 1,780 2,329
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 393 365 365 493
40085 Medicare 1,073 1,030 1,030 1,268
40090 Benefit Allotment 13,246 12,340 12,340 16,020
Total Personnel $99,865 $89,625 $89,625 $122,363
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $21,961 $39,500 $39,500 $42,500
41300 Small Tools & Equipment —2,000 1,500 1,500
Total Supplies $21,961 $41,500 $41,000 $44,000
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42125 Telephone $2,090 $2,000 $2,000 $—
42126 Utilities 168,654 202,500 202,500 212,700
42130 Rental/Lease of Equipment 379 4,500 2,000 2,000
42210 Maint. of Grounds/Buildings 189,325 206,419 206,419 201,475
42310 Fuel 343 ———
Total Operating Expenditures $360,790 $415,419 $412,919 $416,175
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
44000 Professional Services $—$1,500 $—$2,500
Total Professional Services $—$1,500 $—$2,500
CAPITAL OUTLAY
46220 Furniture/Fixtures $1,364 $2,000 $1,000 $2,000
46410 Capital Improvements 4,440 ———
Total Capital Outlay $5,804 $2,000 $1,000 $2,000
DIVISION TOTAL $488,419 $550,044 $544,544 $587,038
CIVIC CENTER
City of Diamond Bar, California 81 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 34
DEPARTMENT:
Administration
& Support
DIVISION:Public
Information
ORGANIZATION #:001-4095
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $237,767 $248,970 $248,970 $253,976
40020 Overtime Wages 4,606 6,900 5,400 6,000
40070 City Paid Benefits 3,044 3,320 3,320 3,158
40080 Retirement 44,380 47,790 47,790 38,792
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———13,754
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense 4,782 4,820 4,820 4,912
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 1,413 1,470 1,470 1,498
40085 Medicare 3,789 3,860 3,860 3,952
40090 Benefit Allotment 37,378 38,680 38,680 40,176
Total Personnel $337,160 $355,810 $354,310 $366,218
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $5,030 $5,500 $5,500 $5,000
41300 Small Tools & Equipment 4,987 4,750 4,000 5,750
41400 Promotional Supplies 18,002 27,500 27,500 24,500
Total Supplies $28,019 $37,750 $37,000 $35,250
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42110 Printing $80,823 $99,500 $99,500 $95,000
42112 Photography 3,087 8,500 7,500 8,500
42115 Advertising 31,520 42,000 42,000 19,500
42120 Postage 58,351 58,500 58,500 58,650
42124 Technology 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200
42315 Membership & Dues 1,495 2,655 1,400 3,875
42320 Publications —350 350 500
42325 Meetings —150 150 150
42330 Travel-Conferences 923 5,950 4,500 4,900
42335 Travel-Mileage & Auto Allow 1,708 1,790 1,790 1,540
42340 Education & Training 151 450 250 500
Total Operating Expenditures $179,258 $221,045 $217,140 $194,315
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
44000 Professional Services $96,792 $176,202 $176,201 $88,650
Total Professional Services $96,792 $176,202 $176,201 $88,650
CONTRACT SERVICES
45000 Contract Services $3,336 $36,719 $36,000 $12,500
Total Contract Services $3,336 $36,719 $36,000 $12,500
CAPITAL OUTLAY
46250 Misc Equipment $1,196 $10,108 $10,000 $—
Total Capital Outlay $1,196 $10,108 $10,000 $—
DIVISION TOTAL $645,760 $837,633 $830,651 $696,933
PUBLIC INFORMATION
City of Diamond Bar, California 83 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 35
DEPARTMENT:
Administration
& Support
DIVISION:
Econ
Development
ORGANIZATION #:001-4096
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $87,049 $91,950 $91,950 $103,098
40020 Over Time Wages 306 ———
40070 City Paid Benefits 555 625 625 841
40080 Retirement 14,473 15,625 15,625 15,764
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———5,589
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense 725 1,575 1,575 1,996
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 300 480 480 609
40085 Medicare 1,289 1,340 1,340 1,506
40090 Benefit Allotment 5,814 6,240 7,740 12,315
Total Personnel $110,510 $117,835 $119,335 $141,718
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42315 Membership & Dues $5,250 $2,000 $5,750 $5,750
42325 Meetings $—$—$—$2,500
42330 Travel - Conferences $—$—$—$3,000
Total Operating Expenditures $5,250 $2,000 $5,750 $11,250
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
44000 Professional Services $60,958 $190,000 $190,000 $130,000
Total Professional Services $60,958 $190,000 $190,000 $130,000
CONTRACT SERVICES
45000 Contract Services $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000
Total Contract Services $12,000 $12,000 $12,000 $12,000
DIVISION TOTAL $188,719 $321,835 $327,085 $294,968
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
City of Diamond Bar, California 85 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 36
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES SUMMARY
Organization #: 001-4411 through 001-4440
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
SUPPLIES $21,274 $26,000 $21,500 $27,000
OPERATING EXPENDITURES 18,774 46,200 41,200 45,700
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 31,583 32,000 32,000 30,000
CONTRACT SERVICES 6,509,340 6,850,093 6,801,760 7,200,003
CAPITAL OUTLAY —7,500 5,000 5,000
DEPARTMENT TOTAL $6,580,971 $6,961,793 $6,901,460 $7,307,703
DEPARTMENT INCLUDES:
4411 Law Enforcement $7,033,503
4415 Volunteer Patrol 6,000
4421 Fire Protection 12,500
4431 Animal Control 183,500
4440 Emergency Preparedness 72,200
Total Department Expenditures $7,307,703
FY 18/19 Adopted Expenditures
Law Enforcement
$7,033,503 96.2%
Volunteer Patrol $6,000
0.1%
Fire Protection $12,500
0.2%
Animal Control $183,500
2.5%
Emergency Preparedness
$72,200 1.0%
PUBLIC SAFETY
City of Diamond Bar, California 86 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 37
DEPARTMENT:Public Safety
DIVISION:
Law
Enforcement
ORGANIZATION #:001-4411
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $4,960 $4,000 $1,000 $5,000
41300 Small Tools & Equipment —1,000 —1,000
Total Supplies $4,960 $5,000 $1,000 $6,000
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42200 Equipment Maintenance $75 $1,000 $500 $1,000
42325 Meetings 681 2,500 2,500 2,500
42361 Criminal Apprehension
Award
—5,000 1,000 5,000
42363 Public Safety Outreach 4,454 10,000 10,000 10,000
Total Operating Expenditures $5,210 $18,500 $14,000 $18,500
CONTRACT SERVICES
45401 CS-Sheriff Department $6,022,661 $6,321,593 $6,282,000 $6,563,903
45402 CS-Sheriff /Special Events 136,445 166,500 154,963 241,100
45405 CS-Parking Citation Admin 24,932 30,000 30,000 30,000
45410 CS-Crossing Guard Services 142,163 150,000 150,000 174,000
Total Contract Services $6,326,201 $6,668,093 $6,616,963 $7,009,003
DIVISION TOTAL $6,336,371 $6,691,593 $6,631,963 $7,033,503
LAW ENFORCEMENT
City of Diamond Bar, California 88 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 38
DEPARTMENT:Public Safety
DIVISION:Volunteer Patrol
ORGANIZATION #:001-4415
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $573 $1,000 $500 $1,000
Total Supplies $573 $1,000 $500 $1,000
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42325 Meetings $4,366 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000
Total Operating Expenditures $4,366 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000
DIVISION TOTAL $4,939 $6,000 $5,500 $6,000
VOLUNTEER PATROL
City of Diamond Bar, California 90 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 39
DEPARTMENT:Public Safety
DIVISION:Fire Protection
ORGANIZATION #:001-4421
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
CONTRACT SERVICES
45404 Contract Services-Fire Dept $7,359 $7,500 $7,359 $7,500
Total Contract Services $7,359 $7,500 $7,359 $7,500
CAPITAL OUTLAY
46250 Misc Equipment $—$7,500 $5,000 $5,000
$—$7,500 $5,000 $5,000
DIVISION TOTAL $7,359 $15,000 $12,359 $12,500
FIRE PROTECTION
City of Diamond Bar, California 92 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 40
DEPARTMENT:Public Safety
DIVISION:Animal Control
ORGANIZATION #:001-4431
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
CONTRACT SERVICES
45403 Contract Svcs-Animal Cntrl $160,000 $167,000 $169,938 $176,000
45406 CS - Wild Animal Control 1,896 7,500 7,500 7,500
Total Contract Services $161,896 $174,500 $177,438 $183,500
DIVISION TOTAL $161,896 $174,500 $177,438 $183,500
ANIMAL CONTROL
City of Diamond Bar, California 94 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 41
DEPARTMENT:Public Safety
DIVISION:
Emergency
Prep
ORGANIZATION #:001-4440
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $15,741 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000
41300 Small Tools & Equipment ————
Total Supplies $15,741 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42125 Telephone $4,421 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000
42126 Utilities 250 4,350 4,350 4,350
42130 Rental/Lease - Equipment 945 1,000 1,000 1,000
42140 Rental/Lease - Real Property 150 150 150 150
42200 Equipment Maintenance 241 6,000 5,500 5,500
42315 Membership & Dues 2,866 3,200 3,200 3,200
42340 Education & Training 325 2,000 2,000 2,000
Total Operating Expenditures $9,198 $22,700 $22,200 $22,200
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
44000 Professional Services $31,583 $32,000 $32,000 $30,000
Total Professional Services $31,583 $32,000 $32,000 $30,000
DIVISION TOTAL $56,522 $74,700 $74,200 $72,200
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
City of Diamond Bar, California 96 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 42
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES SUMMARY
Organization #: 001-5210 through 001-5230
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES $958,672 $1,016,945 $981,336 $1,016,023
SUPPLIES 2,491 8,850 3,800 4,100
OPERATING EXPENDITURES 23,449 38,500 22,014 31,450
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 22,067 35,500 8,200 11,000
CONTRACT SERVICES 740,413 801,600 719,100 561,000
CAPITAL OUTLAY —1,000 ——
DEPARTMENT TOTAL $1,747,092 $1,902,395 $1,734,450 $1,623,573
DEPARTMENT INCLUDES:
5210 Planning $667,607
5220 Building and Safety 654,612
5230 Neighborhood Improvement 301,354
Total Department Expenditures $1,623,573
FY 18/19 Adopted Expenditures
Planning
$667,607
41.1%
Building and
Safety
$654,612
40.3%Neighborhood
Improvement
$301,354
18.6%
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
City of Diamond Bar, California 97 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 43
DEPARTMENT:
Community
Development
DIVISION:Planning
ORGANIZATION #:001-5210
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $414,234 $428,635 $428,635 $443,431
40020 Over-Time Wages 4,720 4,500 4,500 5,000
40070 City Paid Benefits 5,424 5,710 5,710 5,400
40080 Retirement 76,348 84,160 84,160 68,694
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———24,357
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense 7,471 7,685 7,685 7,907
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 2,346 2,590 2,590 2,653
40085 Medicare 6,278 6,495 6,495 6,725
40090 Benefit Allotment 65,632 67,600 67,600 69,840
Total Personnel $582,452 $607,375 $607,375 $634,007
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $2,361 $3,000 $1,100 $1,200
Total Supplies $2,361 $3,000 $1,100 $1,200
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42110 Printing $—$2,000 $800 $1,000
42115 Advertising 2,070 1,500 2,400 2,400
42120 Postage 327 1,000 1,000 1,000
42124 Technology 1,200 1,200 1,200 1,200
42315 Membership & Dues 1,355 2,000 2,000 2,000
42320 Publications 582 1,000 600 800
42325 Meetings 1,694 1,200 800 1,000
42330 Travel-Conferences 6,896 8,000 3,121 8,000
42335 Travel-Mileage & Auto Allow 4,223 3,500 3,200 3,500
42340 Education & Training —500 400 500
Total Operating Expenditures $18,346 $21,900 $15,521 $21,400
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
44000 Professional Services $17,565 $18,500 $1,500 $3,000
44100 Commission Compensation 4,160 5,000 4,700 5,000
44220 Planning - General Plan 342 ———
44240 Prof Services - Environmental —12,000 2,000 3,000
Total Professional Services $22,067 $35,500 $8,200 $11,000
CAPITAL OUTLAY
46200 Office Equipment $—$1,000 $—$—
$—$1,000 $—$—
DIVISION TOTAL $625,226 $668,775 $632,196 $667,607
PLANNING
City of Diamond Bar, California 99 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 44
DEPARTMENT:
Community
Development
DIVISION:
Building &
Safety
ORGANIZATION #:001-5220
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $88,834 $95,390 $95,390 $89,707
40020 Over-Time Wages —500 500 200
40070 City Paid Benefits 865 1,500 1,500 1,305
40080 Retirement 16,293 18,660 18,660 13,574
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———4,813
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense 1,020 1,060 1,060 1,002
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 482 575 575 524
40085 Medicare 1,191 1,385 1,385 1,301
40090 Benefit Allotment 16,778 17,580 17,580 16,686
Total Personnel $125,463 $136,650 $136,650 $129,112
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $—$5,200 $2,500 $2,500
Total Supplies $—$5,200 $2,500 $2,500
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42110 Printing $891 $2,500 $1,000 $1,000
42128 Banking Charges 510 1,000 1,000 1,000
42200 Equipment Maintenance —1,200 ——
42340 Education & Training —1,000 1,000 1,000
Total Operating Expenditures $1,401 $5,700 $3,000 $3,000
CONTRACT SERVICES
45201 CS-Building & Safety $703,752 $761,000 $680,000 $520,000
Total Contract Services $703,752 $761,000 $680,000 $520,000
DIVISION TOTAL $830,616 $908,550 $822,150 $654,612
BUILDING & SAFETY
City of Diamond Bar, California 101 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 45
DEPARTMENT:
Community
Development
DIVISION:
Neighborhood
Improvement
ORGANIZATION #:001-5230
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $173,714 $186,600 $160,000 $168,771
40020 Over-Time Wages 612 1,500 1,500 8,500
40070 City Paid Benefits 2,352 3,140 3,140 2,867
40080 Retirement 32,672 36,710 33,000 18,187
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———6,449
40082 PEPRA Member Retirement ———4,181
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense 3,262 3,415 3,047 3,047
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 1,013 1,130 1,019 1,019
40085 Medicare 2,854 3,025 2,605 2,605
40090 Benefit Allotment 34,280 37,400 33,000 37,278
Total Personnel $250,757 $272,920 $237,311 $252,904
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $130 $650 $200 $400
Total Supplies $130 $650 $200 $400
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42110 Printing $—$2,000 $2,000 $2,000
42200 Equipment Maintenance —2,000 ——
42315 Membership & Dues 420 300 300 600
42325 Meetings 52 100 100 100
42330 Travel-Conferences 3,129 4,000 1,093 4,000
42335 Travel-Mileage and Auto —500 —50
42340 Education & Training 102 2,000 —300
Total Operating Expenditures $3,702 $10,900 $3,493 $7,050
CONTRACT SERVICES
45213 CS-Code Enforcement $1,717 $2,000 $2,600 $1,000
45214 CS - Property Abatement —3,600 1,500 3,000
45520 CS-Graffiti Removal 34,944 35,000 35,000 37,000
Total Contract Services $36,661 $40,600 $39,100 $41,000
DIVISION TOTAL $291,250 $325,070 $280,104 $301,354
NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT
City of Diamond Bar, California 103 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 46
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES SUMMARY
Organization #: 001-5310 through 001-5350
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES $1,646,409 $1,828,165 $1,820,165 $2,161,231
SUPPLIES 159,168 226,962 170,060 161,600
OPERATING EXPENDITURES 353,164 536,364 524,326 520,680
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 11,299 15,340 10,900 23,950
CONTRACT SERVICES 492,584 597,404 561,869 572,880
CAPITAL OUTLEY 73,865 138,691 77,000 15,000
DEPARTMENT TOTAL $2,736,488 $3,342,926 $3,164,320 $3,455,341
DEPARTMENT INCLUDES:
5310 Parks & Recreation Administration $—
5333 Diamond Bar Center 1,383,691
5350 Recreation 2,071,650
Total Department Expenditures $3,455,341
FY 18/19 Adopted Expenditures
Diamond Bar
Center
$1,383,691
40.0%
Recreation
$2,071,650
60.0%
PARKS & RECREATION
City of Diamond Bar, California 104 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 47
DEPARTMENT:
Parks &
Recreation
DIVISION:
Parks & Rec
Administration
ORGANIZATION #:001-5310
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $11,171 $—$—$—
40020 Over-Time Wages 508 ———
40070 City Paid Benefits 249 ———
40080 Retirement 5,143 ———
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 100 ———
40085 Medicare 180 ———
40090 Benefit Allotment 3,188 ———
Total Personnel $20,631 $—$—$—
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $266 $—$—$—
Total Supplies $266 $—$—$—
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42210 Maint. of Grounds/Bldgs 540 500 ——
42315 Membership & Dues 324 1,400 300 —
42320 Publications 530 100 ——
42325 Meetings 486 300 500 —
42340 Education & Training 199 300 300 —
Total Operating Expenditures $2,079 $2,600 $1,100 $—
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
44000 Professional Services $1,175 $5,440 $1,000 $—
Total Professional Svcs.$1,175 $5,440 $1,000 $—
DIVISION TOTAL $24,151 $8,040 $2,100 $—
PARKS & RECREATION
City of Diamond Bar, California 106 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 48
DEPARTMENT:
Parks &
Recreation
DIVISION:D-Bar Center
ORGANIZATION #:001-5333
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $153,232 $185,400 $185,400 $299,650
40020 Over-Time Wages 6,636 7,000 4,000 4,000
40030 Part-Time Salaries 304,443 302,240 302,240 391,400
40070 City Paid Benefits 2,768 3,675 3,675 4,946
40080 Retirement 22,635 24,050 24,050 29,730
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———10,541
40082 PEPRA Member Retirement ———8,608
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense 12,956 14,500 14,500 18,947
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 891 1,125 1,125 1,799
40085 Medicare 25,809 27,850 27,850 10,296
40087 Social Security ———24,273
40090 Benefit Allotment 33,406 44,525 44,525 63,126
Total Personnel $562,777 $610,365 $607,365 $867,316
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $52,024 $88,700 $34,400 $35,150
41300 Small Tools & Equipment 1,532 2,000 2,000 2,000
Total Supplies $53,557 $90,700 $36,400 $37,150
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42110 Printing $4,560 $18,500 $18,500 $19,950
42115 Advertising ———30,000
42124 Technology 600 1,800 600 600
42125 Telephone 4,278 5,000 5,000 —
42126 Utilities 94,624 97,600 97,600 102,500
42130 Rental/Lease - Equipment 3,750 7,500 7,500 8,500
42141 Rental/Lease - Exhibit Space 1,557 2,198 2,500 2,500
42200 Equipment Maintenance 1,077 27,800 27,800 30,725
42210 Maint. of Grounds/Buildings 39,259 70,020 70,020 81,820
42330 Travel - Conferences 1,460 2,500 2,500 2,500
Total Operating Expenditures $151,165 $232,918 $232,020 $279,095
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
44000 Professional Services $8,819 $7,200 $7,200 $20,250
Total Professional Services $8,819 $7,200 $7,200 $20,250
CONTRACT SERVICES
45010 CS-Security $33,615 $39,000 $39,000 $39,000
45300 CS-Parks & Recreation 153,027 147,840 123,280 125,880
Total Contract Services $186,642 $186,840 $162,280 $164,880
DIAMOND BAR CENTER OPERATIONS
City of Diamond Bar, California 107 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 49
CAPITAL OUTLAY
46250 Misc Equipment $20,866 $44,000 $42,000 $15,000
46410 Capital Improvements 52,999 94,691 35,000 —
Total Capital Outlay $73,865 $138,691 $77,000 $15,000
DIVISION TOTAL $1,036,823 $1,266,714 $1,122,265 $1,383,691
DIAMOND BAR CENTER OPERATIONS
City of Diamond Bar, California 108 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 50
DEPARTMENT:
Parks &
Recreation
DIVISION:Recreation
ORGANIZATION #:001-5350
FY 16/17 Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $461,565 $495,000 $495,000 $553,077
40020 Over-Time Wages 10,250 25,000 20,000 23,600
40030 Part-Time Salaries 324,191 394,000 394,000 388,600
40070 City Paid Benefits 8,312 12,500 12,500 12,227
40080 Retirement 90,877 93,000 93,000 69,542
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———23,565
40082 PEPRA Member Retirement ———12,361
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense 17,921 21,000 21,000 22,901
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 2,946 3,300 3,300 3,620
40085 Medicare 29,249 35,000 35,000 14,648
40087 Social Security ———22,984
40090 Benefit Allotment 117,691 139,000 139,000 146,790
Total Personnel $1,063,001 $1,217,800 $1,212,800 $1,293,915
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $103,278 $129,762 $133,160 $124,450
41210 Car Show Supplies 2,067 3,400 ——
41300 Small Tools & Equipment —3,100 500 —
Total Supplies $105,345 $136,262 $133,660 $124,450
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42110 Printing $12,375 $22,643 $22,643 $24,400
42115 Advertising —200 ——
42120 Postage Charges —200 ——
42124 Technology Allowance ———1,200
42128 Banking Charges 29,069 24,000 24,000 24,000
42130 Rental/Lease of Equipment 35,182 44,050 44,050 45,800
42140 Rental/Lease of Real Property 40,460 113,408 113,408 49,500
42145 Rental/Lease Rides & Attractions 36,260 42,400 32,400 29,000
42315 Membership & Dues 295 2,410 2,635 3,635
42320 Publications ———100
42325 Meetings 1,331 1,500 2,000 2,500
42330 Travel - Conferences 5,710 2,500 2,500 8,500
42335 Travel - Mileage & Auto Allowance ———3,000
42340 Education & Training 20 1,020 1,020 3,400
42353 City Birthday Party (470)———
42410 Admissions-Youth Activities 39,686 46,715 46,550 46,550
Total Operating Expenditures $199,920 $301,046 $291,206 $241,585
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
44100 Commission Compensation $1,305 $2,700 $2,700 $2,700
Total Professional Services $1,305 $2,700 $2,700 $3,700
CONTRACT SERVICES
45300 CS-Parks & Recreation $114,616 $174,229 $174,229 $208,000
45305 CS-Concerts in the Park 31,546 30,000 30,000 —
45306 CS-City Birthday 3,010 1,975 ——
45310 CS-Excursions 8,726 28,000 14,000 17,000
45320 CS-Contract Classes 137,325 153,000 158,000 158,000
45402 CS-Sheriff's Dept Special Events 10,720 23,360 23,360 25,000
Total Contract Services $305,942 $410,564 $399,589 $408,000
DIVISION TOTAL $1,675,514 $2,068,372 $2,039,955 $2,071,650
RECREATION
City of Diamond Bar, California 109 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 51
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES SUMMARY
Organization #: 001-5510 through 001-5558
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES $1,313,682 $1,430,475 $1,425,175 $1,471,795
SUPPLIES 94,241 133,000 133,000 125,000
OPERATING EXPENDITURES 599,288 694,098 670,588 650,625
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 273,058 404,500 327,000 257,500
CONTRACT SERVICES 2,472,702 2,690,726 2,543,255 2,766,591
CAPITAL OUTLAY 7,668 60,000 60,000 157,500
DEPARTMENT TOTAL $4,760,640 $5,412,799 $5,159,018 $5,429,011
DEPARTMENT INCLUDES:
5510 Public Works Administration $758,007
5551 Engineering 1,150,702
5554 Road Maintenance 1,770,533
5556 Parks & Facilities Maintenance 1,445,456
5558 Landscape Maintenance 304,313
Total Department Expenditures $5,429,011
FY 18/19 Adopted Expenditures
PW Administration
$758,007
14.0%
Engineering
$1,150,702
21.2%Road Maintenance
$1,770,533
32.6%
Parks &Facilities
Maintenance
$1,445,456
26.6%
Landscape Maintenance
$304,313
5.6%
PUBLIC WORKS
City of Diamond Bar, California 111 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 52
DEPARTMENT:Public Works
DIVISION:
Public Works
Administration
ORGANIZATION #:001-5510
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $315,205 $319,825 $319,825 $295,984
40020 Over-Time Wages 472 2,000 500 —
40070 City Paid Benefits 3,614 3,635 3,635 3,168
40080 Retirement 56,044 61,620 61,620 45,297
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———16,061
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense 5,862 5,590 5,590 5,125
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 1,741 1,895 1,895 1,749
40085 Medicare 4,553 4,685 4,685 4,372
40090 Benefit Allotment 46,849 41,565 41,565 39,951
Total Personnel $434,340 $440,815 $439,315 $411,707
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $5,186 $4,500 $4,500 $4,500
41300 Small Tools & Equipment —500 500 500
Total Supplies $5,186 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42110 Printing $5,018 $8,000 $8,000 $8,000
42115 Advertising 230 22,000 17,000 30,000
42124 Technology 1,800 1,800 1,800 1,800
42126 Utilities 72,860 80,000 80,000 —
42315 Membership & Dues 1,234 1,000 1,000 2,000
42320 Publications 744 1,000 1,000 1,500
42325 Meetings 1,329 2,000 2,000 2,000
42330 Travel-Conferences 5,101 4,000 3,000 4,000
42335 Travel-Mileage & Auto Allow 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000
42340 Education & Training 774 1,500 500 1,500
Total Operating Expenditures $92,089 $124,300 $117,300 $53,800
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
44000 Professional Services $700 $1,500 $1,500 $1,500
44100 Commissioner Compensation 1,530 3,000 3,000 3,000
44240 Prof Svcs-Environmental 210,235 285,000 212,500 253,000
Total Professional Services $212,465 $289,500 $217,000 $257,500
CONTRACT SERVICES
45221 CS - Engineering $913 $—$—$—
45227 CS - Inspection 459 ———
45530 CS - Industrial Waste 26,186 30,000 30,000 30,000
Total Contract Services $27,557 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000
DIVISION TOTAL $771,636 $889,615 $808,615 $758,007
PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION
City of Diamond Bar, California 112 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 53
DEPARTMENT:Public Works
DIVISION:Engineering
ORGANIZATION #:001-5551
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $162,989 $136,180 $136,180 $190,351
40020 Over-time Wages 877 1,500 750 1,500
40070 City Paid Benefits 1,979 1,895 1,895 2,266
40080 Retirement 25,534 26,695 26,695 29,381
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———10,418
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense 3,272 2,690 2,690 3,540
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 936 825 825 1,135
40085 Medicare 2,438 2,055 2,055 2,877
40090 Benefit Allotment 28,248 22,990 22,990 29,484
Total Personnel $226,272 $194,830 $194,080 $270,952
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42315 Membership & Dues $1,558 $1,500 $1,500 $2,000
42325 Meetings 43 750 750 750
42330 Travel-Conferences 9 500 500 500
42335 Travel-Mileage & Auto Allow —500 500 500
42340 Education & Training 597 1,000 1,000 1,000
Total Operating Expenditures $2,207 $4,250 $4,250 $4,750
CONTRACT SERVICES
45221 CS - Engineering $293,767 $395,000 $329,500 $350,000
45222 CS - Traffic 91,822 106,939 100,000 445,000
45223 CS - Plan Checking 23,347 58,524 30,000 25,000
45224 CS - Soils —20,000 15,000 15,000
45226 CS - Surveying 6,525 15,000 10,000 10,000
45227 CS - Inspection 21,162 42,000 20,000 30,000
Total Contract Services $436,623 $637,463 $504,500 $875,000
DIVISION TOTAL $665,102 $836,543 $702,830 $1,150,702
ENGINEERING
City of Diamond Bar, California 113 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 54
DEPARTMENT:Public Works
DIVISION:
Road
Maintenance
ORGANIZATION #:001-5554
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $207,759 $272,265 $272,265 $276,822
40020 Over-Time Wages 1,763 3,000 3,000 3,500
40070 City Paid Benefits 2,916 4,700 4,700 4,385
40080 Retirement 39,113 46,320 46,320 38,514
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———13,656
40082 PEPRA Member Retirement ———1,813
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense 5,845 7,540 7,540 7,669
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 1,197 1,595 1,595 1,625
40085 Medicare 3,187 4,190 4,190 4,206
40090 Benefit Allotment 37,082 56,820 56,820 57,843
Total Personnel $298,862 $396,430 $396,430 $410,033
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $813 $500 $500 $500
41250 Road Maintenance Supplies 39,635 65,000 65,000 65,000
41300 Small Tools & Equipment 15,142 18,000 18,000 10,000
Total Supplies $55,591 $83,500 $83,500 $75,500
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42126 Utilities $—$—$—$85,000
42130 Rental/Lease of Equip $2,723 $4,000 $4,000 $4,000
42200 Equipment Maintenance 6,063 6,000 6,000 6,000
Total Operating Expenditures $8,786 $10,000 $10,000 $95,000
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
44520 Prof Svcs - Engineering $60,593 $115,000 $110,000 $—
Total Professional Services $60,593 $115,000 $110,000 $—
CONTRACT SERVICES
45501 CS-Street Sweeping $168,102 $190,000 $180,000 $180,000
45502 CS-Road Maintenance 244,329 250,000 250,000 195,000
45504 CS-Sidewalk Insp & Repair 447,061 330,000 330,000 200,000
45506 CS-Striping & Signing 49,992 50,000 50,000 50,000
45507 CS-Traffic Signal Maintenance 287,934 230,000 225,000 275,000
45508 CS - Vegetation Control 116,095 125,000 125,000 130,000
45512 CS-Storm Drainage 10,664 30,000 30,000 30,000
45522 CS-Right of Way Maintenance 30,000 50,000 50,000 50,000
Total Contract Services $1,354,177 $1,255,000 $1,240,000 $1,110,000
CAPITAL OUTLAY
46250 Misc Equipment $—$—$—$80,000
Total Capital Outlay $—$—$—$80,000
DIVISION TOTAL $1,778,009 $1,859,930 $1,839,930 $1,770,533
ROAD MAINTENANCE
City of Diamond Bar, California 114 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 55
DEPARTMENT:Public Works
DIVISION:
Parks & Facility
Maintenance
ORGANIZATION #:001-5556
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
PERSONNEL SERVICES
40010 Salaries $164,523 $243,200 $243,200 $229,012
40020 Over-Time Wages 4,064 4,500 8,000 8,000
40030 Part-Time Salaries 109,170 36,050 36,050 36,000
40070 City Paid Benefits 2,067 4,150 4,150 3,529
40080 Retirement 28,872 45,500 45,500 30,066
40081 Classic Mbr - Pmt Amrt Base ———10,661
40082 PEPRA Member Retirement ———2,523
40083 Worker's Comp. Expense 6,984 6,700 6,700 5,104
40084 Short/Long Term Disability 910 1,450 1,450 1,352
40085 Medicare 10,855 6,550 —4,022
40087 Social Security ———2,232
40090 Benefit Allotment 26,766 50,300 50,300 46,602
Total Personnel $354,209 $398,400 $395,350 $379,103
SUPPLIES
41200 Operating Supplies $33,464 $39,500 $39,500 $39,500
41300 Small Tools & Equipment —5,000 5,000 5,000
Total Supplies $33,464 $44,500 $44,500 $44,500
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
42125 Telephone $7,599 $8,110 $2,600 $—
42126 Utilities 285,083 287,115 287,115 301,225
42130 Rental/Lease of Equipment 939 7,750 7,750 8,700
42210 Maint. of Grounds/Bldgs 201,336 240,573 240,573 176,300
42330 Travel-Conferences 1,250 12,000 1,000 10,850
Total Operating Expenditures $496,207 $555,548 $539,038 $497,075
CONTRACT SERVICES
45300 CS-Park & Facility Maint $338,660 $420,803 $420,803 $447,278
Total Contract Services $338,660 $420,803 $420,803 $447,278
CAPITAL OUTLAY
46250 Misc Equipment $7,668 $60,000 $60,000 $77,500
Total Capital Outlay $7,668 $60,000 $60,000 $77,500
DIVISION TOTAL $1,230,208 $1,479,251 $1,459,691 $1,445,456
PARKS & FACILITIES MAINTENANCE
City of Diamond Bar, California 115 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 56
DEPARTMENT:Public Works
DIVISION:
Landscape
Maintenance
ORGANIZATION #:001-5558
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
CONTRACT SERVICES
45500 CS - Public Works $37,658 $35,000 $35,000 $50,000
45503 CS - Parkway Maintenance 26,172 27,000 27,492 28,800
45509 CS - Tree Maintenance 235,592 267,060 267,060 201,593
45510 CS - Tree Watering 16,263 18,400 18,400 23,920
Total Contract Services $315,685 $347,460 $347,952 $304,313
DIVISION TOTAL $315,685 $347,460 $347,952 $304,313
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE
City of Diamond Bar, California 116 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 57
DEPARTMENT:Transfers-Out
DIVISION:Transfers-Out
ORGANIZATION #:001-9915
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
OPERATING TRANSFER OUT
49011 Transfer Out-Com Orgnztn Fd $13,580 $15,000 $15,000 $15,000
49015 Transfer Out - Gen Plan 25,258 33,007 ——
49018 Transfer Out - IS Replcmt Fund 100,000 100,000 100,000 —
49370 Transfer Out-Debt Service Fd 859,138 859,406 859,091 858,307
49510 Transfer Out-Self Ins Fund 441,316 538,950 544,598 369,065
49530 Transfer Out-Equip Replcmt 147,400 988,500 288,500 1,048,895
$1,586,692 $2,534,863 $1,807,189 $2,291,267
USES OF FUND BALANCE RESERVES
49138 Transfer Out-LLAD #38 43,965 202,570 203,314 98,410
49139 Transfer Out-LLAD #39 —71,281 86,895 244,764
49141 Transfer Out-LLAD #41 51,458 150,523 150,523 143,867
49250 Transfer Out-CIP Fund 294,941 2,652,663 482,170 2,284,699
$390,364 $3,077,037 $922,902 $2,771,740
TOTAL $1,977,056 $5,611,900 $2,730,091 $5,063,007
TRANSFERS OUT
City of Diamond Bar, California 117 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 58
PERSONNEL SUMMARY
City of Diamond Bar, California 118 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
Budget FY 2016/17 Budget FY 2017/18 Budget FY 2018/19
Department
Full Part
Total
Full Part
Total
Full Part
Total
% of
TotalTimeTime*Time Time*Time Time*
City Manager's Office 10.00 —10.00 10.00 —10.00 10.00 —10 10%
Community
Development 8.00 —8.00 8.00 —8.00 8.00 —8.00 8%
Finance 5.00 —5.00 5.00 —5.00 5.00 —5.00 5%
Information Systems 3.00 —3.00 4.00 —4.00 4.00 —4.00 4%
Parks and Recreation 10.00 35.90 45.90 11.00 42.50 53.50 11.00 42.50 53.50 54%
Public Information 3.00 —3.00 3.00 —3.00 3.00 —3.00 3%
Public Works 13.00 —13.00 15.00 0.9 15.90 15.00 0.90 15.90 16%
Total 52.00 35.90 87.90 56.00 43.40 99.40 56.00 43.40 99.40 100%
* Part-time staff hours are converted to full-time equivalencies (FTEs) - one FTE equals 40 hours per week,
52 weeks per year.
CITYWIDE AUTHORIZED PERSONNEL FY 2018/19
City Manager's Office:
10.0%
Community
Development:8.0%
Finance:5.0%
Information Systems:
4.0%
Parks and Recreation:
54.0%
Public Information:
3.0%
Public Works:16.0%
b
Packet Pg. 59
Fiscal Year 2018 - 2019
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
Job Title Authorized Funded
City Manager 1 1
Assistant City Manager 1 1
City Clerk 1 1
Administrative Assistant 1 1
Senior Office Specialist 1 1
Human Resources & Risk Manager 1 1
Human Resources Technician 1 1
Assistant to the City Manager 1 1
Management Analyst/Senior MA 2 2
Total:10 10
PUBLIC INFORMATION
Job Title Authorized Funded
Public Information Manager 1 1
Public Information Coordinator 1 1
Media Specialist 1 1
Total:3 3
PARKS AND RECREATION
Job Title Authorized Funded
Parks and Recreation Director 1 1
Administrative Assistant 1 1
Recreation Supervisor 2 2
Recreation Coordinator 2 2
Recreation Specialist 4 3
Recreation Superintendent 1 1
Total:11 11
FINANCE
Job Title Authorized Funded
Finance Director 1 1
Senior Accountant 1 1
Accountant 1 1
Accounting Technician 2 2
Total:5 5
FULL-TIME BENEFITTED PERSONNEL SUMMARY
City of Diamond Bar, California 119 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 60
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Job Title Authorized Funded
Information Systems Director 1 1
Network Systems Administrator 1 1
Information Systems Analyst 1 1
Network/Systems Technician 1 1
Total:4 4
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Job Title Authorized Funded
Community Development Director 1 1
Administrative Coordinator 1 1
Senior Planner 1 1
Assistant/Associate Planner 2 2
Permit Services Coordinator 1 1
Neighborhood Improvement Officer/Senior NIO 2 2
Total:8 8
PUBLIC WORKS
Job Title Authorized Funded
Public Works Director 1 1
Administrative Coordinator 2 2
Senior Civil Engineer 1 1
Assistant/Associate Engineer 3 3
Street Maintenance Superintendent 1 1
Maintenance Worker/Senior MW 4 4
Parks Maintenance Superintendent 1 1
Facilities Maintenance Supervisor 1 1
Facilities & Asset Maintenance Tech.1 1
Total:15 15
Total Full-Time Benefitted Positions:56 56
FULL-TIME BENEFITTED PERSONNEL SUMMARY
City of Diamond Bar, California 120 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 61
Fiscal Year 2018 - 2019
PARKS AND RECREATION
Job Title Authorized Funded
Pre-School Teacher 1 1
Assistant Pre-School Teacher 1 1
Total:2 2
Total Part-Time Benefitted Positions:2 2
PART-TIME BENEFITTED PERSONNEL SUMMARY
City of Diamond Bar, California 121 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 62
DEPARTMENT:
Special
Revenue
DIVISION:Landscape
ORGANIZATION #:138
FUND DESCRIPTION:
The City is responsible for the operations of the LLAD #38 which primarily maintains the City's medians. This district
was was set up in accordance with the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972. Property owners benefiting from this
district receive a special assessment on their property taxes. This fund accounts for this district's operations.
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
ESTIMATED RESOURCES
25500 Fund Balance Reserves $—$—$—$—
30300 Prop Tax-Special Assessment 268,228 272,145 272,145 277,000
39001 Transfer in - General Fund 43,965 202,570 203,314 98,410
TOTAL $312,193 $474,715 $475,459 $375,410
PERSONNEL SERVICES
5538-40010 Salaries $22,474 $25,700 $26,344 $26,344
5538-40020 Over Time Wages 96 200 300 300
5538-40070 City Paid Benefits 240 315 315 300
5538-40080 Retirement 4,120 4,850 4,850 3,962
5538-40083 Worker's Comp. Exp.676 735 735 753
5538-40084 Short/Long Term Disability 130 150 150 153
5538-40085 Medicare 311 375 375 387
5538-40090 Benefit Allotment 3,118 3,900 3,900 4,032
Total Personnel $31,165 $36,225 $36,969 $37,636
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
5538-42115 Advertising $3,178 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000
5538-42126 Utilities 97,900 159,900 159,900 168,000
5538-42210 Maint. of Grounds/Bldgs 12,464 35,377 35,377 36,250
Total Operating Expenditures $113,543 $200,277 $200,277 $209,250
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
5538-44000 Professional Services $5,145 $5,500 $5,500 $5,500
Total Professional Services $5,145 $5,500 $5,500 $5,500
CONTACT SERVICES
5538-45500 Contract Services $162,008 $227,713 $227,713 $116,524
5538-45509 Tree Maintenance 332 5,000 5,000 6,500
Total Contract Svcs $162,340 $232,713 $232,713 $123,024
FUND BALANCE RESERVE
25500 Reserve $—$—$—$—
Total Fund Balance Reserve $—$—$—$—
TOTAL $312,193 $474,715 $475,459 $375,410
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE - DIST. #38 FUND
City of Diamond Bar, California 155 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 63
DEPARTMENT:
Special
Revenue
DIVISION:Landscape
ORGANIZATION #:139
FUND DESCRIPTION:
The City is responsible for the operations of the LLAD #39. This district was set up in accordance with the Landscape
and Lighting Act of 1972. Property owners benefiting from this district receive a special assessment on their property
taxes. This fund accounts for this district's operations.
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
ESTIMATED RESOURCES
25500 Approp Fund Balance $33,753 $66,810 $66,810 $—
30300 Prop Tax-Special Assessment 295,622 295,236 295,236 295,500
39001 Transfer In - General Fund —71,281 86,895 244,764
TOTAL $329,375 $433,327 $448,941 $540,264
PERSONNEL SERVICES
5539-40010 Salaries $11,576 $14,400 $14,400 $14,799
5539-40020 Over Time Wages 96 200 300 300
5539-40070 City Paid Benefits 124 130 130 180
5539-40080 Retirement 2,154 2,750 2,750 2,238
5539-40083 Worker's Comp. Exp.349 425 425 425
5539-40084 Short/Long Term Disability 67 85 85 86
5539-40085 Medicare 162 225 225 220
5539-40090 Benefit Allotment 1,618 2,325 2,325 2,412
Total Personnel $16,145 $20,540 $20,640 $21,453
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
5539-42115 Advertising $3,661 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000
5539-42126 Utilities 76,462 126,700 126,700 133,035
5539-42210 Maint. of Grounds/Bldgs 12,371 32,500 32,500 34,500
Total Operating Expenditures $92,495 $164,200 $164,200 $172,535
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
5539-44000 Professional Services $5,145 $5,500 $5,500 $5,500
Total Prof. Svcs.$5,145 $5,500 $5,500 $5,500
CONTACT SERVICES
5539-45500 Contract Services $127,720 $220,087 $220,087 $208,476
5539-45509 Tree Maintenance 6,144 5,000 5,000 95,400
5539-45519 Weed Abatement 14,916 18,000 33,514 36,900
Total Contract Svcs $148,780 $243,087 $258,601 $340,776
FUND BALANCE RESERVE
25500 Reserve - Future Capital Imp $66,810 $—$—$—
Total Fund Balance Reserve $66,810 $—$—$—
TOTAL $313,230 $412,787 $428,301 $540,264
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE - DIST. #39 FUND
City of Diamond Bar, California 156 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 64
DEPARTMENT:
Special
Revenue
DIVISION:Landscape
ORGANIZATION #:141
FUND DESCRIPTION:
The City is responsible for the operations of the LLAD #41. This district was set up in accordance with the Landscape
and Lighting Act of 1972. Property owners benefiting from this district receive a special assessment on their property
taxes. This fund is to account for the cost of the operations of this special district.
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
ESTIMATED RESOURCES
25500 Fund Balance Reserves $—$—$—$—
30300 Prop Tax-Special Assessment 122,013 122,157 122,157 122,200
39001 Transfer in - General Fund 51,458 150,523 150,523 143,867
TOTAL $173,471 $272,680 $272,680 $266,067
PERSONNEL SERVICES
5541-40010 Salaries $11,169 $12,550 $12,550 $14,799
5541-40020 Over Time Wages 38 100 100 200
5541-40070 City Paid Benefits 119 155 155 180
5541-40080 Retirement 2,042 2,365 2,365 2,238
5541-40083 Worker's Comp. Exp.336 375 375 425
5541-40084 Short/Long Term Disability 65 75 75 86
5541-40085 Medicare 154 185 185 220
5541-40090 Benefit Allotment 1,547 1,865 1,865 2,412
Total Personnel $15,470 $17,670 $17,670 $21,353
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
5541-42115 Advertising $3,594 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000
5541-42126 Utilities 49,329 67,750 67,750 71,138
5541-42210 Maint. of Grounds/Bldgs 8,329 20,000 20,000 20,000
Total Operating Expenditures $61,252 $92,750 $92,750 $96,138
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
5541-44000 Professional Services $5,144 $5,500 $5,500 $5,500
Total Professional Services $5,144 $5,500 $5,500 $5,500
CONTACT SERVICES
5541-45500 Contract Services $45,583 $72,220 $72,220 $68,076
5541-45509 Tree Maintenance 3,315 18,000 18,000 23,400
5541-45519 CS-Weed/Pest Abatement 42,708 66,540 66,540 51,600
Total Contract Services $91,605 $156,760 $156,760 $143,076
FUND BALANCE RESERVE
25500 Reserve - Future Capital Imp $—$—$—$—
Total Fund Balance Reserve $—$—$—$—
TOTAL $158,001 $255,010 $255,010 $266,067
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE - DIST. # 41 FUND
City of Diamond Bar, California 157 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 65
City of Diamond Bar, California 199 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 66
FUND TYPE:Internal Service
FUNCTION:Self Insurance
FUND #:510
FUND DESCRIPTION:
This fund was established in accordance with Resolution #89-53. The resolution states the City will
establish a self-insurance reserve fund. The purpose of the fund shall be to pay all self-assumed losses
and related costs. Contributions to the fund shall be pro-rata from all other City funds afforded
protection under the program based upon each of the funds exposure to liability.
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
ESTIMATED RESOURCES
25500 Fund Balance Reserve $1,002,282 $921,506 $921,506 $921,506
36100 Interest Revenue 8,679 8,500 8,500 8,500
39001 Transfer in - General Fund 441,316 538,950 544,598 369,065
TOTAL $1,452,277 $1,468,956 $1,474,604 $1,299,071
OTHER EXPENDITURES
4081-47200 Insurance Expenditures $105,055 $21,600 $29,111 $30,565
4081-47210 Insurance Deposits 425,717 525,850 523,987 347,000
Total Transfers $530,772 $547,450 $553,098 $377,565
FUND BALANCE RESERVES
25500 Fund Balance Reserve $921,506 $921,506 $921,506 $921,506
Total Fund Balance Res.$921,506 $921,506 $921,506 $921,506
TOTAL $1,452,277 $1,468,956 $1,474,604 $1,299,071
SELF INSURANCE FUND
City of Diamond Bar, California 200 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 67
FUND TYPE:Internal
Service
FUNCTION:
Equip Maint/
Replacement
FUND #:520
FUND DESCRIPTION:
This fund was established in FY99-00 to incorporate a method for the eventual replacement of the City's
vehicles and associated equipment. The vehicles and equipment will be capitalized over its useful life
expectancy. Beginning with FY 2015/16 the fleet fuel and maintenance costs will also be tracked in this
fund. The necessary funds to cover the costs incurred are transferred from the General Fund.
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
ESTIMATED RESOURCES
25500 Fund Balance Reserve $741,891 $665,858 $665,858 $393,458
36100 Investment Revenue 8,005 8,000 7,500 7,500
36950 Cost Reimbursement ————
39001 Transfer in - General Fd ————
TOTAL $749,896 $673,858 $673,358 $400,958
OPERATING EXPENSE
4090-42310 Fuel - General Government $—$—$—
4093-42310 Fuel - Pool Cars 2,392 17,000 4,000 6,000
5310-42310 Fuel - Parks & Rec Admin 186 ——
5333-42310 Fuel - DBC —500 —500
5230-42310 Fuel - Neighborhood Improvement 1,881 2,000 1,500 2,000
5556-42310 Fuel - Parks & Facilities 10,698 17,000 17,000 17,000
5554-42310 Fuel - Road Maintenance 5,761 8,000 6,000 8,000
4030-42203 Vehicle Maint - City Manager ———500
4090-42203 Vehicle Maint - General Gov't 1,238 ———
4093-42203 Vehicle Maint - Pool Cars 2,738 10,000 6,000 7,000
5230-42203 Vehicle Maint - NI 355 2,500 500 2,500
5556-42203 Vehicle Maint -Parks & Facilities 17,093 14,000 14,000 14,000
5554-42203 Vehicle Maint - Road
Maintenance
1,713 7,000 5,000 8,500
4090-42215 Depreciation Expense 39,982 40,000 40,000 50,000
Total Operating Expense $84,038 $118,000 $94,000 $116,000
CAPITAL OUTLAY
4090-46100 Auto Equipment $—$226,083 $185,900 $57,000
5554-46250 Miscellaneous Equipment ———25,000
Total Transfers $—$226,083 $185,900 $82,000
FUND BALANCE RESERVES
25500 Reserve $665,858 $329,774 $393,458 $202,958
Total Fund Balance Res.$665,858 $329,774 $393,458 $202,958
TOTAL $749,896 $673,858 $673,358 $400,958
VEHICLE MAINTENANCE & REPLACEMENT FUND
City of Diamond Bar, California 201 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 68
FUND TYPE:Internal Service
FUNCTION:Equip Maint/Rpl
FUND #:530
FUND DESCRIPTION:
This fund has been established to assist the City in funding and anticipating various equipment
replacement and/or enhancements. The equipment will be capitalized over the life expectancy and
the amount will be transferred into this fund from the General Fund.
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
ESTIMATED RESOURCES
25500 Fund Balance, Beginning of Year $650,596 $670,700 $670,700 $526,500
36100 Investment Revenue 4,676 5,000 5,800 5,800
39001 Transfer in - General Fund 147,400 988,500 288,500 973,895
39018 Transfer in - Tech Reserve Fund —300,000 70,000 338,905
TOTAL $802,672 $1,964,200 $1,035,000 $1,845,100
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
4070-42215 Depreciation - Expense $120,840 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000
Total Operating Exp $120,840 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000
CAPITAL OUTLAY
4070-46230 Computer Equip-Hardware $11,133 $411,767 $288,500 $352,800
4070-46235 Computer Equip-Software —1,000,000 70,000 960,000
Total Capital Outlay $11,133 $1,411,767 $358,500 $1,312,800
FUND BALANCE RESERVES
25500 Reserve $670,700 $402,432 $526,500 $382,300
Total Fund Balance Res.$670,700 $402,432 $526,500 $382,300
TOTAL $802,672 $1,964,200 $1,035,000 $1,845,100
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE & REPLACEMENT FUND
City of Diamond Bar, California 202 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 69
FUND TYPE:Internal Service
FUNCTION:
Equip Maint/
Replacement
FUND #:540
FUND DESCRIPTION:
This fund was established in FY12-13 to incorporate a method to fund the eventual replacement of
equipment at City Hall. The primary revenue source in this fund is rebates received from Southern
California Edison from the installation of solar panels at City Hall.
FY 16/17
Actual
FY 17/18
Adjusted
FY 17/18
Projected
FY 18/19
Adopted
ESTIMATED RESOURCES
25500 Fund Balance Reserves $594,518 $282,577 $282,577 $89,577
36100 Investment Revenue 8,321 8,000 7,000 7,000
36760 Solar Incentive Revenue 10,291 10,000 ——
39001 Transfer In - General Fund ————
TOTAL $613,130 $300,577 $289,577 $96,577
CAPITAL OUTLAY
4093-46410 Capital Improvements $24,552 $9,700 $—$18,000
$24,552 $9,700 $—$18,000
TRANSFERS OUT
9915-49250 Transfer Out - CIP Fund $153,000 $100,000 $100,000 $—
9915-49250 Transfer Out - CIP Fund
Carryover 153,000 100,000 100,000 —
Total Capital Outlay $306,000 $200,000 $200,000 $—
FUND BALANCE RESERVES
25500 Restricted Fund Balance $—$—$—$—
25500 Unrestricted Fund Balance 282,577 90,877 89,577 78,577
Total Fund Balance Res.$282,577 $90,877 $89,577 $78,577
TOTAL $613,130 $300,577 $289,577 $96,577
BUILDING FACILITY & MAINTENANCE FUND
City of Diamond Bar, California 203 FY 2018/19 Draft Budget
b
Packet Pg. 70
Agenda #: 6.1
Meeting Date: May 1, 2018
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Daniel Fox, City Manager
TITLE: APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MINUTES.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve as submitted.
PREPARED BY:
Attachments:
1. 6.1.a Special Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission of January
30, 2018.
2. 6.1.b Study Session Minutes of April 17, 2018.
3. 6.1.c Regular Meeting of April 17, 2018.
6.1
Packet Pg. 71
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
AND PLANNING COMMISSION
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
JANUARY 30, 2018
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Low called the Special Meeting of the City Council and
Planning Commission to order at 6:30 p.m. in the City Hall Windmill Community Room,
21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765.
1. ROLL CALL:
Present:
Council Members: Jimmy Lin, Nancy Lyons, Steve Tye, Mayor Pro Tem
Carol Herrera, and Mayor Ruth Low.
Commissioners: Naila Barlas, Frank Farago, Jennifer Mahlke,
Vice Chair Ken Mok and Chair Raymond Wolfe
Also present: Dan Fox, City Manager; Ryan McLean, Assistant City
Manager; David DeBerry, City Attorney; Greg Gubman, Community Development
Director; Grace Lee, Senior Planner; David Liu, Public Works Director; Marsha
Roa, Public Information Manager; Cecilia Arellano, Public Information Coordinator;
Natalie Espinoza, Assistant Planner; Mayuko (May) Nakajima, Associate Planner,
and Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk.
Consultants present: Rajeev Bhatia, AICP, ASLA, Partner, President and
Project Manager, Dyett & Bhatia; Katharine Pan, Associate Planner, Dyett &
Bhatia; Julia Malmo-Laycock, Planner, Dyett & Bhatia; Paul Herrmann, Senior
Engineer, Fehr & Peers; Lance Harris, Partner, Pro Forma Advisors; Jane Lin,
Founding Partner, Urban Field Studio
2. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE (Phase II: Options and Strategies) - SELECTION
OF A PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE LAND USE PLAN:
CM/Fox turned the meeting over to CDD/Gubman who stated that the General
Plan Update is currently in Phase II: Options and Strategies. This joint meeting of
the City Council and Planning Commission marks the completion of Task 4
(Alternatives) with the selection of a Preferred Alternative Land Use Plan.
CDD/Gubman summarized the meeting topics and provided a brief chronology of
the prior GPAC meetings that led to the formulation of the three land use
alternatives, distinguished primarily by their potential locations for a town center:
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 72
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 2 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
Alternative 1 places the town center within the Sprouts/Smart & Final
corridor, which is the segment of Diamond Bar Boulevard between Golden
Springs and the SR60 consisting of approximately 33 acres. In this
alternative the golf course would remain as is.
Alternatives 2 and 3 are on different portions of the golf course , with
Alternative 2 south of Grand and Alternative 3 north of Grand.
Through the process, there was a preference for Alternative 1 as voiced by the
public and the GPAC in a 9-1 vote on November 30, 2017. However, the research
compels staff to ask that a meaningful dialogue take place in which the merits of
Alternative 2 are carefully considered before making this very important policy
decision.
Alternative 2 is unique among the three alternatives in that unlike the other
locations where development would be adjacent t o residential uses, Alternative 2
is presently far removed from residential development. Dedicating the remaining
125 acres of golf course property to the north side of Grand Avenue for future open
space and recreational purposes would preserve the greenbelt adjacent to the
Golden Prados and Racquet Club neighborhoods and retain Diamond Bar’s a rea
that has been referred to as its “front lawn.”
Another key factor to consider is ownership of the property. The quest to relocate
the golf course will certainly be challenging and complex which is one of the
reasons that General Plans look into a time horizon of usually 20 years into the
future for implementation. The golf course, however, has the benefit of having only
one owner which is the County of Los Angeles. In contrast, the buildout of
Alternative 1 would require the cooperation of what is currently at least 15 different
properties.
Alternative 1 shows the town center within the already established Commercial
District along Diamond Bar Boulevard north of Golden Springs. This area
encompasses about 33 acres. A new town center in this location would likely focus
on neighborhood serving retail and dining uses. Opportunities for regional retail
and entertainment uses, as well as new public spaces and parks would be limited
due to space constraints and the challenge of introducing such uses into that built
environment. In contrast, there would be more flexibility and opportunities to
accommodate a range of regional serving commercial uses under both
Alternatives 2 and 3, as well as public spaces, recreational and community
facilities. And the proximity and visibility to the SR57/60 freeway confluence may
also support the regional competitiveness of businesses located within either of
these town center alternative sites (2 and 3).
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 73
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 3 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
With respect to financial feasibility, based on conceptual studies prepared by
Urban Field Studio, Alternatives 1 and 3 would require structured parking to
accommodate the diversity of spaces desired for a town center, rendering the two
sites financially infeasible without subsidies. However, the Alternative 2 site would
not initially require structured parking due to its size and shape so developing that
site is financially feasible to a developer at the outset.
Next, it would be prudent to think about the future of the golf course with respect
to what the County’s future plans might be. Golf courses have been closing
nationwide including within the San Gabriel Valley and Inland Empire and some
plans to develop new golf courses have been canceled. Given that reality, it may
be prudent for Diamond Bar to be proactive in expressing the City’s expectations
to the County should they ever consider repurposing the golf course site – so,
regardless of which town center is selected, the City may wish to proactively
consider long range planning policies for the eventual r epurposing of the golf
course, whether entirely for other recreational uses or for a more diverse pal ette
of uses. Also, regardless of which alternative is selected as the preferred
alternative, the General Plan Update should incorporate economic developm ent
policies to promote and incentivize the rehabilitation, revitalization, preservation
and long term viability of all of the City’s commercial properties.
CDD/Gubman introduced Rajeev Bhatia for a detailed overview of the land use
alternatives analysis.
Rajeev Bhatia explained one of the principle changes is looking at introducing new,
mixed-use land use designations to allow more options for flexibility on specific
sites.
There are three categories of mixed uses shown in all three alternatives. One is a
neighborhood mixed use which is essentially a medium density housing with
limited supporting commercial uses. In all three alternatives this is located at the
very northern end of Diamond Bar Boulevard. The town center mixed use i s a
destination mixed-use which would be a community-wide draw with community
serving retail, entertainment, hotel, dining types of uses. There may be housing
allowed in these areas and if so, it would likely be of medium density because the
primary use would be commercial use – dining and entertainment. This category
would also encompass theaters and other public gathering spaces, plazas and so
on. While each alternative has a town center the difference is where the town
center is located.
The third category is Transit-Oriented Mixed Use which would primarily be a high
density housing designation. Office and commercial uses would be allowed as a
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 74
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 4 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
supporting use and all alternative uses shown in the area near the Metrolink
station. A vast majority of the City, will not undergo or is not expected to undergo
a change. This conversation is about changes specifically on a few sites in the
City.
Alternative 1 has a town center at Diamond Bar Boulevard and Golden Springs
Drive which is where Sprouts is located along with other new development taking
place. Given the size of the site and existing uses, many of the commercial uses
are likely to have more of a neighborhood orientation as opposed to having larger
regional scale attractions. In those alternatives there would be a mixed-use
neighborhood along the northern portion of Diamond Bar Boulevard and transit -
oriented housing near the Metrolink station. The golf course would not be
impacted by the location of the town center in that area.
Alternative 2 has the town center located in the southern half of the golf course.
The northern portion of the golf course can either remain as a smaller golf course,
a public park or some other recreational amenity which is why it is shown as a
green color. Mr. Bhatia noted that the site shown as the town center in
Alternative 1 can remain and continue to function as a commercial center. This
town center would be an addition to that commercial center that incorporates
Sprouts and Smart & Final. This town center would obviously have visibility from
the freeway, direct access from the freeway and would lead to lesser impacts than
the town center had it been located farther inward.
In Alternative 3, the town center would be located in the northern portion of the golf
course and the actual town center would occupy only a small area of the overall
area. The water feature at the golf course would remain as -is and the northern
half of the site would remain as open space. Again, in this alternative, the shopping
center along Diamond Bar Boulevard would continue to function as it currently
functions.
Urban Design Concepts:
Jane Lin, Urban Field Studio, said she was responsible for the designs presented
this evening which make a lot of assumptions and are only one option out of many
possible options.
Alternative 1: The concept for Alternative 1 would be to create something new that
would connect a quarter mile which is about a five minute walk from one end to the
other. The development that is occurring is beginning to support ideas of pushing
some of the new retail closer to the big street and forming a stronger street edge
which for an urban designer is a really good start. But to make it really wonderful
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 75
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 5 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
for walking there needs to be more thought given to what is occurring. As
additional retail space is added, there would likely be a need for parking structures.
As these types of factors are weighed, it will impact the financial feasibility of this
project. This is an infill site so a lot of buildings may not change. This design
assumes that Sprouts would not change but the other stores might. What will
happen naturally over time may not follow what this design shows, but the idea
that things change over time and start to respect a new street and show circulation
in a slightly different way and reinforce the retail that exists may create something
a bit stronger than what is currently there. This scenario creates exciting thoughts
about what could happen in the General Plan over a couple of decades.
Alternative 2: With only one property owner, the concept of Alternate 2 includes
a new street grid with new roads that come off of Golden Springs which includes
a fairly substantial grade drop. One could envision coming down a slope to the
main street which would be more or less in the center of the site. This is more of
a destination where there could be a town square with hotels, one -story retail and
surface only parking being completed in Phase I of a project. There is room for
growth. For example, the surface parking could actually accommodate more
structured parking with residential or office on top of the retail if it were developed.
In this case, there are many variables to this alternative. With this alternative, the
other half of the golf course can be left to be what it wants to be.
Alternative 3: This alternative would have the opposite effect to Alternative 2
where a slightly reconfigured golf course could be retained on the south side or it
could become a park. The town center concept involves only a small portion of
the north side with room for landscaping and retention of existing trees. In order
to deal with the parking in this option, if there was less surface parking, more of
the natural landscape could be retained. This Al ternative is more destination-
oriented with a multi-plex theater and there is a town square which is much like the
Victoria Gardens square which is surrounded with retail and is a great gathering
place with a nice walk from an existing lake where there is a hotel and parking.
This Alternative could be done without a parking structure. However, in that case
there could be less retail or, there could be more surface parking. There are many
things to consider in all three alternatives and she encouraged the group to try and
draw out what they liked about them during the discussion period.
Ms. Lin included other local examples of what a town center could look like
including The Shoppes at Chino Hills which is a great example of what the scale
could be. Another example of concepts is a nice mix of things at Victoria Gardens,
Rancho Cucamonga, and a really nice main street feel like Village “West” in
Claremont. She also looked at housing in the TOD area but it could also be
included in the town center area as well which could incorporate commercial uses
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 76
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 6 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
at the ground floor. Many of these examples, however, are mixed -use on a
horizontal level.
Mr. Bhatia said that what Ms. Lin has shown are some ways of accomplishing
development on these sites. The reason these sites were tested was to
understand development possibilities and feasibility for these sites only. The
General Plan will not dictate a specific design, a specific layout or mandate that
the parking be structured or not structured. When the City provides direction they
are not asking for City officials to decide whether the parking should be structured
or not, that is a level of detail that would be considered at the project level when
the development comes forward. The General Plan lays out a 20 -year long vision
for the area and stating that if there were to be a town center, where would it be
located, what would the general nature be and what would be the range of uses.
Transportation/Circulation/Mobility Impacts
Mr. Bhatia said that in all three land use alternatives there would be an increased
demand for travel throughout Diamond Bar and the surrounding area , as well as
an increase in vehicular travel volumes. Fehr & Peers ran numbers on traffic
forecasting and on the existing general plan into 2040 to compare five conditions
of daily trip generation, daily trip generation percent change, daily vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) per service population (residents and workers) and daily VMT per
service population (residents and workers).
With respect to Daily Trip Generation, the three alternatives have almost the same
number of trips being generated. Compared to the existing conditions, these
numbers are fairly modest with a 7 to 8 percent trip generation increase over the
next 20 years. The VMT per Service Population (number of jobs plus residential)
per capita there is a slight decline in that number. Even though the overall VMT
increases slightly and the population increases slightly, the jobs would increase
40-50 percent. Because of that, the VMT per capita is projected to decrease under
each of these alternatives compared to the existing conditions , as well as the
current General Plan. In short, because of the increased services in one location
the number of daily trips and distances decreases.
Fiscal Impacts
Lance Harris, Pro Forma Advisors, said that in conducting their analysis, all three
alternatives yielded a positive fiscal impact ranging from $5.6 million to $6.6 million.
The proposed land uses helped diversify the fiscal revenue streams of the City,
particularly from a retail perspective and also increased the amount of job -
generating land uses. Financial Analysis refers specifically to an evaluation of the
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 77
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 7 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
theoretical financial performance of the six development concepts – the three town
centers and the three TOD projects. From a financial perspective, all of the TOD
sites were feasible. The major finding in terms of the town center sites was that
the structured parking created a negative land value due to structured parking
being very expensive. This is by no means absolute but more theoretical in
attempting to understand the key differen ces in terms of the different planning
programs. The analysis looked at hotel uses and retail uses, particularly with
respect to Alternatives 2 and 3 that had the freeway adjacency and more of a
regional, service and retail orientation where the fiscal impacts were much more
significant. This analysis covers the theoretical residual land value which is
another way of saying how much a developer would pay for the land in order to
obtain the required profit. The sizes are different so the numbers are absolute but
relatively similar in terms of the negative yield on Alternatives 1 and 3 and
positively on Alternative 2.
Community Outreach
Katharine Pan, Dyett & Bhatia, explained the public outreach efforts to date which
began on June 14, 2017, and continued through November 17, 2017. A number
of communications and advertising methods were used. In addition, there were
smaller events such as popups and information booths to reach a larger portion of
the community. During this phase various tools were used including newspaper
ads, lobby monitors and electric signage at City Hall and fire stations, postcards,
City banners, project business cards, social media, and stakeholder engagement
(educational institutions, HOAs, developers, etc). In addition, a social media tool
kit was developed to provide key stakeholders with copy-ready text for
incorporation into social media sites. Two direct mailings were used: a newsletter
that gave information and introduction to all three Alternatives; and postcards
about the survey which were mailed to all Diamond Bar addresses. News releases
were also made through local media outlets.
A community workshop was held on October 19, 2017, with about 130 people
participating. Most participants were in favor of Alternative 1 for the following
reasons: They wanted to retain the golf course as is; and wanted to focus on
revitalizing an existing commercial area. There were several pe ople that preferred
Alternative 2 and Alternative 3 because these particular sites would offer more
flexibility due to their size and locations in the City that might provide more
opportunity for civic uses like community centers, etc. Among those participants,
more individuals preferred Alternative 2 to Alternative 3 due to its location across
the street from existing commercial uses such as Target and because it was farther
away from existing residential neighborhoods which would offer less likelihood of
negatively impacting them. Other items that came up at the workshop included
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 78
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 8 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
concerns about traffic congestion and interest in uses like teen, senior, sports,
recreation centers and community gathering spots, regional retail competition
oversaturation and housing needs and whether there is a need for more housing
types for renters (younger generation and lower income individuals) versus those
who were interested in having no additional housing.
An online survey was conducted using MetroQuest’s template during the period
October 12 through November 12 which was available in English, Korean and
Chinese. There were 600 responses. Key themes were traffic, reluctance to
develop the golf course out of environmental concerns and a desire to keep it as
open space, as well as the contribution the golf course makes to the City’s
character. People also noted that the larger sites in Alternatives 2 and 3 would
offer more flexibility. Housing was a divisive issue as well with some saying “no
more housing” and others saying there needed to be a broader range of options.
There was also interest in more Transit Oriented Development and alternative
transit projects to make it easier to get aroun d. People were asked to rank 1-5
what they felt for each Alternative with 5 being the hi ghest ranking. For
Alternative 1 there were 197 “5” ratings and for the other two combined
approximately 125 were evenly split between the two with a “5” rating. Reports on
the community outreach and online survey are available online and have been for
the past couple of months.
The GPAC met at the end of November 2017 to recei ve a longer version of
tonight’s presentation, question staff and receive public comments. At the
conclusion of that meeting the GPAC recommended Alternative 1 to be the
preferred Alternative. Other feedback from GPAC members included wanting to
make sure that even though there is a focus on the town center that there should
be support for other local retail for their continued success in the long term.
Members also wanted to consider other options for the golf course in the event
that sometime in the future the County would decide to discontinue use at that site.
Relative to parking structures and service parking, there should be consideration
of potential changes for the parking ratio and improving transit opportunities for the
town center for easier access and in general, consider traffic impacts that the new
town center would have for the community.
NEXT STEPS:
Mr. Bhatia said that following the Council and Commission’s selection of the
Preferred Alternative, the project team will proceed with the fifth and final task in
Phase II: The formulation of the preferred land use plan and the framework for
policy development encompassing land use, urban design, open space, and
transportation/connectivity components. Task 5 is anticipated to take
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 79
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 9 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
approximately five months. The preferred plan and policy framework, following
acceptance by the GPAC, Planning Commission and City Council, will serve as
the template for the preparation of the Comprehensive General Plan.
Mayor Low asked for questions from the City Councilmembers and Planning
Commissioners.
C/Lin thanked staff and consultants for their presentation. He asked why the
numbers in the packet and the presentation were different with respect to trip
generations.
Paul Herrmann responded that the numbers presented this evening are the more
accurate numbers. Over time the numbers have been adjusted and revised which
means the numbers in the packet may be outdated.
C/Tye asked how there could be such a large discrepancy when the numbers are
different by half.
Mr. Herrmann said that he uses the SCAG model (transportation demand model)
that estimates trip throughout the entire SCAG region. What they noticed after the
numbers had been presented in the packet was that the trip generation numbers
coming out of “transportation analysis zones” were corrected when the analyst
discovered that only the trips coming out of the zones and not into the zones were
missed (half) which caused the record to be corrected. The numbers present ed
this evening in the PowerPoint are the more accurate numbers.
C/Lin said that on the Alternative Land Uses there are 2,500 new dwelling units
and on the TOD there are 540 new units. Where are the other 2,000 units coming
from and where does Tres Hermanos play in this entire picture?
Katharine Pan responded that those are testing numbers that were conducted by
Jane Lin to show what this type of density would look like on typical sites in those
areas. What the consultant is looking at in terms of the 2,500 housing units there
were likely a thousand overall that were calculated in the spreadsheet and those
housing units would be spread throughout the colored area.
C/Lin asked if all 2,500 housing units were assumed to be built surrounding the
Metrolink Station.
Ms. Pan said she did not know if they would all be in that area. The housing units
that are shown in the tables and Alternatives evaluation are citywide which means
that some would take place in the new town center , mixed-use areas and others
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 80
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 10 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
would be in areas currently designated for residential use throughout the City that
have not yet been developed.
C/Lin asked how the estimates of trip generations could result in a difference of
8,600 trips when 2,500 units would typically generate 25,000 additional trips. He
wondered if the traffic calculations were very, very conservative with respect to the
level of service or perhaps there is an error in the calculations.
Mr. Herrmann reiterated that the numbers are directly out of th e transportation
analysis and typically with ITE trip generation a single family resident would
generate about 10 trips per day so 2,500 units would generate about 25,000 trips;
however, multi-family trips will generate fewer trips than a single family hom e.
Also, some of the internalization between the traffic analysis zones might not be
representative of these numbers. These numbers are not meant to be used for
the EIR, they are for comparative purposes between the Alternatives. He would
not focus too much on the raw numbers because it is more of a compar ison. The
purpose of this was to do a high-level analysis. When this process gets into the
EIR and more detail they will focus on these numbers so that the trips are
represented in the most accurate way possible.
C/Lin suggested that before the final report is produced it might be good to refine
some of the numbers to bring them closer to reality.
C/Lin said he agreed with the fiscal impact, but it would be good to know the public
investment costs in each of the three alternatives. For example, one alternative
might be very good but it would cost three times more for the public investment to
carry it out and may not be as feasible as the City might believe it to be. Is part of
the consultant’s job to come up with infrastructure investment numbers and other
public investment numbers?
Mr. Harris responded that for the purposes of this analysis, since this is a long-
term plan and a very high-level plan, they did not get into that minutia of detail.
What they did was look at the land use changes over the long term and those were
supported by a market analysis. In terms of infrastructure costs and the like, capital
investment was not considered in the fiscal analysis. For looking at the site-
specific scenarios which gets into more of how do these typologies bear out from
a financial perspective in terms of development, some of that was included at a
high level but not engineered specifically for the various conceptual alternatives.
M/Low asked what the assumptions were with respect to expenditures in creating
the Fiscal Impact Analysis (Page 42, Attachment #2, table #4-12) with certain
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 81
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 11 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
expenditures, as well as changes to revenue. Does this include the cost of
financing that is required to build the infrastructure?
Mr. Harris said again, the answer is “no” specifically to that question. The fiscal
model is built on revenues and expenditures of the City so in creating the analysis,
they took an historic look at what the City’s costs and revenues were and created
factors for some things and modeled other things specifically. The base year for
the model was fiscal year actuals for 2015 so they were built in real numbers and
then took the land use changes and their associated impacts on the General Fund
to quantify the impact on the General Fund specifically. The main reason for that
is as previously stated, this is a long term plan and what the an alysis attempts to
achieve is “how do these alternative land uses compare apples to apples against
each other.” If we were to get into some of the specifics which are important in
terms of the overall planning, it is more important in terms of the charges to say if
all land uses are to be changed to Public Parks, for example, that would not be
financially sustainable and would not work for the City from a General Fund
perspective which is the focal point of the Fiscal Impact Analysis.
M/Low said that under that example, the big expenditure would be maintenance.
In these assumptions, what are the big categories that were built in to arrive at this
number?
Mr. Harris stated that typically, the larger costs are associated with safety and fire
which is essentially built into property tax. Parks and Recreation is a significant
expense which showed up in some of the differences between the land uses
because in some of those assumptions the golf course was being changed or
transformed into an active park space. Again, the overall land uses in a lot of these
cases are much different in terms of the analysis so it is easier to point out in
Alternative 1 versus 2 versus 3 because there was more multi-family housing so
this or that would happen. The planning in this instance was relatively consistent
among the alternatives with the big exception being potential transformation of the
golf course.
Ms. Lin stated that in order to make some of the site work, roads and parks and
other things have to be constructed. In this instance, they were working at a really
high level but one would expect that the new streets, new squares, etc. will have
an impact as well and in looking amongst the three they are somewhat
comparable, but Alternative 1 there would be less street to build because it is
already built up. And there would probably be some utility impacts as well.
C/Lyons heard Mr. Harris say “all alternatives have a positive financial impact” and
she is having a hard time reconciling that statement with the chart that was shown
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 82
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 12 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
on the Residual Land Value. In looking at that chart, it says “because
Alternatives 1 and 3 require structured parking, rendering the two sites financially
infeasible without subsidy and yield negative residual land values between
$5 million and $6 million, respectively” so to her, the word “subsidy” is troubling.
Mr. Bhatia responded that in taking a step back, these are two entirely different
things. The first chart where everything was positive looks at the impacts of
development on the City’s General Fund. It assumes that if the City were to be
able to construct the town center by whatever method, if that were to be built as
an operation that produces tax revenue to the City and the City has to make some
efforts to maintain the roads, the parks, the streets, the fire calls, police calls and
so on, those look at the difference and the impacts on the City’s General Fund.
The second chart Residual Land Value looks at the financial feasibility from a
private developer’s standpoint of building that development. It is not looking at the
City augmenting on an ongoing basis of a positive contribution to whether it is
adding to the City’s General Fund, it is a one-time cost. A developer will be
$5 million in the hole if you asked him to build parking structures and build the
development – he cannot do it. So that is a one -time cost and that means that if
the City were to, at a later date, want to build a development and work with a
developer or other financial tools and say well, maybe not everything needs to be
structured and perhaps the City can decrease the parking rati os, the City may get
to the point where it can have a development that is most feasible.
C/Lyons said that what this is saying is that if a development fell from the sky and
it was there they would all have positive impacts, but to get there, Alternatives 1
and 3 have a one-time “subsidy” of either $5 or $6 million.
Mr. Bhatia said that C/Lyons was absolutely correct.
C/Tye indicated that the responses received in the surveys do not represent the
diversity of the City? It troubles him that if this method of survey was chosen and
the City gets the wrong survey, perhaps it chose the wrong method. Is there a
different survey that would be more effective? At the end of the day the City could
choose a different survey method and come up with the same results.
Mr. Bhatia responded that with all of these tools, whether it is a workshop or an
online survey there is a self -selection bias. In other words, people choose to
participate or not and usually it is people more active, more alert, have more ti me
or pay more attention or whatever and this misses the young couple that is pressed
for time or the youth that is not looking to be as engaged in civic activities. This is
by default. His firm sees this time and again and that is why Dyett & Bhatia tri es
to reach out in many different ways and not in just one way which is why they did
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 83
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 13 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
a workshop, online survey and multiple other forms of outreach with booths set up
in various places to catch people wherever they are. While they have tried to reach
out in many different ways there is a more scientific way of going about it such as
doing a phone survey where the same person is called over and over again until
they answer the question. But what this process is doing is giving the City
feedback on what they received through a variety of sources and he believes that
as decision makers, this body needs to decide whether that is active feedback or
not or understand that it is more weighted coming from a smaller segment of the
population.
Ms. Pan said there is always a concern with public outreach. If someone was
missed in the survey, they had a chance to attend the workshop or if they were
unable to do either of those, they were reached at a popup, maybe outside of
HMart, for example, so they could write into the City if they were concerned. In
addition, those who are present this evening will be able to give their input and
background about what they and their neighbors have an opinion on.
C/Lin said that he would not call 638 individuals a “random” survey because only
people who were interested responded. The result is not profoundly different at
3.4 versus 2.5. If it is 5 versus 1 he could understand that. To him, the better way
would be to do a random telephone survey. Pick a thousand that includes Chinese
and Spanish speaking people which may provide a better result. His opinion is
that 638 surveys gives a false impression that the people in Diamond Bar prefer
the Smart & Final area to be the preferred alternative. The survey is done and it
is too late to go back and do it again, but that result may not be a reflection of the
true sentiment of the residents of Diamond Bar.
Mr. Bhatia explained that some people are not able to get into the depths of
understanding the fiscal implication and transportation implication as m uch. It
cannot be done in a 10 minute survey. People generally go by their gut reaction.
In order for his firm to do a really good job they would have to gather a
representative sample group in a room and make them sit for two hours to get
them to understand everything and have a response. It can be done, but what
they are finding is that the reasons people are advancing to a certain decision are
reasonably consistent – “I like this because of ….(this reason)” so he believes it is
his job to present to this decision making body the rationale in addit ion to what
people are saying.
Julia Malmo-Laycock spoke about the survey demographics. The demographic
tended to be a bit older than what is represented in Diamond Bar. In looking at the
actual per-age group what is really happening in this instance is that there were
very few participants that were 19 and under which is pretty typical of surveys done
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 84
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 14 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
for this type of work. In terms of ethnicity, the major variation is that in this case
there was a slight over-representation of the white demographics and under-
representation of the Asian and Asian-American segments. Those who identified
as Latino and Hispanic was pretty consistent as well as, mixed.
Chair/Wolfe said this was an issue of discussion at the last meeting. He is a little
surprised that there so few, if any, respondents from the 19 and un der category
because there was outreach at the high school and perhaps there was a better
way to approach that. He wondered if this is what the group experienced in other
of communities. In a high school environment, in a Civics class he would believe
there is a pretty simple way to engage that class.
Mr. Bhatia said that Chair/Wolfe is absolutely correct. If one were to engage a
class activity there would be more of a response but they would have to proactively
go out and seek to do. A lot still remains to be done on the General Plan and the
document has not yet been written so there is still room to do that.
Chair/Wolfe suggested that the demographics of the two high schools in this
community are fairly representative of the demographics of the community as a
whole and perhaps there is an opportunity through a Civics Class type exercise
not only would the high school students be engaged, but perhaps their parents.
C/Mahlke agreed with Chair/Wolfe and remembered that this was a concern this
body had previously. The idea of using City social media is perhaps not as active
as it could have been for the benefit of this exercise, but she was also concerned
that most of their questions took place before the Diamond Bar Ranch Center
opened. So the idea of talking about Alternative 1 before Alternative 1 had actually
opened and been feasible is a concern to her. She has been fortunate to spend a
lot of time at Chipotle and Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf and Sprouts and the center
is very active and busy. In the consultants’ experience, had that area already been
developed when the surveys went out, might that have changed the way they
viewed these Alternatives. When talking about a place that has been fairly inactive
and vacant as a potential for a town c enter before it becomes more active, does
that change the perception of that particular alternative?
C/Farago asked if the County decided to do something else with the golf course or
close it, what kind of oversight or influence would the City have as to what ends up
happening on that site.
CDD/Gubman said the short answer is that the City has a General Plan and a
General Plan designation on the golf course site so whatever the current or future
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 85
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 15 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
General Plan designation prescribes for that site it would have to be what the
future use of the site would have to be in conformance with.
C/Farago asked if with respect to Alternative 2 any consideration had been given
to the following: If the City went down the road for Alternative 1 and then the
County decides to do something with the golf course that both areas could be
developed at the same time. What he is thinking is that with 13 different owners
in Alternative 1, what is the incentive to get them together to develop this as a town
center over the next 20 years other than possible marketplace competition by
having a plan that also included Alternative 2 so that both would be created at or
close to the same time. What is the incentive for Alternative 1 to move forward
with that many owners?
CDD Gubman responded that with the multiple ownership on the site, it is a
challenge that can be addressed through incentives. Since there is no
redevelopment, wherein financing incentives can be offered, incentives through
development flexibility is one way to go about it.
Mr. Bhatia said that the center that currently supports Sprouts and Smart & Final,
as it is being refurbished and more and more is built out at that location, the more
difficult it is to turn it into a “town center” as a walkable destination. He is not saying
it won’t be a vibrant commercial center, but to the extent that the City is looking for
a walkable destination that has a range of amenities including entertainment and
so on, is not what that site may ultimately emerge to be. Also, it may not have
been entirely clear, but the market segments that we are dealing with for a new
town center could cater to different economic markets.
Mr. Harris said “exactly, yes.” If there is anchor that is grocery store based the
market area shrinks because the multiple visitation of going to get groceries is
usually within a couple of miles. The town center is a fundament concept,
sometimes called RDE (Retail, Dining and Entertainment) that has more of a
regional focus and a wider market. They can certainly co-exist and not necessarily
compete with one another. All retail competes to a certain extent, but it is a
completely different orientation wherein the driver is to create multiple uses and
experiences that extends someone’s length of stay – it is walkable and it is a place
where people go to linger and hang out. It is a social experience and it is not a
specific purpose of going to buy groceries per se so yes, they can totally co -exist.
C/Farago said that makes complete sense and his thinking is that if the City we nt
down the path to Alternative 1, since this area already has a couple of anchors, it
will likely be very difficult to get them to change over the course of 20 years into a
town center. And while this may go in the updated General Plan and the City
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 86
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 16 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
pursues it, it may never materialize. So, this body may want to think of an
alternative where the City has more control or leverage.
CDD/Gubman responded to a question about whether the City has a tool or way
in which it could put a placeholder on the golf course site should the County’s future
plans for its disposition come into play. If the decision was to proceed with
Alternative 1 and wanted to keep from foreclosing on an option to pursue another
opportunity that may arise, this body may wish to consider placing some overlay
type of designation on the golf course. So, it could prescribe in the General Plan
that should the County decide to do something else with the golf course site, there
could be included policies that say that any repurposing or redevelopment of the
site would be subject to a Specific Plan that would have to meet certain planning
principles that the City of Diamond Bar would demand for that site since i t is within
the City’s borders and it needs to have the land use control that oversees how that
unfolds. That’s not necessarily designating the golf course site as a town center
on the day of General Plan adoption, but should circumstances that are curren tly
unforeseen reveal themselves in the future the City has, in this instance, been
proactive and defensive in saying that there would need to be a comprehensive
planning process before the County could unilaterally make a land use decision on
its own.
C/Farago agreed and said that what he was referring to was for the City to have a
Plan B. By having a Plan B, it may leverage the owners in Alternative 1 to perhaps
come together before the City says too much time has passed and the City is now
pursuing something else that the County decides for that property. He felt the City
should not throw all of its eggs in one basket and believed it there needed to be an
alternative moving forward.
M/Low said that CDD/Gubman mentioned a Specific Plan as opposed to a General
Plan designation. Between the two, which has more power with respect to a third
party that wishes to do something specific with a parcel of property.
CDD/Gubman explained that the General Plan trumps any other policy and the
General Plan would therefore be the prevailing document. The General Plan
would say that if a developer or owner of any major amount of acreage were to
contemplate something, that development site is so large or could potentially have
a ripple effect on how it is developed that instead of placing a static zoning
designation, the City may instead require a very deliberative public process (i.e., a
Specific Plan) be engaged to carefully plan that site, given its opportunities and
constraints.
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 87
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 17 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
M/Low said so for example, the supervisors have a bunch of money and they are
very concerned about homelessness and they reach out to Diamond Bar to say
they have that nice golf course and we should build lots of multi -unit housing for
people who need homes. If it remained designated as a town center, would the
County then apply for a Specific Plan to turn that into residences without a General
Plan designation?
CDD/Gubman said that in such a case, the County would have to comply with the
General Plan. Because it is a County property, if they intended to establish some
other public use that is a County Agency governed use, they would have similar
autonomy to what they have now. But if they wanted to sell the property to an
Affordable Housing developer or another developer then the General Plan
designation and policies would guide how that would play out.
M/Low said that they have heard over and over that what we are doing here is a
land use designation. She wants to clarify that a land use designati on does not
mean that whatever is being designated will be built there, it is simply a designation
or label.
CDD/Gubman said that the designation is more of a high -level governing palette
or menu of uses that are allowed within that designation. From t hat point it goes
to the Zoning designations to be more precise about what uses are permitted or
prohibited.
Mr. Bhatia said that a General Plan communicates to everyone including
L.A. County what the City’s intent behind a site is. The General Plan tel egraphs
the City’s intent to everyone else. If the General Plan is left the way it is, it says
that we anticipate the golf course continuing and if it doesn’t continue we do not
have our minds made up as to what should be out there or not. If you put a t own
center out there it lets people know that if the golf course were to go away, that is
what the City has resolved about what will happen as a result. Diamond Bar can
go as far as it is comfortable going with that. You can say “consider placement of
a town center somewhere in this big area and come back to the City with a specific
proposal” or, “we are perfectly happy locating in this place or not”. A developer that
comes to a site will be looking for certainty. If there is nothing out there and they
know they will have to go through a multi-year process whether it is housing or it
is a town center development, it adds to uncertainty, cost, time and so on which
they have to factor into their calculations. If the City is willing to telegraph the intent
to say “this is what we would like” they can choose to come back or not – at least
it telegraphs to them the overall intent and idea and desire where the community
stands. And he believes this body needs to make an informed decision about what
it wants to do and how far it wants to go with that which is what the General Plan
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 88
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 18 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
is all about, again bearing in mind that it is a long range document, a 20 -year
document.
Chair/Wolfe commented that a developer recently invested a significant amount of
money at Alternative 1 site. He wondered the message that this body’s decision
might send to that developer and whether there had been conversations at the
staff level with the developer, but what is the message we would be sending that
as that project is just now being completed that we want something significantly
different than they brought to the table.
RECESS: M/Low recessed the meeting at 8:12 p.m.
RECONVENE: M/Low reconvened the meeting at 8:21 p.m.
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS:
M/Low announced that there is a three (3) minute time limit for speakers this
evening. For speakers who have heard others speak on their issues, please note
that fact. Also, before speaking, please indicate whether or not you have
responded in any previous surveys, either online or in person.
Diego Tamayo said the golf course is a very treasured piece of land and is a
designated wildlife station which is important for migrating birds which are on
decline with some species threatened. There are four blue line streams onsite
which require mitigation. He is a student at Diamond Bar High School and was not
personally informed about a survey and is very involved with such issues. He and
others who are interested would like to see better outreach. Mr. Tamayo
responded to M/Low that he responded to the October Community Workshop and
online survey.
Douglas Barcon said he responded to the survey and attended previous GPAC
meetings and outreach events. Regarding 600 plus responses to the online
survey, those could be families and not just individuals and could possibly
represent more than 600 people. He has previously commented on the record
regarding the plan and has heard what has been said this evening. At the GPAC
meeting, Craig Ranch Regional Park in North Las Vegas was cited as an example
of a possible vision for the golf course site. The County requires a replacement
golf course and one of the areas that has been considered is Tres Hermanos
Ranch at the northeastern end which is of the SR60 at Phillips Ranch Road and
Chino Hills Parkway which is next to the San Bernardino County line and would
better serve those areas than it would Diamond Bar at the expense of Los Angeles
County. Moreover, the City of Industry owns that property and could use it as part
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 89
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 19 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
of a solar farm and not sell it to Diamond Bar, for example. Also, on the GPAC
report page 10, #4 – Financial Feasibility, Alternative 2 shows a $12 million
positive residual land value and wondered if that included the cost of the
replacement golf course land which means it could be a negative value. He
suggested that the golf course be excluded from consideration in any of the
General Plan alternatives but could be considered for alternative uses in the future
should the demand for golf courses continue to decline without rebou nd. The wild
card in all of this is the City of Industry and whatever they do on both sides of
Grand Avenue.
Amy Harbin is a member of the GPAC and a 40 plus year resident who has been
employed as a City Planner for Baldwin Park for over 25 years. Sh e wanted to
explain her lone “no” vote at the GPAC meeting recommending Alternative 1 and
to advocate for consideration of Alternative 2 by the Planning Commission and City
Council. As a member of the GPAC she is tasked with reading mounds of
information, attending meetings, listening to public comments and comments from
her fellow GPAC members, and ultimately evaluating all of that into a well-thought
position of what she feels is good for all segments of the population of the City of
Diamond Bar in the long term. She believes that Diamond Bar needs to think long
term and maintain what she considers greater flexibility for future financial
sustainability and she believes that Alternative 2 accomplishes that for several
reasons: 1) the lower portion of the golf course can accommodate a regional
serving center with freeway visibility that can entice national credit retail and
restaurant tenants; 2) the upper portion of the golf course would still be utilized as
open space for either active or passive recrea tional opportunities and an open
space area is actually more sensitive to the adjacent single family residences as
opposed to a commercial or office development; 3) there is only one property
owner to negotiate with, with the golf course, the County of LA as opposed to
multiple property owners in Alternative 1; and 4) she realizes no one wants
additional traffic with any type of new development but a lot of people seem to
forget that with any type of new development, be it residential, commercial, and
industrial or office, there is new traffic associated. She said she probably
responded to the survey.
Jim Hayes said he did not respond to any of the outreach. He urged the Council
and Commission to vote for Alternative 1 and heed the recommendations of the
GPAC and the voice of the people. Tonight’s consideration of Alternative 2 has
significant issues and needs to be better analyzed and should not be approved
until this analysis is completed. To have a truly viable future , the General Plan
should address the crisis of global warming and ongoing decline of air quality.
SB 375 known as the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of
2008 set regional emission reduction targets for passenger vehicles. Alternative 1;
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 90
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 20 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
and will produce the fewest emissions. Do we know if Alternative 2 will meet
SB 375 requirements to meet regional goals for reducing greenhouse gases?
What data supports that it does? Has it accounted for the effect of the loss of the
golf course on the air quality and climate? Will the City be assessing increased
City heat from the added parking lot? Alternative 1 already has a parking lot.
Alternative 2 will require tearing out green knocking down trees. Recent research
from Caltrans prepared by Ronald T. Milan, Executive Director, Fehr & Peers,
found that widening roads created an induced travel effect of more, not less, traffic.
So how can the traffic analysis of Alternative 2 which was also prepared by Fehr &
Peers claim that the freeway expansion by the future town center in Alternative 2
would effectively mitigate concerns about congestion? W e would like to know
C/Lin’s view of induced travel and of staff’s report calculations as owner of a
successful transportation planning company, KOA. Has the analysis of
Alternative 2 factored this into the report and if not, should this be adjusted for that.
Grace Lim-Hayes said she was a respondent. She has attended several meetings
and took the online survey. She is flabbergasted at staff’s recommendation for
Alternative 2 based on the biased analysis she has heard tonight and the glaringly
incomplete information. At the November 30 meeting several speakers asked
about the cost of acquiring land for the golf course and what it would cost to rebuild
it. In tonight’s Feasibility Section the report is still not accurate. How can
Alternative 2 be the most financially feasible plan? The Re sidual Land Value chart
on Page 10 appears misleading as well. How is it a valid comparison of the three
plans without factoring the cost of the land and rebuilding the golf course? One
can argue that structured parking might actually cost less in the long run. Pro
Forma Advisor’s describes its Financial Analysis as projections, existing beliefs,
inaccurate assumptions potentially and unanticip ated events. The land assembly
section assumes acquisition of parcels in Diamond Bar would be more complex
than relocating the golf course, but how has this been proven to be true? Industry
owns that land. In 2016, the City of Industry purchased 400 acres of the Boy Scout
land to mitigate development in Tres Hermanos. Is Diamond Bar aware of this
project which is subject to CEQA? The land compatibility section is piecemealing
considering residential only proximity on Golden Prados. What about the potential
impacts of the Industry/Grand Avenue project to Diamond Bar’s proposed
Alternative 2 or 3? Have there been calculations about the impact of Alternative 2’s
town center drawing away from businesses in Diamond Bar? Public records
indicate the City of Industry has been cited for mitigation and hydrology violations.
Has the Alternative 2 site been environmentally analyzed? Have there been
greenhouse gas emission studies and estimates to comply with SB 375? Are there
staff, Commissioners and Councilmembers residing in the neighborhoods
bordering Tres Hermanos that could benefit from the golf course being built there?
If so, will they recuse themselves from voting for Alternative 2? Omissions in the
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 91
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 21 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
staff report caused her to ask if the information provided to the Council was not
disclosed to the public and would the Planning Department and City Council seek
to collude and to achieve plans not disclosed to the public.
Robert Velazquez said he had been a respondent in this process. Scientific data
is unclear about whether major highway projects actually produce an economic
boost. Congestion is a dubious claim when it comes to road expansion.
Transportation experts have repeatedly found that building new roads inevitably
encourages more people to drive which in turn, negates any congestion savings,
a phenomenon known as “induced demand” or “induced travel.” More roads mean
more difficult traffic in both short and long term. Much of the traffic is brand new
which means that some cars on the highway are actually taking that route as a
new route because the roads had opened up. The significant point is that Caltrans
acknowledges induced traffic travel demands create something of a mission crisis
for transportation agencies that spend most of their money on building new roads
and peaking driving. In 2014, Caltrans assessment conducted by Smart
Transportation Initiative specifically cited demand as research finding that yet to
filter down to the department’s thinking and decision making. Ronald Milan, Fehr &
Peers has said that Caltrans has recognized the shortcomings of traditional traffic
models. Namely SB 375 and SB 743 is updating and broadening that effort and
new guidelines are in the works. Has Fehr & Peers applied the new guidelines in
the January 30th staff recommendations reports? Are the traffic forecasts cited in
Alternatives 2 and 3?
Christine Johnson, a Diamond Bar taxpayer for 44 years said she is proud of
“Country Living.” She had questions for Pro Forma Financial Report, Cost
Calculations and Land Use Alternatives. Why are the financial pr ojections stated
in the January 30th staff report for land use alternatives considered useful in
planning if Pro Forma Advisors issues a full disclaimer for their report –
November 14th, 2017, that “no warranty or representation by Pro Forma Advisor
that any of our projected values or results contained in this study will actually be
achieved.” Missing from the staff and financial report, the projected cost of
replacing the converted golf course via using other Diamond Bar open space like
Tres Hermanos Ranch or Royal Vista golf club. Where are these calculations and
why are they missing? Presently, Diamond Bar is suing the City of Industry. Would
Diamond Bar negotiate with City of Industry to receive a settlement of a portion of
Tres Hermanos to serve as a new golf course site? Additionally, what are the
financial computations for the golf course land exchange, acquisitions, designs,
building costs, bad risk retail decline considering online shopping impacts, bad risk
retail decline considering big box retail, bad risk consideration of City of Industry
Business Center impacts bordering Alternative 2 and 3, economic impacts on the
Sprouts Center from another alternative town location. Bad risk City hotel vacancy
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 92
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 22 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
blight. Why does the City continue to build hotels when there are vacant hotels on
sight and control of vacation rentals in housing neighborhoods? What are the
existing City hotel performance reports? Ms. Johnson said she had been a
respondent and attended all of the meetings.
Victor Ramirez, a member of GPAC, thanked Council for appointing him to that
important committee. He believes the committee’s recommendation speaks for
itself. As a concerned citizen of 30 years said that one of the reasons he agrees
with Alternative 1 is because of the many, many citizens who came forward and
gave public testimony as they have tonight and shared with the GPAC their
experiences and desires for the future. What GPAC heard constantly was that
they wanted to retain the character of this beautiful town. They want us to invest
in existing commercial resources, not develop new resources to the detriment of
what exists. One of the most important elements of Diamond Bar and the golf
course is what that golf course does to create a natural buffer and calming
influence over that freeway. He takes issue with the consultant and staff findings
about the residual land value. There have been speakers who described the
shortcoming of not including the replacement cost of a golf course but also the
negative costs of developing Alternative 1 assumes that there would have to be a
large parking structure which is just not the case. The assumption is based on
zoning rules probably developed in the 1960s and 1970 s which define the ratios
of parking to commerce. Those are wrong. The future is changing. There are
disrupter companies like Uber and Lyft and new technology where people will
transport in a different way and will not necessarily have to park so Diamond Bar
should be looking to change the parking ratios for zoning.
Yuwen Wang said she attended the October workshop and completed the online
survey. She is a Diamond Bar High School Junior. She stated that if the
Alternative 2 is adopted by the City Council it is likely that development of the
historic Diamond Bar Golf Course will happen in which case, Tres Hermanos
Ranch will be used to replace the golf course land. Depending on the location of
the 720 acres of Tres Hermanos, what happens if there are Planning
Commissioners or City Councilmembers presently living next to the Tres
Hermanos Ranch who could push for Alternative 2 and vote to bypass the GPAC
preference of Alternate 1? Real Estate companies in Diamond Bar assert that if a
park or especially a golf course were to be built within 1000 feet of certain streets
it would raise the property values significantly. What is this situation called an d
how does the City handle such cases. Additionally, she took the survey with high
school students and views it as a manipulative and leading survey. For example,
one of the questions was “how much new housing do you want” as opposed to “do
you want to see new housing in Diamond Bar?” This leading question virtually
forces the students to respond with a certain amount of new housing units they
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 93
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 23 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
would like to see in the future and basically this is putting words into their mouth
even if they believe new housing is absolutely unnecessary. Although this might
seem insignificant, leading questions are prohibited during the direct examination
of a witness in every US Court of Law. Although this was only a survey, the fact
that manipulative questions which would be illegal in Court, were used in the
survey distributed to high school students, it makes her question the objectivity and
ethics of the surveyors. And she believes this biased question reflects the lack of
credibility of surveys distributed among residents.
M/Low stated that leading questions are not prohibited in a Court of Law.
Gregg Fritchle said he is not eligible to complete the surveys because he is a
resident of Walnut. He is present to speak about this discussion having a broader
impact on the surrounding communities. The biggest example is traffic. The traffic
figures shown on the Table on Page 6 seems to him to be misleading because it
does not tell him very much. There are three Alternatives being considered that
essentially do the same thing and it stands to reason that the effect on traffic in
each of those areas (numbers of vehicles) is going to be approximately the same.
What won’t be the same is the speed of traffic flow. This is just one of the things
about this study he believes is lacking, misleading and flawed. He would
personally recommend that the results of the study be rejected and a new study
be done.
Allen Wilson said he did not respond to the online survey because for him it was
too confusing and he gave up. He has been attending every GPAC meeting and
he is honored to be part of this process as a member of the public. He has listened
to a lot of people in this community. He does not fear a lot of things, but he believes
the feel of the community is to keep the golf course as it is. It is of historical
significance for this community. He believes Alternative 1 should be considered for
future build out. He understands that the City is very prudent and conservative
when it comes to finances. Alternative 1 has a projected annual revenue of
$2.7 million. Alternative 2 is $4.1 million and Alternative 3 is $4.2 million. The City
Council has expenditures for ride share for seniors, but the City needs to be a little
more practical about what it wants to do with the community. People do not want
more housing, they want more businesses and the concentration should be on
Diamond Bar Boulevard and Golden Springs and cleanup of this community. He
has a vested interest in the golf course because he lives across the street from the
golf course and this will impact him. The golf course is his only environmental
buffer. What is really sad about what will happen in the City of Industry going into
Grand Avenue they have cut that hill in half which has decimated wildlife , and he
fears the same will happen to the golf course. He wants the City Council to listen
to the community and understand the residents want Alternative 1 as a basis for
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 94
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 24 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
economic growth and development of this community. The community needs to
support these businesses and if another business is built on the golf course, what
will happen to the businesses on Diamond Bar Boulevard and Grand Avenue.
Please be very serious, listen to the community and support Alternative 1.
Bobby Lee said he has attended all of the GPAC meetings and looked at the online
survey but did not respond because of the way the questions were written and
there was no alternative to do nothing. He thought the outreach methods were
one of the better parts of this process even though he disagreed with the content
of the outreach itself. He believed there was plenty of opportunity for everyone to
respond. It seems to him that people are looking for answers from the consultants
and while he appreciates that they are experts in their respe ctive fields, there is a
means to an end and residents need to make sure that they are not just gathering
data to drive the decision because he feels they are looking for a definitive answer,
which should not be the case. However, there should be somebody working with
them to look at how those models are developed and the input. For example, at
one of the meetings he attended he wondered if the revenue projection for the
retail centers with 90 percent occupancy at a certain square footage was
reasonable, is that an assumption over a number of years and does it account for
downturns in the economy, all of which needs to be evaluated for the Council to
have accurate numbers to consider that are relevant to Diamond Bar. He believes
it is 100 percent clear that people want to keep the golf course and the feedback
is overwhelmingly in favor of Alternative 1. In reading the feedback it is evident
that it is not just about Alternative 1, people do not want to mess with the golf
course. When three alternatives are presented with two that affect the golf course
and one that does not, naturally, with only those three choices people will choose
Alternative 1. Secondly, he does not understand the focus on a town center and
he is at a loss to understand this focus.
Jim Gallagher, Chino Hills, said he participated in the online survey and
participated in the workshop at the Community Center. He was very impressed
and he felt this was the most residential input he has ever seen for any General
Plan. He was part of the GPAC in Chino Hills in 1993 and participated in the
amended plan. The residents of Diamond Bar are doing a great job because they
are addressing this and speaking on it. The reason he is here this evening is
because his city (Chino Hills) as well as Walnut share neighboring properties with
Diamond Bar. Nobody is really addressing Tres Hermanos and there needs to be
recognition that there are 2,450 acres, 1,750 of which is in Chino Hills and 700
acres is in the City of Diamond Bar. So Chino Hills has the brunt of the
responsibility, he believes, in trying to keep that space open which is what most of
the residents have indicated should happen. Both cities have encouraged their
residents to get involved and get informed. Diamond Bar residents are doing that,
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 95
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 25 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
Chino Hills residents have been all along but are starting to wake up. The key
thing both cities want residents to look at is Industry’s solar panels and to be
concerned about it. But he is concerned about something else which is the zoning
from both cities. Diamond Bar’s General Plan allows for 630 units to be located
on Tres Hermanos. He is not hearing anyone speak about that tonight. Chino
Hills’ General Plan calls for a maximum of 675 units. That is a total of 1,305 units
plus commercial that Chino Hills is also recommending. And there is talk now of
possibly moving the golf course over. Most of the workshops he has attended he
has seen the residents speak out loudly including the GPAC for Alternative 1 which
keeps the town center down on Diamond Bar Boulevard and it does not advocate
for the relocation of the golf course which is a possibility under the other
alternatives. He does not believe these p eople are NIMBYs but instead believes
that everyone is concerned about the quality of life, fresh air, and preservation of
a natural habitat (wetlands with threatened species) and, he believes the reason
people live in Diamond Bar and Chino Hills is because they appreciate their open
space and it needs to remain as such. The lawsuits are critical and what does the
City of Diamond Bar and Chino Hills believe will be the outcome if they actually
win these lawsuits and where do the cities go from there?
Mario Salas said he has participated in all of the General Plan events but did not
respond to any surveys. He is a proponent of Alternative 1 but he will also reiterate
that he encourages a traffic-neutral General Plan. Regarding Alternative 1, he
wanted to know if the current Sprouts, McDonald’s Chipotle development can be
integrated to help ease that transition and is the City willing to exercise any type of
domain to ensure completion of the project. Funds are not and should not be a
driving force for this community. This is a community that is giving, that participates
through payment of taxes and residents wants to make sure that what the
population wants, the population gets because ultimately, that’s the reason for
people being here. He encouraged preventing development of the golf course,
regardless of the county’s decision and no development whatsoever of Tres
Hermanos.
John Harbaugh said that the last conversation was about Shell-Aera and the
football stadium, and Supervisor Knabe not being included in some of the
discussions they had. He asked if Shell Aera was still in play - perhaps. He was
going to title his discussion tonight “reparations for Diamond Bar” because we are
5th in the nation in traffic congestion. Some people were concerned about Tres
Hermanos and actually, the City of Industry owns more than just Tres Hermanos
– they own the Boy Scout Reservation and Lower Canyon LLP. So in that event,
we have that to be forward thinking. Regarding the future of Tres Hermanos, look
for a Tonner Canyon Expressway coming through because Carbon Canyon is the
only way to get from Chino Hills to Brea without going through the SR congestion.
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 96
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 26 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
He thinks regardless of what the consensus is tonight, there will be more
development over which the City has not much control. He had conversations with
Kenneth Hahn and Pete Schabarum when they were alive, both of whom told him
that the 710 freeway extension would be built and that did not happen. Bob Huff
said he would like to see it for the public good and he didn’t win. He was in China
for the last meeting Mr. Harbaugh attended to see who was going to be the next
Congress person to replace Ed Royce. The earth scar in the City of Industry called
massive grading Phase I and Phase II, at the time he (Bob Huff) was on Council
was supposed to be another buffer zone and it did not happe n. Tonight he is
concerned about the City of Industry and what they are going to do as it will affect
the City of Diamond Bar. Mr. Harbaugh said he did not respond to any of the
surveys.
Paul Sherwood is a member of GPAC and said that tonight’s participation is great.
He witnessed some excellent participation over the GPAC meetings as well. The
survey and workshops were also created and designed to encourage community
involvement in the General Plan process. The GPAC relied heavily on the
information that was gleaned from these surveys and workshops and he is
concerned that now we are questioning the validity of those results. People
committed a lot of their time to give the GPAC their information and he believes
this body needs to rely on the information received. He has and will continue to
rely on that information. The 1995 General Plan called for 5-acres of park and
recreation land per thousand residents. Currently, Diamond Bar is far behind that
target at 1.2 acres of parks and recreation land per thousand. So, he would like to
submit the concept that if the golf course becomes available, perhaps a land use
alternative for it would be parks and a sports complex which would go a long way
to serving Diamond Bar residents and it would meet the desire to not get rid of the
golf course as green space and would help meet the City’s goals of park and
recreation land that the City so sorely needs to serve families and kids in this
community. Obviously, he is one of nine in favor of Alternative 1 and h e is in favor
of keeping the golf course or at least develop ing it as parks and recreation land if
it were ever to become available.
Sadie Meyer, architecture and urban design student and practitioner, said she was
particularly interested in “People First” architecture and placemaking. She
supports Alternative 1 as the best approach presented when considering the best
practices of placemaking. There has been a people-centered approach with
community outreach that resulted in a clear preference for Alternative 1 and
addresses the key factors of placemaking in people first design. First and foremost
it reflects public opinion; and second, it would preserve physical amenities such as
the historic Diamond Bar Golf Course, which has been a center for community
connection, identity and even a wildlife habitat waystation. In turn, this also
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 97
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 27 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
preserves the Tres Hermanos Ranch that sets Diamond Bar apart as a bio -
diversity hotspot unique to this region which is increasingly rare nationally and
internationally. Alternative 1 also features a creek/water element which could be
a natural place of gathering and is a unique feature that could be taken advantage
of. These natural places make Diamond Bar unique and would ultimately protect
the natural spaces allowing placemaking to reach beyond the town center. The
town center proposed is already an established commercial district and would
focus on neighborhood serving retail and dining uses and allow opportunities for a
series of small plazas and public spaces interspersed with existing and new
businesses. Alternative 1 provides the opportunity for “a walking network with
alternate street spaces and small squares” and Alternative 1 seems to be a no-
brainer when considering best practices; however, the report prepared by
CDD/Gubman and Senior Planner strongly favors Alternative 2 which would
basically remove the historic golf course, require development in the Tres
Hermanos Ranch and provide visibility to the SR57/60, which would be in the
middle of a retail island centered over vast and permeable pavement directly over
two blue line streams.
Robin Smith said she has participated in all of the surveys and has attended all
meetings. She thought the survey was really inadequate. After reading staff’s
report and realizing that the recommendation is Alternative 2, she had mixed
feelings because she feels like the community is getting railroaded into something.
One of the big glaring things was that last time she was here she asked Fehr &
Peers representative if they had heard anything about induced travel, which is a
big deal and the consultants we have here knew nothing. And then she finds out
their principal has written a serious scholarly paper about it which says “current
travel forecasting models, both four-step and activity based may not fully account
for induced travel affects. Model testing is required to measure and verify the level
of sensitivity and accuracy. Ms. Smith continued stating that his bottom line is that
this is a science that we would embrace because we are facing probably the
toughest thing in our history which is the boa constrictor of traffic that is strangling
our community. She believes we all want the right thing and unless we are so
blinded by our own special interests we cannot see what th e long term affect is
going to be. The traffic will filter through up to where Alternative 1 exists – she
gets that, but it is going to be concentrated down by the golf course, especially in
view of whatever City of Industry is going to do. And we all know, it is probably not
going to be a good thing. It will be warehouses. And by the way, this location is
one of the epicenters, the 5th most congested goods transit corridor in the US. This
is something people are not talking about. It’s the truck traffic, it is not just the
cars, and road widening certainly causes more traffic. So we’re all in this together
and she want sober thought. Regarding the budget, she would like to find out
when the project will turn a profit, whether it would be self -sustaining in five years
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 98
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 28 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
and how will that comport with the City’s budget? She believes if that was done
the City would be a lot more sustainable and the City would look at projects that
would pay for themselves in a very short period of time.
Mary Power said she did not complete the survey because she felt it was very
biased. She is a commercial landowner and has a degree in marketing. The fact
that there was no alternative for “no development” was why she did not complete
the survey. As a commercial landowner, it’s hard to get two landowners to agree,
let alone 13. She would like to see “no alternatives” because she does not believe
Diamond Bar needs a town center. This is country living and she would like to
keep it that way.
Paul Deibel, a Diamond Bar resident for over 20 years, said he participated in the
survey and the October 2017 meeting and in both he expressed a preference for
Alternative 1 because he felt it was feasible and built on existing infrastructure of
uses that would lend itself more toward an intensive downtown plus, from a design
standpoint it allowed for placemaking opportunities and possibly a town square
and so forth. However, in light of the discussion he has heard tonight, he is no
longer of that opinion. In particular, he is impressed by the additional analysis in
looking at the Residual Land Value Analysis. He did not necessarily believe it
would be Diamond Bar’s decision as to whether or not the golf course stays or
does not stay. Therefore, he believes because this is a long term plan, 20 or 30
years of looking out into the future, he believes this plan should take that into
consideration and not lower the City’s sights to focusing on Alternative 1 as the
ultimate town center. He believes Diamond Bar needs a town center. He is tired
of taking visitors, relatives, his kids, nieces and nephews to Brea or to Chino Hills
to have a pedestrian-oriented experience with restaurants, a place to congregate,
see a movie and have family interaction. He believes the City should go fo r the
best town center possible from a regional standpoint rather than neighborhood
standpoint so that the City could have regional-oriented uses there and he believes
the market will continue to increase for that given population expansion, etc. So
he thinks Alternative 2 would actually be more feasible, particularly when looking
at the land value and the urban design and placemaking opportunities that exist
there, starting with a clean state. Also, that residual land value might enable the
possibility of some affordable housing and diversity of housing to go into a town
center because for it to be a town center it would have mixed -use, so it would have
residential uses as well. In that regard, he would like to focus on the need for
affordable housing in Diamond Bar so that members of his family and particularly
younger members of his family could continue to live in this community. He
believes Diamond Bar has commitments to the region in that regard which need to
be taken into account and adhered to.
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 99
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 29 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
John Martin, a Diamond Bar resident for 45 years, said that if Alternative 2 and 3
is chosen, what will happen to Alternative 1? Will it be like the Alpha Beta center
was? So we have to use all of the incentives and do the best job possible. He
knows that working with 15 property owners is very difficult, but he believes the
City has to go that route. If the golf course closes, the Cit y would have a great
opportunity to use that land for recreation, which is a goal for everyone in the City,
and he believes it has been said many, many times that the actual golf course as
a green recreational center is a necessity against the City of Industry. He believes
that even though it will be a battle, it has to go to Alternative 1. Mr. Martin said he
did not complete the survey but he attended all of the meetings.
With no further speakers, M/Low closed the public comments.
Council and Planning Commission Discussion and Deliberation:
Chair/Wolfe said that C/Farago brought up the point that regardless of what this
body ultimately chooses, should we, because with Alternative 2 or 3, there is still
an element of the golf course that could continue to exist, contemplate in the
General Plan what the community might want to do if at some point the County of
Los Angeles chooses to close the golf course. He believes this body should really
think about that because there has been a lot of testimony this evening that
proposes the City should continue to leave the golf course as “open recreational
space.” He agrees with that premise and the comments that the City needs the
buffer that the golf course provides, but he would caution that until the State of
California gets away from carbon fuels, that is not a great place for children to be
playing (up against the SR57/60 confluence) and health studies have been done
to support that. However, he thinks that in a 40-50 year horizon, because
California is doing a great job in starting to convert its fleet over which is ultimately
a national issue, he would argue that if the County were to close the golf course
and if Diamond Bar were to propose that land to be park space or recreational
space, the City should look carefully at health impacts to those who would be using
those recreational facilities. If the City has moved away from carbon fuel modes
of transportation, this then becomes a moot point.
MPT/Herrera said she appreciates all of the comments made this evening and as
people were talking about how long they have lived in Diamond Bar, she reminded
the group that she has live in Diamond Bar for 52 years. In that time, the City has
changed a lot. When she moved to Diamond Bar, 7,000 people lived in the town
and then all of those present moved into Diamond Bar. While people prefer
Alternative 1, she would say that is already happening and she does not know that
it matters if this body designates that as a preferred alternative because there is a
developer that is spending millions of dollars to make it happen now. Alternative 1
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 100
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 30 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
is not a town center, and while some said they do not want a town center, she is
sorry about that because for years, she has heard from 60,000 other residents that
they want a town center - a place where they can walk among beautiful trees and
pathways and maybe have an ice cream, sit on a park bench and enjoy their
surroundings and, where in the City could that be located? The County of Los
Angeles owns the golf course and should they decide to do away with the golf
course for whatever reason, if Diamond Bar does not have a plan in place then it
falls victim to whatever LA County wants to do. And right now, the County
Supervisors are talking about providing “homeless encampments”. The golf
course consists of 170 acres and what would happen if one of the Supervisors
decided “hey, that’s a good spot for a homeless encampment and Diamond Bar
had no plan for the land. The City of Diamond Bar does not have a plan for that
land because there is no land use plan stated in their General Plan, so let’s go
ahead and do it because the City of Diamond Bar doesn’t care.” Considering that
possible outcome, MPT/Herrera said she would propose to move forward with
Alternative 1 – pushing for and encouraging it because it is actually happening at
this time. It is not going to die. The stores are there and they will be there for
years to come. But at the same time she would recommend and encourage that
the City have a designation or call for a Specific Plan or Overlay for the golf course,
in case the County decided they no longer wanted the land. And, that designation
could go as far as designating the south end where there could be a walkable
community town center, and on the north side it could be park space and perhaps
some ball fields. She believes the General Plan should designate the entirety of
the golf course area so that the Board of Supervisors cannot say, well, they only
want to build in one area, so let’s do a homeless encampment in the remaining
area. She thinks it behooves Diamond Bar to take care of itself by being proactive
and designating such in the General Plan update, which was her motion.
C/Lyons said she was concerned that the folks who voted for the town center as
Alternative 1 would not get what they think they are going to get. She has heard
for many years many, many people say they want a restaurant where they can sit
down and be waited on, preferably with tablecloths - they want a theater and higher
end amenities, etc. In reading the documentation, it states that Alternative 1 would
have Neighborhood Retail and Restaurants. Not knowing what that meant , she
asked CDD/Gubman to explain it to her and was told this is what it means:
Neighborhood Retail and Restaurants are the types of businesses currently
populating the area. In other words, exactly what is in place at this point in time
and theaters tend to require wider markets so they would not be considered
“neighborhood oriented.” So for tho se who thought that Alternative 1 would give
them something more upscale, she believes that is not correct and everyone needs
to understand that.
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 101
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 31 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
C/Tye said he believed C/Lyons was on the right track. What he hears people
saying is “let’s not do that – let’s not designate (Alternative 2) for a development of
a town center.” In fact, no one is considering or suggesting that for development
right now. The City is not saying it is pleased that The Charles Company made
that investment in Diamond Bar but now is looking to change the land use so that
it can now be a “town center”. People are looking for something that is a focal
point and designating where layout of the roadway and site can be changed to
make it more walkable and bike friendly. MPT/Herrera is the only person who was
on the Council when he was elected, and there was a day at the Diamond Bar
Center where the Council talked about what it would like to see in a town center.
It did not have anything to do with redoing the General Plan, but only what
residents would like to see. In short, what was our vision for Diamond Bar? At
that time he said he would love to see from Golden Springs to the SR57 and from
the back side of Mandarin Taste to Diamond Bar Boulevard flattened so Diamond
Bar could start over because that area consists of 20 or 30 acres that someone
could work with to make it function as a town center. He believes that is what The
Charles Company has in mind as it attempts to cobble together the different pieces
and different ownerships at that site. And, to him, having something as large as
the golf course site and something where the City could start anew would be terrific
because it could be a destination. He believe s he heard Mr. Diebel say he was
tired of taking his family to other cities. And that is what the City may have available
and all that is left for such a project, were it to happen, so the City is going to have
to be proactive or lose that opportunity. It isn’t as if Diamond Bar is saying okay,
we’re going to commit this much in resources and we want you to build a theater
and we want you to build a high-end restaurant. All we are doing is saying “this is
a designation” and we think this would make the most sense at Alternative 1 and
Alternative 2 and he does not think they are mutually exclusive. He doesn’t believe
it has to be either-or. He thinks what the City needs to protect itself against, and it
could be too late because Diamond Bar is surrounded by too much retail whether
it is Chino Hills, City of Industry, or Brea Birch Street, it would be a great plan if
Diamond Bar could create something and have a vision that says this is where we
would like to do something like that. He asked staff and the consultants how hard
it would be, on the south end (of the golf course) to move holes 3 through 8 to the
north side campus, which would give the City enough property to achieve what it
wanted to achieve in that place, and give Diamond Bar the best of both worlds. He
came here tonight thinking one thing and after looking at this, considering it, and
seeing what folks want as their community, he believes it does not have to be
mutually exclusive between Alternative 1 and 2.
C/Lin said this is one of the best public meetings he has attended and he
appreciates everyone’s opinions. He is a golfer and he plays the Diamond Bar
Golf Course quite a bit and it is one of the worst golf courses he has ever played.
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 102
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 32 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
It is so noisy and flat. The golf course as an open space is only for the person who
can pay $59 to enjoy. If you don’t have any money you can’t enjoy it now. So, if
the City were to turn that into an open space it would be free for people to use and
wouldn’t that be better and still provide a nice barrier to the houses. He thinks that
this body and the attendees should no t lose sight of the fact that they are being
asked to define one of two alternatives to move forward to an environmental
assessment. In other words, there is one hurdle before this body reaches a final
conclusion. However, it does not mean that the City has to move forward with only
one alternative. It can move both forward for further study before anything
happens.
CDD/Gubman explained that the current General Plan designations include
“placeholder” designations. As an example, the Target property had a Planned
Development designation that essentially prescribed that the area had to be
master planned. At the same time, it did not specify a specific use. There are
already a few sites that are designated as Planning Areas that do not specify what
the particular menu of uses are, but at least highlights them as planning priority
areas should a development opportunity occur in the future. So, it is a way to not
go so far as to prescribe what designation it would fall under, but should that
opportunity arise in the future, there are then policies that mandate that a “process”
be undertaken to define what that future development profile would be.
Mr. Bhatia said that they could look at the worst condition. In other words, the EIR
would say that if that were to be a town center this is the worst environmental
transportation condition there might be which, as CDD/Gubman said, does not
mean that it is an automatic approval to anyone who comes forward to develop the
property. There would still be requirements for a Master Plan or Specific Plan with
discretionary approval by the City Council to be in place subject to further review.
As a placeholder, the General Plan would state that this environmental document
looks at the cumulative traffic conditions and results from that so nobody would
say that we were understating the worst environmental impacts that could
potentially happen which, in his mind, would be the best approach to take. But this
would still leave a discretionary approval from the City Council for somebody to
come back five or 10 years or so from now with a more Specific Plan before giving
it a thumbs up.
C/Lin said that the EIR is for the entire General Plan. In fact, town center is not
even a land use designation but a commonly used term. So, what can the City
do? Can it simply say it has a commercial center and in addition have a general
plan designation for the south section of the golf course as MPT/Herrera
mentioned, as open space, etc. and use that as a combined proposal to move
forward to the EIR.
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 103
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 33 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
Mr. Bhatia said that C/Lin was perfectly correct. That can be done.
M/Low said she heard C/Lin say that Alternative 2 and 3 should be combined to
make a big Alternative 2.
C/Lin said he was not saying that. What he is saying is that like it or not, the Smart
& Final area is already a commercial center. Diamond Bar is planning for 20 years
from now and wants to have a buildout in that area. There is already in place a
buildout plan for that commercial center. At the same time, we would like to see
some kind of a commercial center or town center considered on the south part of
the golf course with the north part of the golf course being considered for open
space public use.
Mr. Bhatia said that C/Lin was correct and that when Fehr & Peers does their
transportation analysis they report 2040 conditions (long term) what the traffic
impacts of that scenario might be.
C/Lin said that if the economy drives that scenario and 20 years from now if there
is no environment for the golf course to be developed, so be it.
Mr. Bhatia said that there can also be policies in place for the community’s support
of the existing golf course use. He does not believe that the City is looking for the
golf course to move out. He believes the community should continue supporting it
and let it remain vibrant, but at such time that use is no longer economically viable
or should the County want to move it or do something else with it, at that time, what
C/Lin said comes into play.
C/Mahlke said that in listening to comments tonight - and she is a public speaking
teacher so she gets really excited when people come to meetings and talk, she
believes what they saw tonight was reflective of the miniscule amount of survey
respondents (1.2% of the population) and more so what she believes it shows is
opposing forces of what people want and what that comes with it, which is not
actually what they want. We want school of choice but we don’t want traffic. We
want to be able to shop in our City but we don’t want to have to deal with too many
people on the streets – this is the nature of who we are which is not exclusive to
Diamond Bar. She keeps coming back to what Mr. Bhatia wisely said , which is
that the General Plan is the idea of how we protect our goals long range which
shows our intent to reduce uncertainty. She hears people who are fervently
passionate about these alternatives except that it might not ever happen. And
these numbers the consultants are sort of being dragged through the mud on, are
projections of things that cannot be account for. It is to the best of their ability
knowing that these items might not ever be built and there may never be
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 104
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 34 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
developers or companies wanting to come in and do it due to economics,
emissions and so many other things. These are very important things but these
are difficult things to look at. So when we are looking at this sh e wants to go with
what is recommended with the idea of protecting the city, not based on moving
forward, but putting safety measures place for this General Plan that ensure that
however the City decides these opposing forces need to be resolved within our
City, that can be done which will be leveled out what as to what that actually means
through more talk, more input, or more people coming to meetings and speaking
out about what they want and how we protect what it is that folks may think they
want moving forward. She knows this has been a conversation about a town
center but perhaps the conversation could be more about protecting everything
that offers possibilities. A General Plan does not mean the City intends to move
forward with specific things, it merely sets forth a vision and protects future
opportunities. Even if Alternative 1 is selected and the idea of a golf course is
protected, if something happens to change what is currently in place it does not
mean that the City would necessarily do anything but continue to protect its future
opportunities.
M/Low asked staff for help with a motion that encompassed what this body wanted
to do.
CM/Fox said it sounds like there may be consens us for selection of Alternative 1
as the preferred land use alternative with the addition of placing an Overlay on the
entire golf course with potential development on the south part and potential Open
Space/Recreational uses on the north part which was a motion made by
MPT/Herrera. C/Lin seconded the motion and stated that to him, that motion
addresses both the City’s desire as well as, the concerns of the residents. Motion
carried by the following Roll Call vote:
City Council:
AYES: Council Members: Lin, Lyons, Tye, MPT/Herrera, M/Low
NOES: Council Members: None.
ABSENT: Council Members: None.
ABSTAIN: Council Members: None.
Planning Commission:
AYES: Commissioners: Barlas, Farago, Mahlke, VC/Mok, Chair/Wolfe
NOES: Commissioners: None.
ABSENT: Commissioners: None.
ABSTAIN: Commissioners: None.
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 105
______________________________________________________________________________
JANUARY 30, 2018 PAGE 35 GENERAL PLAN SPECIAL JT MTG
______________________________________________________________________________
M/Low thanked everyone for their participation in tonight’s meeting.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the joint session, M/Low
adjourned the Special Meeting at 9:47 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
_____________________________
Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this _______ day of ____________, 2018.
_____________________________
Ruth M. Low, Mayor
Respectfully Submitted,
_____________________________
Greg Gubman,
Community Development Director
__________________________
Kenneth Mok, Chairperson
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 106
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
APRIL 17, 2018
STUDY SESSION: M/Low called the Study Session to order at 5:56 p.m. in
Room CC-8 of the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center,
21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765.
ROLL CALL: Council Members Lyons, Tye, Mayor Pro Tem Herrera,
and Mayor Low.
Staff Present: Dan Fox, City Manager; David DeBerry, City Attorney; Ryan McLean,
Assistant City Manager; David Liu, Public Works Director; Greg Gubman, Community
Development Director; Dianna Honeywell, Finance Director; Ken Desforges, IT Manager;
Kimberly Young, Senior Civil Engineer; Christian Malpica, Associate Engineer; Anthony
Santos, Assistant to the City Manager; Marsha Roa, Public Information Manager; Cecilia
Arellano, Public Information Coordinator, and Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk.
► GRAND AVENUE/GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE INTERSECTION ENHANCEMENT
PROJECT UPDATE:
CM/Fox stated that City of Industry is taking the lead on construction of Phase 2a
of the Confluence project and the City has been working with the City of Industry to
ensure incorporation of Diamond Bar’s streetscape and enhancement elements.
SCE/Young stated that in 2015 the City’s first Comprehensive Streetscape
Enhancement project commenced along the Grand Avenue corridor, specifically at
the intersections of Grand Avenue/Diamond Bar Boulevard and Grand
Avenue/Longview Drive. As a result of the success of this project, the streetscape
design guidelines were developed for future projects to follow on both public and
private projects.
Council’s adopted Strategic Plan continues the vision to incorporate streetscape
design elements at other arterial intersections and City entry points. The goal and
while there are different projects within the City that are accomplishing this goal,
tonight’s discussion will center on the Grand Avenue and Golden Springs Drive
Intersection.
The EIR for Industry East project and the Industry Business Center IVC
developments north of the SR57/60 Confluence area (in the City of Industry) identify
traffic mitigation measures for the Grand Avenue/Golden Springs Drive int ersection
(Phase 2a). Improvements include widening of the Grand Avenue/Golden Springs
Drive intersection and the right-of-way for the widening is being acquired from the
golf course only so that the Chili’s and Mobile Gas Station parcels will not be
impacted. Along the southbound Grand Avenue portion of the intersection, the third
thru-lane will remain and the two left-turn lanes and the dedicated right-turn lane
will remain.
C/Tye asked where the southbound Golden Springs Drive lane begins.
6.1.b
Packet Pg. 107
APRIL 17, 2018 PAGE 2 CC STUDY SESSION
SCE/Young explained that ultimately, the improvements will extend from Industry
through Diamond Bar and extend through the intersection to Montefino. The new
project will eliminate the 4th lane. Additionally, a bike lane will be installed to allow
travel through the intersection to the current bike lane at Lavender. A third lane will
be added at the Mobil Gas Station and a dedicated right-turn lane for that third lane
on Grand Avenue will be added. T he shoulder striping is temporary so that when
the ultimate improvements are completed along the bridge, that area will become a
4th thru-lane that will turn into a dedicated right-turn lane to the eastbound SR60
onramp. The street widening improvements are being constructed and funded
entirely by the City of Industry. As a result of the widening, the Diamond Bar
landscaped median along Grand Avenue that contains the rich Lantana and
Camphor trees will be removed and as will the very mature Eucalyptus trees at the
golf course parking lot and all of the landscaping in the golf course slope. A narrow
median will be constructed along Grand Avenue to separate the bidirectional traffic.
The City acquired the services of David Evans & Associates (landscape ar chitect)
in 2015 to design the streetscape elements for this project to attempt to put back
some aesthetic enhancements consistent with the City’s design standards. As a
result, this project will incorporate and add 51 Crepe Myrtle street trees to the
intersection with decorative tree grates and pavers, 49 planters with concrete post
and rails in the sidewalk area to create a visual buffer between pedestrians and
vehicular traffic, steel panels with windmills at each corner with concrete posts and
wood rail where feasible and decorative traffic signals and enhanced crosswalks.
C/Tye asked if the Crepe Myrtles would be sapling or mature trees .
SCE/Young responded that they would be 24-36 inch box trees.
C/Tye asked what it would take to have the area look mature.
PWD/Liu said “bigger than 36 inch” at a substantial cost; however, staff can
determine the cost of that option of the Council wishes.
C/Lyons asked if the rendering showed what was being installed.
SCE/Young explained that the renderings depict the ultimate improvements (full
maturity). The feedback received regarding the Grand Avenue/Diamond Bar
Boulevard project included residents wanting the parkway planters to have more
vibrant plantings so for this project, the landscape architect is proposing to change
the palate of the planters in the sidewalk and the examples show what the plantings
would look like.
C/Lyons asked what the 24-36 inch box trees would look like at the time of planting.
6.1.b
Packet Pg. 108
APRIL 17, 2018 PAGE 3 CC STUDY SESSION
PWD/Liu said that two years ago when the Grand Avenue Diamond Bar Boulevard
trees were planted it included about 12 trees and were about 6 -8 feet tall at the time
of planting and those trees have since reached maturity.
C/Lyons agreed the trees look good at this time.
CM/Fox said that special consideration has to be given to the size of the box
working in the size of the hole in the sidewalk so that the root barriers fit into the
space.
C/Lyons asked if more cows could be placed on the hillside by C hili’s.
SCE/Young said that the median include a succulent plant (Afterglow) and,
Lantana, and grasses that are drought tolerant as well.
C/Tye wanted to make sure, going forward that this third iteration was as durable
as it needed to be considering the additional wear and tear to the crosswalk pavers
that will occur at this busy intersection.
SCE/Young explained that staff met with the paver manufacturer who has reviewed
the pavers that are currently in place (Longview, Grand Avenue, Diamond Bar
Boulevard, Brea Canyon Road) and who provided specific recommendations to
incorporate in the next project to try and eliminate some of the maintenance issues
the City is seeing at the current locations. Recommendations include using a
smaller paver and setting pavers on an aggregate base rather than on a concrete
base.
C/Tye said the pavers that are in place appear to be on an aggregate base because
they are uneven which should not happen with a concrete base.
SCE/Young explained that the concrete base, the water is not allowed to drain and
while drainage holes were put in the concrete, ponds of water are forming under
the pavers and with the aggregate base, the water will be allowed to drain through
properly. The pavers will still be flexible but not in terms of the type of maintenance
issues where the pavers are breaking.
C/Lyons asked if there would be lighting behind the archite ctural features.
SCE/Young responded that there would be in the sidewalk area but not in the
medians.
The current cost estimate for the streetscape elements only (Diamond Bar’s
portion) is projected at a total of $1.51 million which includes the four t raffic signal
poles Diamond Bar is negotiating with the City of Industry for cost-share match
since staff believes their project is removing a value of the current landscape pads.
6.1.b
Packet Pg. 109
APRIL 17, 2018 PAGE 4 CC STUDY SESSION
PWD/Liu indicated that staff will continue to pursue this issue because Diamond
Bar has a very strong case for this request.
MPT/Herrera asked if the City had an obligation to the LA County Board of
Supervisors to replace the land that is being taken by the freeway.
PWD/Liu said that staff’s understanding is that impacts that occur on golf courses
involve conversations between the Supervisors, LA County Parks and Recreation
and the City of Industry. The County is very interested in the mainline
improvements and when it is all said and done the entire golf course will be
reconstructed to a new 18-hole golf course and the County is satisfied with the
improvement plans that have been submitted to them. CM/Fox said he believes
the County expects to have a replacement of about 10 acres for all phases in some
form or fashion under the Park Preservation Statute.
MPT/Herrera asked if that replacement would be located within the City of Industry
or within the City of Diamond Bar. CM/Fox said that is unknown at this point and
SCE/Young said the replacement has to occur within the County of LA.
M/Low said Tres Hermanos would be a nice area for a 10-acre park.
CM/Fox said that where the undercrossing tunnel is between Golden Springs Drive
and the freeway, part of this project will be to relocate that tunnel and one of the
golf course holes will need to be relocated. This will be done prior to construction
which is anticipated for early 2019 for the physical roadway activity portion. The
idea is to keep the golf course operation to every extent possible during the roadway
construction.
M/Low asked if acreage is being taken from the golf course parking area .
SCE/Young responded only the slope area. Overall, the parking lot will not be
impacted but during construction a few parking spaces will have to be relocated.
The final improvements will not impact the parking lot asphalt or the configuration.
M/Low asked if the other side of the freeway would be impacted .
CM/Fox said only the slope which he assumes will be re-landscaped and he is
assuming that the County and the golf course will want to put some trees back in
that area but it will be a long time before it will be seen at the street level due to the
steepness of the grade.
M/Low said that in discussions with the County related to improving the golf course,
is it just as to the greens portion or will the building be improved as well.
PWD/Liu said he believed they are doing something to the exi sting clubhouse as
well. He would have to look into the details, but he believes the County got a lot
6.1.b
Packet Pg. 110
APRIL 17, 2018 PAGE 5 CC STUDY SESSION
out of this project including some interior improvements to the clubhouse and other
facilities including drainage facilities.
M/Low said she would be interested to see if there would be any interest or fin ancial
possibility to develop the clubhouse to incorporate a restaurant that could
accommodate customers and diners as opposed to just the catering section that
they have now. It seems to her it would be a good location for a full restaurant with
a good view.
C/Lyons agreed.
C/Lyons felt that M/Low had a good point about the 10 -acres and engage in
discussions with the Supervisor and suggested it should go back into Diamond Bar.
M/Low said that it could be in Tres Hermanos contiguous or in the City’s border.
CM/Fox said that staff could ask those questions of the Parks and Rec staff.
C/Lyons said the City is already very short of park land.
SCE/Young stated the proposed project schedule is nearing final design and
Industry is expecting to bid the project in June 2018, award the contract in
September and move widening construction to January 2019 (to allow for
reconstruction of the golf course hole No. 3) with completion anticipated for March
2020. Play on hole No. 3 will continue without interruption during construction.
Public Comments: None.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to come before the City Council,
M/Low recessed the Study Session at 6:21 p.m. to the Regular Meeting.
________________________________
TOMMYE CRIBBINS, City Clerk
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this day of , 2018.
_______________________________
RUTH M. LOW , Mayor
6.1.b
Packet Pg. 111
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
APRIL 17, 2018
CLOSED SESSION: 5:30 P.M., Room CC-8
Public Comments on Closed Session Items: None Offered.
► City of Diamond Bar v. Oversight Board of the Successor Agency to the Industry
Urban-Development Agency, et al - Sacramento Superior Court Case No. 34-
2017-80002718.
City of Diamond Bar v. City of Industry, et al – Los Angeles Superior Court Case
No. BS171295.
STUDY SESSION: 5:56 P.M., Room CC-8
► GRAND AVENUE/GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE INTERSECTION
ENHANCEMENT PROJECT UPDATE:
Public Comments: None
Recessed to Regular Meeting at 6:21 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Low called the Regular City Council meeting to
order at 6:32 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Government
Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA.
Mayor Low reported that no reportable action was taken during the Closed Session.
CM/Fox reported that tonight’s Study Session focused on the enhanced design
elements that will be incorporated into the Grand Avenue/Golden Springs Drive
intersection improvements, the next phase of the SR57/60 Confluence Project, intended
to be consistent with what has been occurring throughout the community over the past
couple of years.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Low led the Pledge of Allegiance.
INVOCATION: None.
ROLL CALL: Council Members Lyons, Tye, Mayor Pro Tem
Herrera and Mayor Low
Absent: Councilmember Lin was excused.
Staff Present: Dan Fox, City Manager; David DeBerry, City Attorney; Ryan
McLean, Assistant City Manager; Ken Desforges, IT Director; David Liu, Public Works
Director; Dianna Honeywell, Finance Director; Greg Gubman, Community Development
6.1.c
Packet Pg. 112
APRIL 17, 2018 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL
Director; Kimberly Young, Senior Civil Engineer; Anthony Santos, Assistant to the City
Manager; Marsha Roa, Public Information Manager; Christian Malpica, Associate Traffic
Engineer; Cecilia Arellano, Public Information Coordinator, and Tommye Cribbins, City
Clerk.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Presented.
1. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS:
1.1 M/Low and Council Members presented PWD/Liu with the Arbor Day
Proclamation.
2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
CM/Fox reported that Lt. Phil Marquez would be leaving the Diamond Bar/Walnut
Station to transfer to the Countywide Services Division where he will serve as a
Division Operations Lieutenant. Lt. Marquez has been a wonderful wealth of
resources in dealing with the community and has been an outstanding member
of the Sheriff’s team. He will be missed in this community and everyone wishes
him the best in his career endeavors as he moves forward.
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Pui-Ching Ho, Diamond Bar Library Manager, announced upcoming library
events, as well as The Diamond Bar Friends of the Library will host its 25th
Annual Wine Soiree on Sunday, April 22 nd from 4:00 to 7:00 p.m. For information
on these and other events check out the library’s website at
www.colapublib.org/libs/diamondbar/index.php
Susan Pantages, Vice President, Diamond Bar Friends of the Library,
encouraged everyone present and those watching to join the Friends this
Sunday, April 22nd for the 25th Anniversary of the Diamond Bar Friends of the
Library Wine Soiree and Benefit Auction at the Diamond Bar Center on Grand
Avenue from 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. Tickets are $65 per person and can be purchased
prior to the event at the Diamond Bar Library, Basically Books, Xavier Florists
and Midas Auto Service or, at the door on Sunday.
Giang Nguyen, 23842 Chinook Place, a Financial Campaigner in Los Angeles
and resident of Diamond Bar stated that this month is Financial Literacy Month to
raise public awareness about the importance of financial education and the
serious consequences that may be associated with the lack of understanding
about personal finances.
4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS: None
6.1.c
Packet Pg. 113
APRIL 17, 2018 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL
5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1 General Plan Advisory Committee Meeting – April 19, 2018 – 6:30 p.m.,
Windmill Community Room, 21810 Copley Drive.
5.2 Earth Day/Arbor Day Celebration – April 21, 2018 – 9:00 a.m. to 2:00
p.m., AQMD/Government Center Parking Lot, 21865 Copley Drive.
5.3 Planning Commission Meeting – April 24, 2018 – 7:00 p.m., Windmill
Community Room, 21810 Copley Drive.
5.4 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting – April 26, 2018 – 7:00 p.m.,
Windmill Community Room, 21810 Copley Drive.
5.5 City Council Meeting – May 1, 2018 – 6:30 p.m., AQMD/Government
Auditorium, 21865 Copley Drive.
5.6 Parks and Recreation Open House – May 2, 2018 – 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.
at the Diamond Bar Center, 1600 Grand Avenue.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Lyons moved, C/Tye seconded, to approve
the Consent Calendar as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call
vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Lyons, Tye, MPT/Herrera, M/Low
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Lin
6.1 APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES:
6.1a Study Session of April 3, 2018 – as presented
6.1b Regular Meeting of April 3, 2018 – as presented
6.2 RATIFIED CHECK REGISTER DATED March 29, 2018 through April 11,
2018 totaling $1,379,350.09.
6.3 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2018-14 AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF
A LIST OF PROJECTS TO BE FUNDED BY SB 1: THE ROAD REPAIR
AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 2017, FOR FISCAL YEAR 2018-19.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None.
8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
8.1 SYCAMORE CANYON PARK SLOPE EROSION AND TRAIL REPAIR
PROJECT UPDATE.
6.1.c
Packet Pg. 114
APRIL 17, 2018 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL
PWD/Liu reported that in January 2017, back to back storm events
occurred over one weekend which resulted in the erosion at Sycamore
Canyon Park along the slopes, trails and adjacent to the LA County storm
drain easement staircase creating extensive damage. In February 2017
the City retained a geotechnical engineer to determine the extent of the
damage and mitigation measures that would be requi red to repair the
damage. The Sycamore Canyon Park Trail which is accessible from
inside the park from the Golden Springs Drive side or from Diamond Bar
Boulevard has remained open to the public except from the Diamond Bar
Boulevard access point which has been closed since February 2017.
With the amount of rain that happened over that weekend, the inlet was
clogged which allowed water to back up and undermine the slope area
around the upper flight of stairs leaving a hole approximately 8 feet deep.
Similar conditions were created along the middle area slopes . The erosion
continued down to the lower flight of stairs.
The design plan involves making sure that the three flights of stairs are
removed and replaced, that the handrails on both sides of th e staircase
are reinstalled, and that the drain inlets are redesigned with new fittings
(raised higher) to prevent clogging and build in filter materials to keep
water flowing into the storm drain system.
C/Tye asked if the failure occurred because of age or design and if the
new and improved systems are installed, would they have been able to
handle the volume of water that fell in that area.
PWD/Liu responded that the proposed improvements will definitely handle
the amount of water it has been designed for. The main reason for failure
in this case was the vast amount of water that fell in a short amount of
time.
A critical part of this repair operation is the need to remove the entire
failure area and re-compact the area with proper soil materials within the
limits proposed. Within these compact limits, the compacted fill slope will
be imbedded with geogrids which are fabric membranes to provide the
extra layer of structural integrity to retain as much soil as possible.
At this point, the project design plan and specifications are near
completion and staff has estimated that this cost will be just shy of
$600,000 with the inclusion of a 20 percent contingency. At this point, staff
believes the engineer’s estimate of $600,000 is a reasonable estimate. In
addition, staff estimates that about $84,000 will be needed to manage the
construction activities as well as to conduct additional soils and
geotechnical studies required as part of the construction which means the
total cost at this time is $675,000 going forward. To date, the City has
6.1.c
Packet Pg. 115
APRIL 17, 2018 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL
spent about $122,000 in engineering design fees as part of the project.
Staff has been coordinating with the State and FEMA in seeking their
financial assistance to help the City with the cost of the repair work.
Based on the current design, if the City is successful in its negotiations
with the State and FEMA, the City can get up to 93 percent of the total
project cost – based on a total project cost of $800,000, a 93 percent
reimbursement amount means that the City could potentially recover close
to $740,000 toward completion of this project. However, at this time,
FEMA, via the State, is telling the City they feel that they can come up with
a reimbursement amount of only $240,000. The City continues to impress
upon them that the City’s design versus the field opinions for suggested
repair work is in complete opposition. They are looking from a cost point
of view and the City is saying it wants to do what is necessary in the long
term at the real cost of remediation. So, FEMA has said that if Diamond
Bar hopes to recover more than the $240,000 it must submit additional
information to support that contention. That process has begun. As of
today, staff continues to communicate with Cal OES and FEMA and staff
remains hopeful that they will get to a better understanding of the scope of
work that needs to be followed closely according to the soils and
geotechnical experts’ recommendations.
At this time, staff would like to finalize the Plans and Specs and go out to
bid and possibly come back to the Council in June for award of contract.
This process will provide staff with “real world” costs from the contractors
that will further help staff to provide additional information to Cal OES and
FEMA to justify the City’s design plan and engineer’s estimate. Should
the City decide it has a feasible project to proceed, construction could start
in July and be completed around the November holiday time. Ideally, staff
would like to complete this project soone r but in this instance is being
conservative by programming this project for at least 120 working days.
C/Lyons asked if this was the last piece to make Sycamore Canyon Park
whole again. Everything else has been done including the bridges of the
stream.
PWD/Liu said that this is the slope repair work project. However, at a later
time, the multi-year CIP includes another creek bed improvement project
that will be brought to the Council’s attention at the lower end of the park.
C/Lyons asked for confirmation that this project would pretty much make
the park fully functional.
PWD/Liu responded “absolutely.”
C/Lyons said that the stairs in the park were not very good and not very
6.1.c
Packet Pg. 116
APRIL 17, 2018 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL
wide and wondered if the new stairs would be better.
PWD/Liu when the stairs were built they were originally built for
maintenance purposes only. When the trailhead was built the first top
flight of stairs was incorporated as part of the trail walkway. As part of the
slope repair work, staff is looking to make sure the staircase is completely
rebuilt from top to bottom (three flights), handrails will be installed on both
sides rather than one side only as they are currently.
C/Lyons asked if there was an appeal process to FEMA’s contribution of
only 23 percent.
PWD/Liu responded yes, there will be an appeal process if the City
decides to appeal the decision. PMS/Jordan is working closely with FEMA
and before that would happen staff is waiting for FEMA’s final decision.
C/Lyons suggested as a possibility to allow for more access to make the
project move along more quickly at less cost the City could close the park
at the end of the summer (September) to provide access for equipment
staging on both sides when school is back in session and Concerts in the
Park are finished.
MPT/Herrera thanked staff for providing this information to the Council,
residents and the public. People have been asking her throughout the last
year why the City hasn’t opened the park, what the caution tapes mean
and why has it been closed for so many months – more than a year. It is
difficult dealing with FEMA and she hopes the City will be successful in a
couple of months in looking forward to more funding for what needs to be
done. It is not just a matter of what the City wants, it is a matter of safety.
The stairs need to be safe for residents and this isn’t a “wishful thinking”
idea, the City wants it to be safe and thanks to staff for bringing the
information forward.
C/Tye said this reminds him of the SR57/60 Confluence project which got
delayed until Congressman Royce was able to get Congressman Shuster
to come and look at the freeway from Grand Avenue to see it in a
completely different perspective when one is standing on a bridge above
trucks rumbling by underneath than it is sitting in a comfortable chair in
Washington, D.C. The troubling part of this is that FEMA actually came
out and looked at this and still maintain s that it is okay to do it for far less.
He believes that one of the reasons it is at 23 percent is because if the
City doesn’t tear out the stairs it doesn’t have to replace them. The
reason that the stairs are being torn out is because they are not safe. He
finds it very, very troubling that FEMA would say the stairs should remain
and they say when they visit the stairs must remain with work performed
under the stairs which to him is ludicrous. Clearly, FEMA needs to change
6.1.c
Packet Pg. 117
APRIL 17, 2018 PAGE 7 CITY COUNCIL
their attitude and look at it from a perspective of safety and what is good
for this area. C/Tye said that as long as the City has an opportunity to
redo this, if the stairs were functional, someone would be walking down
those stairs. What if the City were able to make it instead of stairs, a trail
and the trail headed down the same direction in a switchback manner
which would provide more trail area with perhaps crushed granite similar
to what is at the top of Diamond Bar Boulevard. He believes such a trail
would ultimately be much safer than stairs and hoped staff would look at
that possibility and help FEMA understand they should fund what they
should fund and the City will design it. He agreed with M/Herrera about
what is taking so long. It’s not FEMA that gets blamed, it is the City. He
hopes that whatever the process and timeframe is that it is made clear to
FEMA that Diamond Bar needs their help and will cut a check.
M/Low asked if the 23 percent $240,000 is what FEMA believes the
project is worth or are they just limiting it to 23 percent of the project total?
PWD/Liu said that when FEMA looked at this area they compiled their own
estimate in terms of their own idea of what the fix should be which came in
at a much lower cost. The scope of their estimate is completely different
from the City’s estimate and the $240,000 is based on their methodology
and in that case they do not think the staircase is warranted to be
removed and replaced, they do not think a switchback is a good idea
because that is an “improvement” and if the City wants to entertain doing a
switchback between the upper and lower areas the entire drainage system
configuration would have to be reconfigured which would add to the cost.
The City’s proposed improvements are designed to address the most
serious erosion issues and to further preserve the trail life. From FEMA’s
perspective they limited their scope in that they were concerned only with
those two eroded slope areas. When staff and the City’s engineer looked
at their proposal, collectively staff was in shock and have tried to convey
to them that this needs to be done from a safety stand point and the life of
this public facility and public trail system.
M/Low asked if there were any sources of funding other than FEMA that
could assist in completing this project.
PWD/Liu said that at this time staff is not aware of any other funding
sources. Staff can continue to look for other federal or state programs it
can lobby. At this time, because of FEMA’s initial assessment, they
agreed that this is eligible for reimbursement under the assistance they
provide to communities throughout the country. Staff believes this is
something they will eventually agree to and the staff at Cal OES continues
to work with Diamond Bar and hopes that FEMA will come to a decision to
fully and completely address the proposed repair plan.
6.1.c
Packet Pg. 118
APRIL 17, 2018 PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL
M/Low asked if it was possible to phase this project so that some of the
park could be used.
PWD/Liu reiterated that the trail can be accessed from the Golden Springs
side of the trailhead and it stops at the chain link fence where the trail
ends which disallows proceeding to Diamond Bar Boulevard via the stairs.
Once the contractor is awarded the contract, he owns the site and is
responsible for everything and only he can determine whether certain
areas can be blocked during construction.
MPT/Herrera said that there was a great deal of mud in the Sycamore
Canyon Park playground area and wondered if FEMA helped with any
portion of the cleanup costs.
PWD/Liu responded that they did. The City received about $25,000 in
reimbursement funds which was close to the full remediation cost.
MPT/Herrera asked if FEMA was considering that they had already paid
the City for different portions of the park and therefore will not pay any
more than $240,000 to fix the stairs.
PWD/Liu said he did not believe that was the case. When FEMA visited
the site they viewed all of the areas including the pipeline area and
became aware of the slope erosion of the trails would be a separate
standalone project which is the way in which the City proceeded with
FEMA that the reimbursement would be based on this standalone project.
C/Tye said it seems to him that what the City has done is turn an access
into a county overflow (access to the lower area), a useful trail. So now it
cannot be looked at just as a county worker coming and traversing the
stairs to perform his work. It is something that is utilized by the public and
he would like to see data on how heavily used that area was which is
probably why Council Members are hearing so much from residents
because they love hiking that area and it has not been available for so
long. If FEMA looks at it from the fact that it is not simply something that
accesses an area lower as much as it is something that is heavily used by
residents, by hikers and others, he believes that might help FEMA
understand what needs to be done. Again, bracing the stairs from the
side is just ludicrous.
M/Low thanked staff for the very timely report.
6.1.c
Packet Pg. 119
APRIL 17, 2018 PAGE 9 CITY COUNCIL
9. COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS AND MEETING ATTENDANCE
REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS:
C/Lyons congratulated staff for putting on an extraordinary City Birthday Party.
There were many activities for all ages, great new additions including the horses
the Sheriff’s brought, and the historical display. The weather cooperated and
three excellent volunteers were honored. It was a job well-done and thank-you to
staff for all of the planning that went into this huge, huge event! She attended a
meeting of The Take Back Our Community organization. Diamond Bar has been
considered to be a very safe community bu t it can be made safer and better by
residents becoming more actively involved by forming Neighborhood Watch
groups. Vehicles have been broken into because people are leaving laptops and
iPads and purses on the seat which is an open invitation for someone to break
the car window and grab those items. People can also consider joining the
community Volunteer Patrol. In addition, please look into the initiative the group
is attempting to get on the ballot in November called “Keep California Safe” and
should the voters approve this initiative so that it goes into law, it will correct
some of the problems with AB109, Prop 47 & 57 and improve public safety. To
get more information on this initiative, visit www.keepcalsafe.org C/Lyons said
Diamond Bar will miss Lieutenant Phil Marquez. He will be hard to replace. She
is very happy for his promotion but he will be sorely missed. She hopes to see
everyone at the Wine Soiree and Benefit Auction on Sunday.
C/Tye congratulated Lt. Marquez who is the most recent in a long line of
lieutenants who have broken Diamond Bar residents’ hearts is wished the very
best after 27 years of a spectacular career already. C/Tye said that everyone in
this room cannot be at the Wine Soiree because there is an age restriction but he
hopes everybody who can be there will be at the 25 th Annual Wine Soiree. It is a
great time and the three hour event flies by and usually, a good time is had by all.
It is a world-renowned auctioneer that will conduct the Benefit Auction. C/Tye
asked that staff consider placing on the next City Council Agenda the Sanctuary
City state issue that is going throughout the state. While Diamond Bar is not a
Sanctuary City he would like to know the impacts of what it means to take the
action relative to the Sanctuary state move that the legislature took. He wonders
how this could have happened and he believes Diamond Bar should step up and
tell Sacramento this is not okay.
MPT/Herrera plans to attend the Wine Soiree and participate by pouring at one of
the tables. Congratulations and farewell to Lt. Marquez who has done a stellar
job in Diamond Bar and will be missed. She invited everyone to attend The Sixty
Restaurant & Bar ribbon cutting ceremony at 12 noon , the new restaurant on
Golden Springs Drive in what was formerly the old Coco’s building. She looks
forward to the community support of this restaurant. Residents are always
looking for places to eat and it is up to them to patronize these businesses so
they continue to thrive. She hopes to see a lot of people there tomorrow at noon.
6.1.c
Packet Pg. 120
APRIL 17, 2018 PAGE 10 CITY COUNCIL
M/Low said the City Birthday Party was great. Staff made a great effort in putting
that event together for which she was appreciative. It was a really fun event and
she was very glad the City included new things this year such as the displays
and horses. Lt. Marquez, Diamond Bar will really miss you and everyone wishes
you well and hopes you enjoy your new job. Lt. Marquez has served Diamond
Bar very well. Some of the things she has appreciated is that Lt. Marquez and
the Captain have presented information to MPT/Herrera and M/Low during the
Public Safety Subcommittee meetings, one of which occurred last week where
they learned of the efforts the team has put together to make Diamond Bar safe
and the numbers and efforts are impressive. M/Low reported for the month of
February the total class of crimes was reduced from 87 incidents in 2017 to 53 in
2018. What is astonishing is that the total count of residential burgl aries during
February 2018 was only five which is due to excellent efforts on the part of
enforcement and the collaboration and awareness on the part of residents who
are alert and aware of something out-of-place and calling it in. Public safety is a
joint effort and to that end, Diamond Bar has more than 80 Neighborhood Watch
Groups. Those who are not a member of this group, please join. The Ring
program was announced last week and there are a few of the promotions left so
that for those who have not ye t participated the Ring device is still being offered
which will harden your home against burglaries. Call the City for coupons for a
discount in obtaining The Ring device. In addition to The Sixty Restaurant & Bar
Grand Opening, McDonald’s has reopened and will have their Grand Reopening
next Thursday. She invited everyone to attend the Wine Soiree this Sunday for a
really good time. The GPAC meets on Thursday evening. Thanks to everyone
for joining tonight’s meeting.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Low adjourned the
Regular City Council Meeting at 7:45 p.m.
_____________________________________
TOMMYE CRIBBINS, CITY CLERK
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this day of , 2018.
RUTH M. LOW , MAYOR
6.1.c
Packet Pg. 121
Agenda #: 6.2
Meeting Date: May 1, 2018
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Daniel Fox, City Manager
TITLE: RECEIVE AND FILE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
PREPARED BY:
Attachments:
1. 6.2.a Regular Meeting of February 13, 2018.
6.2
Packet Pg. 122
MINUTES OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 13, 2018
CALL TO ORDER:
Chairman Wolfe called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the City Hall Windmill Room,
21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Vice-Chair/Mok led the Pledge of Allegiance.
1. ROLL CALL:
Present: Commissioners Naila Barlas, Frank Farago, Jennifer
“Fred” Mahlke, Vice-Chairman Kevin Mok, and
Chairman Raymond Wolfe
Also present: Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; James
Eggart, Assistant City Attorney; Mayuko (May) Nakajima, Associate Planner; and
Stella Marquez, Administrative Coordinator.
2. MATTERS FROM THE AUDIENCE/PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Presented
4. CONSENT CALENDAR:
4.1 Minutes of the Regular Meeting: January 23, 2018:
VC/Mok moved, C/Barlas seconded, to approve the Minutes of the Regular
Meeting of January 23, 2018, as presented. Motion carried by the following
Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Barlas, Farago, Mahlke, VC/Mok,
Chair/Wolfe
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
5. OLD BUSINESS: None
6. NEW BUSINESS: None
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 123
______________________________________________________________________
FEBRUARY 13, 2018 PAGE 2 PLANNING COMMISSION
______________________________________________________________________
7. PUBLIC HEARING(S):
7.1 Development Review No. PL2017-187 – Under the authority of Diamond
Bar Municipal Code Sections 22.48 and 22.38, the applicant and property
owner requested Development Review approval to construct a 4,985
square foot single family residence with 480 square feet of garage area and
540 square feet of patio/balcony area, on a 1.09 gross acre (47,480 gross
square foot) lot. The subject property is zoned Rural Residential (RR) with
an underlying General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 2031 Rusty Spur Road
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
PROPERTY OWNER: Yin-Chu Chang
2031 Rusty Spur Road
Diamond Bar, CA 91789
APPLICANT: Raymond Pan
1142 S. Diamond Bar Boulevard #460
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
AP/Nakajima presented staff’s report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of Development Review No. 2017-187, based on the
Findings of Fact and subject to the conditions of approval as listed within
the resolution.
Chair/Wolfe opened the public hearing.
Raymond Pan, Project Architect, said he was pleased to see this project
through, which he felt would be a great addition to the community.
Chair/Wolfe closed the public hearing.
VC/Mok said that when he looked at the plans it appeared to him it would
look like an office building. When he visited the site he found it would fit in
with most of the contemporary looking elements on the back side, whereas,
the front matched with the homes in the nearby neighborhood, which
caused him to go back and review the renderings and attachments with a
different perspective. As such, he felt the Architect had done a good job on
his design and offered Kudos to Mr. Pan.
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 124
______________________________________________________________________
FEBRUARY 13, 2018 PAGE 3 PLANNING COMMISSION
______________________________________________________________________
C/Farago moved, C/Mahlke seconded, to approve Development Review
No. PL2017-187, Findings of Fact and conditions of approval as listed within
the resolution. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Barlas, Farago, Mahlke, VC/Mok,
Chair/Wolfe
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
Chair/Wolfe complimented AP/Nakajima on her report.
7.2 Development Review No. PL2017-133 – Under the authority of Diamond
Bar Municipal Code Section 22.48, the applicant and property owner
requested Development Review approval to construct a 7,093 square foot
single family residence with 2,218 square feet of garage area and 1,452
square feet of deck/patio/balcony area, on a 0.92 gross acre (40,269 gross
square foot) undeveloped lot. The subject property is zoned Rural
Residential (RR) with an underlying General Plan land use designation of
Rural Residential. No protected trees are being remo ved as part of this
project.
SUBJECT PROPERTY: 2740 Steeplechase Lane
Diamond Bar, CA 91765
PROPERTY OWNER: Jeff Tsui and Wendy Hsu
22121 Saleroso Drive
Rowland Heights, CA 91748
APPLICANT: Pete Volbeda
180 N. Benson Avenue, Suite D
Upland, CA 91786
AP/Nakajima presented staff’s report and recommended Planning
Commission approval of Development Review No. PL2017 -133, based on
the Findings of Fact, and subject to the conditions of approval listed within
the resolution.
Chair/Wolfe said that when these reports come to the Commission from The
Country, The Country Estates Architectural Committee has already
approved the proposed project and in this case they have not yet done so.
AP/Nakajima explained that in this case, the applicant is working to get
approval from The Country. Chair/Wolfe asked if in the event the committee
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 125
______________________________________________________________________
FEBRUARY 13, 2018 PAGE 4 PLANNING COMMISSION
______________________________________________________________________
made a substantial change, if this project would come back before the
Planning Commission and AP/Nakajima responded “yes.”
VC/Mok said he remembered that the neighboring project previously came
before the Commission about a year ago and the Commission approved
that project. He also remembered that at that time, he, VC/Mok, asked the
owner if since the road was in disrepair, would he be repairing it so that the
asphalt was smooth and brought back to a good condition and the
applicant’s response was yes, so he is glad that issue was brought up again
and if someone is concerned about the road, staff should be able to contact
the original owner to get him to respond if it was not done. AP/Nakajima
said that VC/Mok was correct and that staff did reach out to the owner who
had no specific timeline as to when they would repair the street but again
agreed he would do the repair.
Chair/Wolfe believed that since the roadway in question is a private
roadway, it is not under the Planning Commission’s jurisdiction. He
believed the question was asked, but that it was not a condition of the
project approval at the time. AP/Nakajima said that Chair/Wolfe’s
recollection of the situation was correct.
Chair/Wolfe opened the public hearing.
Pete Volbeda, Project Architect, said this project was a little different for him
because it is a different style on an uphill lot. The client hopes to have the
Commission approve this project.
Curt Chen, said he is the owner of the 2690 Steeplechase house. He
shared his concern that the middle house (between his property and the
project site) was constructed six years ago and it was half done when the
new applicant came forward last year. When Mr. Chen got the notice of
that project, it was too late for him to comment. Six years ago when the
middle house was started it took a year and a half or so just to lay the
foundation and that experience was, for him, horrific. The roadway was in
good order prior to that time. Yes, it is a private road, but the owner was
very non-responsive. When the road was torn up it was during the rainy
season and it created a hazardous drive and he had difficulty stopping his
vehicle when he drove down the slope which for him was extremely
concerning when his kids were in the car. When driving up the slope, all
the slurry would just go by. He tried for a very long time to get in touch with
the property owner by calling, writing and leaving voice mails. However, the
property owner was non-responsive and it seems that his thought is that he
will fix it when his house is complete. That is a three year job and in the
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 126
______________________________________________________________________
FEBRUARY 13, 2018 PAGE 5 PLANNING COMMISSION
______________________________________________________________________
meantime, that is what Mr. Chen has to live with. Mr. Chen said he has had
to go to The Country and find attorneys to get the young man to own up to
his mistake and fix the road. As a result, the property owner spent $80,000
fixing Mr. Chen’s side of the road, but he left the other side as-is. And the
owner of the last house on the street had to spend his own money to fix that
part of the roadway. Mr. Chen has been told it is a private matter and no
one will help him but he is nevertheless seeking help to alleviate his
nightmare
Chair/Wolfe closed the public hearing.
Chair/Wolfe said the Commission appreciates the speakers concerns and
cannot directly attribute the experience he will have if the Commission
approves this project this evening to what he experienced with the middle
property. Unfortunately, as Chair/Wolfe mentioned a few moments ago, it
is not a matter this Commission can control. The roadway is a private drive
which means that it is a civil matter.
C/Mahlke moved, C/Farago seconded, to approve Development Review
No. PL2017-133, based on the Findings of Fact, and subject to the
conditions of approval as listed within the resolution. Motion carried by the
following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Barlas, Farago, Mahlke, VC/Mok,
Chair/Wolfe
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: None
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: None
Chair/Wolfe said he understood Mr. Chen’s concerns, especially with
regard to the grading plan and the number of trucks that will be required to
construct this project. He hoped that the applicant’s representative would
relay those concerns to the property owners and that they can be congenial
neighbors as they go through the process of constructing the project.
VC/Mok echoed Chair/Wolfe’s statements. He drove to the site today and
the condition of the road was exactly the same as it was last year. It is torn
up, it is in disrepair and when one drives up the street the vehicle is swaying
side to side and up and down. The roadway is drivable but it is very
uncomfortable. He hoped the owner of the house between Mr. Chen’s
house and the project site would live up to his promise when he works on
his house.
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 127
______________________________________________________________________
FEBRUARY 13, 2018 PAGE 6 PLANNING COMMISSION
______________________________________________________________________
8. PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
VC/Mok said it was nice to see the Sprouts Center flourishing and active along
with Chipotle and Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf. And, everyone is anxiously awaiting
the completion of the McDonald’s rehab.
9. STAFF COMMENTS/INFORMATIONAL ITEMS:
9.1 Project Status Report.
CDD/Gubman said that everyone should expect to see McDonald’s open
within 45 days. The Habit project is still in plan check. They resubmitted
plans today and hopefully, building permits will be issued in the near future
with business opening early mid-summer.
CDD/Gubman said that the next scheduled Commission meeting is
February 27th. There are no agenda items for that date at this time and
that meeting will be canceled. It is also possible that there will not be a
meeting on March 13th since there are no items currently queued up for that
agenda. The first meeting in March is typically the reorganization date for
the Planning Commission during which a new Chair and Vice -Chair are
chosen, and if that meeting is canceled, reorganization will be rescheduled
for the second March meeting on March 27th.
C/Mahlke said that she has been asked if The Habit has pulled out of the
deal and she has been told by several people there will not be a Habit. She
will spread the word that the rumor is not true.
10. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
As posted in the Agenda.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business before the Planning Commission,
Chair/Wolfe adjourned the regular meeting at 7:28 p.m.
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 128
______________________________________________________________________
FEBRUARY 13, 2018 PAGE 7 PLANNING COMMISSION
______________________________________________________________________
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this April 24, 2018.
Attest:
Respectfully Submitted,
__________________________________
Greg Gubman
Community Development Director
__________________________________
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 129
Agenda #: 6.3
Meeting Date: May 1, 2018
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Daniel Fox, City Manager
TITLE: TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES.
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
PREPARED BY:
Attachments:
1. 6.3.a Regular Meeting of March 8, 2018.
6.3
Packet Pg. 130
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 131
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 132
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 133
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 134
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 135
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 136
Agenda #: 6.4
Meeting Date: May 1, 2018
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Daniel Fox, City Manager
TITLE: RATIFICATION OF CHECK REGISTER DATED APRIL 12, 2018
THROUGH APRIL 25, 2018 TOTALING $ 1,195,454.20.
RECOMMENDATION:
Ratify.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Expenditure of $1,195,454.20.
BACKGROUND:
The City has established the policy of issuing accounts payable checks on a weekly
basis with City Council ratification at the next scheduled City Council Meeting.
DISCUSSION:
The attached check register containing checks dated April 12, 2018 through April 25,
2018 for $1,119,454.20 is being presented for ratification. All payments have been
made in compliance with the City’s purchasing policies and procedures. Payments
have been reviewed and approved by the appropriate departmental staff and the
attached Affidavit affirms that the check register has been audited and deemed accurate
by the Finance Director.
PREPARED BY:
6.4
Packet Pg. 137
REVIEWED BY:
Attachments:
1. 6.4.a Check Register Affidavit 5-1-2018
2. 6.4.b Check Register 5-1-2018
6.4
Packet Pg. 138
6.4.a
Packet Pg. 139
SUNGARD PENTAMATION INC PAGE NUMBER: 1DATE: 04/25/2018 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACCTPA21TIME: 10:23:29 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUNDSELECTION CRITERIA: transact.ck_date between ’20180412 00:00:00.000’ and ’20180425 00:00:00.000’ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/18 FUND - 001 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME FUND/DIVISION -----DESCRIPTION------ SALES TAX AMOUNT10100 124498 04/18/18 A1PARTYR A1 PARTY RENTALS 0015350 EQ RENTAL-W/SNOW FEST 0.00 282.1510100 124498 04/18/18 A1PARTYR A1 PARTY RENTALS 0015350 EQ RENTAL-W/SNOW FEST 0.00 4,824.00TOTAL CHECK 0.00 5,106.1510100 124499 04/18/18 ABCPUBLI ABC PUBLIC RELATIONS 1155515 AD-EARTH DAY/S/GARDEN 0.00 700.0010100 124500 04/18/18 DANNETTE DANNETTE ALLEN 0014060 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT 0.00 1,500.0010100 124501 04/18/18 AMERICOM AMERICOMP GROUP 0014070 TONERS-C/HALL PRINTER 0.00 218.8910100 124501 04/18/18 AMERICOM AMERICOMP GROUP 0014070 PRINTER MAINT-C/HALL 0.00 2,402.0010100 124501 04/18/18 AMERICOM AMERICOMP GROUP 0014070 TONERS-C/HALL PRINTER 0.00 1,446.44TOTAL CHECK 0.00 4,067.3310100 124502 04/18/18 AT&T AT&T 001 REFUND-DEV DEP 0.00 1,176.2010100 124503 04/18/18 CGC COUNTRY GARDEN CATERERS 0014095 CATERING/EQ STATE CTY 0.00 4,849.6610100 124504 04/18/18 DAVIDEVA DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIAT 001 PROF.SVCS-PL 11-515 0.00 937.5010100 124504 04/18/18 DAVIDEVA DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIAT 001 PROF.SVCS-PL 15-528 0.00 2,197.0410100 124504 04/18/18 DAVIDEVA DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIAT 001 PROF.SVCS-PL 17-203 0.00 23.7610100 124504 04/18/18 DAVIDEVA DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIAT 001 PROF.SVCS-PL 16-105 0.00 60.0010100 124504 04/18/18 DAVIDEVA DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIAT 001 PROF.SVCS-PL 15-201 0.00 143.0010100 124504 04/18/18 DAVIDEVA DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIAT 001 PROF.SVCS-PL 15-145 0.00 240.0010100 124504 04/18/18 DAVIDEVA DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIAT 001 PROF.SVCS-PL 15-321 0.00 440.0010100 124504 04/18/18 DAVIDEVA DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIAT 001 PROF.SVCS-PL 15-317 0.00 445.0010100 124504 04/18/18 DAVIDEVA DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIAT 001 PROF.SVCS-PL 17-41 0.00 552.50TOTAL CHECK 0.00 5,038.8010100 124505 04/18/18 DAYNITEC DAY & NITE COPY CENTER 0015510 PRINT SVCS-SIGNS 0.00 1,250.3810100 124506 04/18/18 DEPTOFJU DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 0014060 PROF.SVCS-HR 0.00 352.0010100 124507 04/18/18 DUKESERV DUKE SERVICE COMPANY 0015333 SUPPLIES-HERITAGE 0.00 710.9710100 124508 04/18/18 FEDEX FEDEX 0014030 EXPRESS MAIL-GENERAL 0.00 371.5110100 124508 04/18/18 FEDEX FEDEX 001 EXPRESS MAIL-PL17-169 0.00 69.3710100 124508 04/18/18 FEDEX FEDEX 001 EXPRESS MAIL-PL14-609 0.00 28.6410100 124508 04/18/18 FEDEX FEDEX 001 EXPRESS MAIL-PL16-216 0.00 30.0210100 124508 04/18/18 FEDEX FEDEX 001 EXPRESS MAIL-PL 17-13 0.00 30.02TOTAL CHECK 0.00 529.5610100 124509 04/18/18 GOVCONNE GOVCONNECTION INC 0014070 ESET-YEAR RENEWAL 0.00 1,035.6010100 124510 04/18/18 HINDERLI HINDERLITER DE LLAMAS & 0014096 ECON DEV-JAN/FEB 2018 0.00 4,200.0010100 124511 04/18/18 HINDOYAN GARABET HINDOYAN 0015350 DINNER-SR DANCE 0.00 1,308.5310100 124512 04/18/18 HRCCINC HUMAN RESOURCE CAPITAL C 0014060 TRNG SVCS-H/R 0.00 2,400.0010100 124513 04/18/18 IVDB INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULL 0014030 LEGAL ADS-NOTICES 0.00 257.5610100 124513 04/18/18 IVDB INLAND VALLEY DAILY BULL 001 LEGAL ADS-PL 17-206 0.00 467.00TOTAL CHECK 0.00 724.566.4.bPacket Pg. 140
SUNGARD PENTAMATION INC PAGE NUMBER: 2DATE: 04/25/2018 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACCTPA21TIME: 10:23:29 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUNDSELECTION CRITERIA: transact.ck_date between ’20180412 00:00:00.000’ and ’20180425 00:00:00.000’ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/18 FUND - 001 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME FUND/DIVISION -----DESCRIPTION------ SALES TAX AMOUNT10100 124514 04/18/18 JAIMEJOS JOSE ARTURO JAIME 0014095 SIGNAGE-CITY B/DAY 0.00 535.0010100 124515 04/18/18 JINMAOHU MAOHUA JIN 001 DEP REFUND-PR 11-377 0.00 1,469.7110100 124516 04/18/18 JONESKEV KEVIN D JONES 0015551 CONSULTANT SVCS-57/60 0.00 3,600.0010100 124517 04/18/18 FASTSIGN K7 ENTERPRISES 0014095 BANNERS & SIGNS-HRTGE 0.00 296.5910100 124517 04/18/18 FASTSIGN K7 ENTERPRISES 0014411 BUSINESS WATCH BANNER 0.00 165.56TOTAL CHECK 0.00 462.1510100 124518 04/18/18 KUMBAREN KUMBA RENTALS 0014095 EQ RENTAL-ST OF CITY 0.00 250.0010100 124519 04/18/18 LESTERLI LESTER LITHOGRAPH INC 0014095 PRINT/MAIL-DBCONN 0.00 3,792.0010100 124520 04/18/18 LIANGANT ANTON LIANG 001 DEP REFUND-PR 17-9982 0.00 4,012.3910100 124521 04/18/18 LOOMIS LOOMIS 0015333 COURIER SVCS-DBC 0.00 613.9610100 124521 04/18/18 LOOMIS LOOMIS 0014050 COURIER SVCS-FINANCE 0.00 613.96TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,227.9210100 124522 04/18/18 LACPUBWK LOS ANGELES COUNTY PUBLI 2505510 PATHFINDER ROAD REHABI 0.00 300,000.0010100 124523 04/18/18 LASHERIF LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERI 0014411 SPCL SVCS-ST SWEEPER 0.00 713.5610100 124523 04/18/18 LASHERIF LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERI 0014411 SPCL SVCS-BURG SUPP 0.00 20,155.08TOTAL CHECK 0.00 20,868.6410100 124524 04/18/18 POSTNET LW POSTNET INC 1155515 PRINT SVCS-RECYC C/BD 0.00 43.5010100 124525 04/18/18 MAGNUSIN MAGNUS INTERNATIONAL 0155210 TRANSLATION-GEN PLAN 0.00 236.0010100 124526 04/18/18 MERCURYD MERCURY DISPOSAL SYSTEMS 1155515 RECYCLING PICK UP-ACE 0.00 678.7010100 124527 04/18/18 METROLIN METROLINK 1125553 CITY SUBSIDY-MAR 0.00 12,215.0010100 124527 04/18/18 METROLIN METROLINK 1125553 METROLINK PASSES-SR 0.00 2,866.5010100 124527 04/18/18 METROLIN METROLINK 1125553 CITY SUBSIDY-SR 0.00 2,866.5010100 124527 04/18/18 METROLIN METROLINK 1125553 METROLINK PASSES-MAR 0.00 48,860.00TOTAL CHECK 0.00 66,808.0010100 124528 04/18/18 MMASC MMASC 0014030 MMASC TRNG-A LOPEZ 0.00 105.0010100 124529 04/18/18 NEOPOST NEOPOST USA, INC 0014093 MAILING SYS BASE 0.00 728.0410100 124530 04/18/18 PAPERREC PAPER RECYCLING & SHREDD 1155515 PAPER RECYCLING-C/HLL 0.00 55.0010100 124531 04/18/18 PARENASR NASREEN PAREKH 001 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 12.7510100 124532 04/18/18 PENCOENG PENCO ENGINEERING INC 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 15-2288 0.00 -68.6210100 124532 04/18/18 PENCOENG PENCO ENGINEERING INC 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 15-2288 0.00 -57.6010100 124532 04/18/18 PENCOENG PENCO ENGINEERING INC 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 15-2288 0.00 57.6010100 124532 04/18/18 PENCOENG PENCO ENGINEERING INC 001 PROF.SVCS-PR 15-2288 0.00 381.2410100 124532 04/18/18 PENCOENG PENCO ENGINEERING INC 001 PROF.SVCS-PR 15-2288 0.00 320.006.4.bPacket Pg. 141
SUNGARD PENTAMATION INC PAGE NUMBER: 3DATE: 04/25/2018 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACCTPA21TIME: 10:23:29 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUNDSELECTION CRITERIA: transact.ck_date between ’20180412 00:00:00.000’ and ’20180425 00:00:00.000’ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/18 FUND - 001 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME FUND/DIVISION -----DESCRIPTION------ SALES TAX AMOUNT10100 124532 04/18/18 PENCOENG PENCO ENGINEERING INC 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 15-2288 0.00 68.62TOTAL CHECK 0.00 701.2410100 124533 04/18/18 PUBLICFI PUBLIC FINANCE STRATEGIE 0014030 CONSULTING SVCS-ELECT 0.00 21,234.1910100 124534 04/18/18 RTSC REGIONAL TAP SERVICE CEN 1125553 COMMISSION-MAR 2018 0.00 -603.9610100 124534 04/18/18 RTSC REGIONAL TAP SERVICE CEN 1125553 FOOTHILL PASSES-SR 0.00 200.0010100 124534 04/18/18 RTSC REGIONAL TAP SERVICE CEN 1125553 CITY SUBSIDY-SR 0.00 200.0010100 124534 04/18/18 RTSC REGIONAL TAP SERVICE CEN 1125553 CITY SUBSIDY-MAR 0.00 3,946.4010100 124534 04/18/18 RTSC REGIONAL TAP SERVICE CEN 1125553 FOOTHILL PASSES-MAR 0.00 15,785.60TOTAL CHECK 0.00 19,528.0410100 124535 04/18/18 RODRLUIS LUIS RODRIGUEZ 001 FACILITY REFUND-DBC 0.00 500.0010100 124536 04/18/18 ROSSCREA ROSS CREATIONS 0015350 SOUND SYS-EASTER 0.00 300.0010100 124537 04/18/18 SGVEP SAN GABRIEL VALLEY ECONO 0014096 ANNL RENEWAL-FY 18/19 0.00 5,250.0010100 124538 04/18/18 SIMPSONA SIMPSON ADVERTISING INC 0014095 GRAPHIC DESIGN SVCS 0.00 490.0010100 124538 04/18/18 SIMPSONA SIMPSON ADVERTISING INC 0014095 GRAPHIC DESIGN SVCS 0.00 1,393.55TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,883.5510100 124539 04/18/18 SOCALSAN SO CAL INDUSTRIES 0015350 RENTAL-EASTER EGG HNT 0.00 929.7910100 124540 04/18/18 ADELPHIA SPECTRUM BUSINESS 0014070 INTERNET SVCS-C/HALL 0.00 1,040.0010100 124541 04/18/18 SPORTPIN SPORT PINS INTERNATIONAL 0015350 CITY B/DAY PINS 0.00 1,479.4410100 124542 04/18/18 TASC TASC 0014060 FLEX ADMIN SVCS-HR 0.00 100.0010100 124543 04/18/18 THESAUCE THE SAUCE CREATIVE SERVI 0014095 DESIGN SVCS-P/CONTEST 0.00 215.6710100 124543 04/18/18 THESAUCE THE SAUCE CREATIVE SERVI 0015350 LOGO DESIGN-B/PARTY 0.00 450.0010100 124543 04/18/18 THESAUCE THE SAUCE CREATIVE SERVI 0015350 PRINT SVCS-FLYERS 0.00 654.6710100 124543 04/18/18 THESAUCE THE SAUCE CREATIVE SERVI 0015350 SUPPLIES-CNCL/COMM 0.00 803.0010100 124543 04/18/18 THESAUCE THE SAUCE CREATIVE SERVI 0015350 PRINT SVCS-DB 4YOUTH 0.00 1,295.0010100 124543 04/18/18 THESAUCE THE SAUCE CREATIVE SERVI 0015350 PRINT SVCS-B/DAY PRTY 0.00 1,414.50TOTAL CHECK 0.00 4,832.8410100 124544 04/18/18 TAITDAVI THE TAIT GROUP INC 0015551 CONSULTANT SVCS-57/60 0.00 1,000.0010100 124545 04/18/18 THOMSONW THOMSON WEST 0014030 PUBLICATIONS-C/CLERK 0.00 855.6010100 124546 04/18/18 TELEPACI TPX COMMUNICATIONS 0014070 T1 INTERNET SVCS-APR 0.00 885.6510100 124547 04/18/18 TSENGKUO KUO AN TSENG 001 REFUND DEP-PR 13-880 0.00 16,868.6310100 124548 04/18/18 WVEF WALNUT VALLEY EDUCATIONA 0114010 COMM ORG SUPPORT FUND 0.00 550.0010100 124549 04/18/18 WVUSD WALNUT VALLEY UNIFIED SC 0015350 GYM RENTAL-REC 0.00 1,134.0010100 124549 04/18/18 WVUSD WALNUT VALLEY UNIFIED SC 0015350 GYM RENTAL-REC 0.00 2,679.6010100 124549 04/18/18 WVUSD WALNUT VALLEY UNIFIED SC 0015350 GYM RENTAL-REC 0.00 4,649.4010100 124549 04/18/18 WVUSD WALNUT VALLEY UNIFIED SC 0015350 GYM RENTAL-REC 0.00 5,561.856.4.bPacket Pg. 142
SUNGARD PENTAMATION INC PAGE NUMBER: 4DATE: 04/25/2018 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACCTPA21TIME: 10:23:29 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUNDSELECTION CRITERIA: transact.ck_date between ’20180412 00:00:00.000’ and ’20180425 00:00:00.000’ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/18 FUND - 001 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME FUND/DIVISION -----DESCRIPTION------ SALES TAX AMOUNTTOTAL CHECK 0.00 14,024.8510100 124550 04/25/18 AARROWHE AARROWHEAD SECURITY INC 0015333 SECURITY GUARDS SVCS 0.00 2,005.2310100 124551 04/25/18 AJILONST AJILON STAFFING SERVICES 0015510 TEMP SVCS-P/WORKS 0.00 1,000.0010100 124551 04/25/18 AJILONST AJILON STAFFING SERVICES 0015510 TEMP SVCS-P/WORKS 0.00 1,000.00TOTAL CHECK 0.00 2,000.0010100 124552 04/25/18 ALVASYLV SYLVIA ALVARADO 001 FACILITY REFUND-DBC 0.00 1,000.0010100 124553 04/25/18 AGSINC AMERICAN GUARD SERVICES 0014411 CROSSING GUARD SVCS 0.00 18,142.7410100 124554 04/25/18 ANIHFAVO FAVOUR ANIH 001 FACILITY REFUND-S/CYN 0.00 50.0010100 124555 04/25/18 BOWNET BOWNET 0015350 EQ-SOCCER GOALS 0.00 323.8810100 124556 04/25/18 BREAROOF BREA ROOFING 001 REFUND-RECYCLING DEP 0.00 250.0010100 124557 04/25/18 BSNSPORT BSN SPORTS CORP 0015556 SUPPLIES-PARKS 0.00 1,356.0610100 124558 04/25/18 C21CARER C21 CARE REAL ESTATE 001 FACILITY REFUND-DBC 0.00 100.0010100 124559 04/25/18 CHENICHI ICHIEN CHEN 001 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 510.0010100 124560 04/25/18 CHICAGOT CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY 0015551 TITLE REPORTS 0.00 45.0010100 124560 04/25/18 CHICAGOT CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY 0015551 TITLE REPORTS 0.00 45.0010100 124560 04/25/18 CHICAGOT CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY 0015551 TITLE REPORTS 0.00 45.00TOTAL CHECK 0.00 135.0010100 124561 04/25/18 CHOAHOLL HOLLY CHOA 001 FACILITY REFUND-S/CYN 0.00 50.0010100 124562 04/25/18 CUNANANA ALELI CUNANAN 001 FACILITY REFUND-PNTRA 0.00 100.0010100 124563 04/25/18 LIUDAVID DAVID LIU 0015510 REIMB-SR 57/60 0.00 160.0010100 124564 04/25/18 DENNISCA CAROL A DENNIS 0015510 PROF.SVCS-T&T COMM 0.00 125.0010100 124565 04/25/18 DBCFOUND DIAMOND BAR COMMUNITY FO 0114010 COMM ORG SUPPORT FUND 0.00 200.0010100 124566 04/25/18 DIMENSIO DIMENSION DATA NORTH AME 5304070 SECURITY CAMERA SYSTEM 0.00 36,304.3910100 124566 04/25/18 DIMENSIO DIMENSION DATA NORTH AME 5304070 SECURITY CAMERA SYSTEM 0.00 1,616.8810100 124566 04/25/18 DIMENSIO DIMENSION DATA NORTH AME 5304070 SECURITY CAMERA SYSTEM 0.00 1,920.0110100 124566 04/25/18 DIMENSIO DIMENSION DATA NORTH AME 5304070 SECURITY CAMERA SYSTEM 0.00 17,138.00TOTAL CHECK 0.00 56,979.2810100 124567 04/25/18 DONGLYLE KYLE DONG 001 FACILITY REFUND-DBC 0.00 200.0010100 124567 04/25/18 DONGLYLE KYLE DONG 001 FACILITY REFUND-DBC 0.00 850.00TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,050.0010100 124568 04/25/18 DUNNEDWA DUNN EDWARDS CORPORATION 0015556 SUPPLIES-PARKS 0.00 56.9910100 124569 04/25/18 DYETTBHA DYETT & BHATIA, URBAN & 0155210 GEN PLAN UPDATE-MAR 0.00 39,185.896.4.bPacket Pg. 143
SUNGARD PENTAMATION INC PAGE NUMBER: 5DATE: 04/25/2018 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACCTPA21TIME: 10:23:29 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUNDSELECTION CRITERIA: transact.ck_date between ’20180412 00:00:00.000’ and ’20180425 00:00:00.000’ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/18 FUND - 001 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME FUND/DIVISION -----DESCRIPTION------ SALES TAX AMOUNT10100 124570 04/25/18 ECSIMAGI ECS IMAGING INC 0014030 LASERFICHE DESIGN SVC 0.00 4,354.7810100 124571 04/25/18 EMERALD EMERALD LANDSCAPE SERVIC 0014093 ADDL LANDSCAPE SVCS 0.00 67.3910100 124572 04/25/18 EXPRESSM EXPRESS MAIL CORPORATE A 001 E/MAIL-PL 2017-206 0.00 43.9610100 124573 04/25/18 FEDEX FEDEX 0155210 EXPRESS MAIL-GPAC 0.00 50.3110100 124574 04/25/18 FIRECRAC FIRECRACKERS 001 FACILITY REFUND-PTRSN 0.00 100.0010100 124575 04/25/18 GARGMAHE MAHENDRA GARG 0015510 T & T COMM-APR 2018 0.00 45.0010100 124576 04/25/18 GATEWAYC GATEWAY CORPORATE CENTER 0014093 CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION 0.00 1,551.1810100 124576 04/25/18 GATEWAYC GATEWAY CORPORATE CENTER 0014093 ASSOCIATION DUES 0.00 173.42TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,724.6010100 124577 04/25/18 GOMEZYES YESENIA GOMEZ 001 FACILITY REFUND-S/CYN 0.00 100.0010100 124578 04/25/18 GONZMICH MICHAEL A GONZALEZ 0015510 T & T COMM-APR 2018 0.00 45.0010100 124579 04/25/18 GRAFFITI GRAFFITI CONTROL SYSTEMS 0015230 GRAFFITI REMOVAL SVCS 0.00 2,912.0010100 124580 04/25/18 GRANANGE ANGELA GRANDBOIS 001 FACILITY REFUND-PNTRA 0.00 100.0010100 124581 04/25/18 HARDYHAR HARDY & HARPER INC 0015554 AC PAVEMENT REPAIRS 0.00 16,420.0010100 124582 04/25/18 HERNANDR ANDREA HERNANDEZ 001 FACILITY REFUND-REAGA 0.00 100.0010100 124583 04/25/18 HIWAYSAF HI WAY SAFETY INC 5205554 VEH MAINT-RD MAINT 0.00 826.9410100 124584 04/25/18 HOFFMANS HOFFMAN SOUTHWEST CORP 0015556 MAINT SVCS-S/CYN PK 0.00 500.0010100 124585 04/25/18 IMEGCORP IMEG CORP 2505310 CONSULTANT SVCS-MAR 0.00 9,655.5210100 124586 04/25/18 JCLTRAFF JCL TRAFFIC SERVICES 0015554 SUPPLIES-RD MAINT 0.00 996.3710100 124587 04/25/18 JONESASH ASHLEY JONES 001 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 50.0010100 124588 04/25/18 KEETONHO HOLLIE KEETON 001 FACILITY REFUND-DBC 0.00 900.0010100 124589 04/25/18 KERTLAND KERTLAND ROOFING INC 001 REFUND-RECYCLING DEP 0.00 250.0010100 124590 04/25/18 KESSELLM MARYSOL KESSELL 001 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 160.0010100 124591 04/25/18 KIMALICE ALICE KIM 001 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 105.0010100 124592 04/25/18 LANDSEND LANDS’ END INC 0015230 JACKET-CITY STAFF 0.00 98.5310100 124593 04/25/18 LACMTA LOS ANGELES COUNTY MTA 1125553 MTA PASSES-SR 0.00 63.0010100 124593 04/25/18 LACMTA LOS ANGELES COUNTY MTA 1125553 CITY SUBSIDY-SR 0.00 63.0010100 124593 04/25/18 LACMTA LOS ANGELES COUNTY MTA 1125553 CITY SUBSIDY-MAR 2018 0.00 220.006.4.bPacket Pg. 144
SUNGARD PENTAMATION INC PAGE NUMBER: 6DATE: 04/25/2018 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACCTPA21TIME: 10:23:29 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUNDSELECTION CRITERIA: transact.ck_date between ’20180412 00:00:00.000’ and ’20180425 00:00:00.000’ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/18 FUND - 001 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME FUND/DIVISION -----DESCRIPTION------ SALES TAX AMOUNT10100 124593 04/25/18 LACMTA LOS ANGELES COUNTY MTA 1125553 MTA PASSES-MAR 2018 0.00 880.00TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,226.0010100 124594 04/25/18 LACPUBWK LOS ANGELES COUNTY PUBLI 0015510 INDUSTRIAL WASTE SVCS 0.00 1,245.3310100 124594 04/25/18 LACPUBWK LOS ANGELES COUNTY PUBLI 0015510 INDUSTRIAL WASTE SVCS 0.00 1,491.1510100 124594 04/25/18 LACPUBWK LOS ANGELES COUNTY PUBLI 0015510 INDUSTRIAL WASTE SVCS 0.00 1,718.2510100 124594 04/25/18 LACPUBWK LOS ANGELES COUNTY PUBLI 0015510 INDUSTRIAL WASTE SVCS 0.00 2,089.94TOTAL CHECK 0.00 6,544.6710100 124595 04/25/18 LACPUBWK LOS ANGELES COUNTY PUBLI 0015556 SUMP PUMP MAINT-MAR 0.00 234.4210100 124596 04/25/18 MAKAI KAI MA 001 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 84.0010100 124597 04/25/18 MCECORPO MCE CORPORATION 1385538 LANDSCAPE MAINT-MAR 0.00 5,002.0010100 124597 04/25/18 MCECORPO MCE CORPORATION 1415541 LANDSCAPE MAINT-MAR 0.00 5,673.0010100 124597 04/25/18 MCECORPO MCE CORPORATION 1395539 LANDSCAPE MAINT-MAR 0.00 17,373.00TOTAL CHECK 0.00 28,048.0010100 124598 04/25/18 METROLIN METROLINK 1125553 CITY SUBSIDY-MAR 0.00 11,492.6010100 124598 04/25/18 METROLIN METROLINK 1125553 METROLINK PASSES-MAR 0.00 45,970.4010100 124598 04/25/18 METROLIN METROLINK 1125553 METROLINK PASSES-SR 0.00 2,688.0010100 124598 04/25/18 METROLIN METROLINK 1125553 CITY SUBSIDY-SR 0.00 2,688.00TOTAL CHECK 0.00 62,839.0010100 124599 04/25/18 MILLSAVA AVA MILLS 001 FACILITY REFUND-S/CYN 0.00 100.0010100 124600 04/25/18 MINBONNI BONNIE MIN 001 FACILITY REFUND-PTRSN 0.00 100.0010100 124601 04/25/18 JIFFYLUB MY FLEET CENTER 5205230 VEH MAINT-P/WORKS 0.00 102.6010100 124602 04/25/18 NICHOLSC NICHOLS CONSULTING ENGIN 0015551 CONSULTANT SVCS-JAN 0.00 11,074.3610100 124602 04/25/18 NICHOLSC NICHOLS CONSULTING ENGIN 0015551 CONSULTANT SVCS-FEB 0.00 15,648.16TOTAL CHECK 0.00 26,722.5210100 124603 04/25/18 NIKRASHK ASHKAAN NIKRAVAN 001 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 10.0010100 124604 04/25/18 ONWARDEN ONWARD ENGINEERING 0015551 ENG SVCS-T/MITIGATION 0.00 2,000.0010100 124605 04/25/18 PATELJ JAY PATEL 001 FACILITY REFUND-DBC 0.00 1,150.0010100 124606 04/25/18 PENCOENG PENCO ENGINEERING INC 0015551 PROF.SVCS-PLAN CHECK 0.00 533.8410100 124606 04/25/18 PENCOENG PENCO ENGINEERING INC 001 PROF.SVCS-PR 17-25018 0.00 1,570.0010100 124606 04/25/18 PENCOENG PENCO ENGINEERING INC 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 17-25018 0.00 282.6010100 124606 04/25/18 PENCOENG PENCO ENGINEERING INC 001 PROF.SVCS-PR 17-25018 0.00 325.0010100 124606 04/25/18 PENCOENG PENCO ENGINEERING INC 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 17-25018 0.00 -58.5010100 124606 04/25/18 PENCOENG PENCO ENGINEERING INC 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 17-25018 0.00 58.5010100 124606 04/25/18 PENCOENG PENCO ENGINEERING INC 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 17-25018 0.00 -282.60TOTAL CHECK 0.00 2,428.8410100 124607 04/25/18 PROFLOCK PROFESSIONAL LOCK SYSTEM 0014070 MAINT SVCS-LIBRARY DR 0.00 264.0010100 124608 04/25/18 PSI PROTECTION ONE INC 0014093 ALARM SVCS-CITY HALL 0.00 30.126.4.bPacket Pg. 145
SUNGARD PENTAMATION INC PAGE NUMBER: 7DATE: 04/25/2018 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACCTPA21TIME: 10:23:29 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUNDSELECTION CRITERIA: transact.ck_date between ’20180412 00:00:00.000’ and ’20180425 00:00:00.000’ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/18 FUND - 001 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME FUND/DIVISION -----DESCRIPTION------ SALES TAX AMOUNT10100 124609 04/25/18 PUBLICST PUBLIC STORAGE #23051 0014030 STORAGE RENTAL-MAY 0.00 384.0010100 124610 04/25/18 QUANCYNT CYNTHIA L QUAN 0015510 T & T COMM-APR 2018 0.00 45.0010100 124611 04/25/18 SAMOYLEN CECILIA SAMOYLENKO 001 FACILITY REFUND-DBC 0.00 850.0010100 124612 04/25/18 SCHOOLSF SCHOOLSFIRST FCU 001 FACILITY REFUND-DBC 0.00 500.0010100 124613 04/25/18 SIEMENS SIEMENS INDUSTRY INC 0015554 C/WIDE TRAFFIC MAINT 0.00 4,441.4810100 124613 04/25/18 SIEMENS SIEMENS INDUSTRY INC 0015554 C/WIDE TRAFFIC MAINT 0.00 4,554.00TOTAL CHECK 0.00 8,995.4810100 124614 04/25/18 SONGGINA GINA SONG 001 FACILITY REFUND-S/CYN 0.00 100.0010100 124615 04/25/18 SCE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS 0015556 ELECT SVCS-T/CONTROL 0.00 28.7010100 124615 04/25/18 SCE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS 1385538 ELECT SVCS-DIST 38 0.00 50.2710100 124615 04/25/18 SCE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS 1415541 ELECT SVCS-T/CONTROL 0.00 49.9910100 124615 04/25/18 SCE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS 0015510 ELECT SVCS-T/CONTROL 0.00 460.0210100 124615 04/25/18 SCE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS 0015510 ELECT SVCS-T/CONTROL 0.00 74.4710100 124615 04/25/18 SCE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS 0015510 ELECT SVCS-T/CONTROL 0.00 82.3210100 124615 04/25/18 SCE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDIS 0015510 ELECT SVCS-T/CONTROL 0.00 199.41TOTAL CHECK 0.00 945.1810100 124616 04/25/18 ADELPHIA SPECTRUM BUSINESS 0014070 CABLE SVCS-CITY HALL 0.00 83.2810100 124617 04/25/18 STANDARD STANDARD INSURANCE COMPA 001 MAY 18-LIFE INS PREM 0.00 2,296.6310100 124617 04/25/18 STANDARD STANDARD INSURANCE COMPA 001 MAY 18-LIFE INS PREM 0.00 1,027.4310100 124617 04/25/18 STANDARD STANDARD INSURANCE COMPA 001 MAY 18-LIFE INS PREM 0.00 729.00TOTAL CHECK 0.00 4,053.0610100 124618 04/25/18 TAITANDA TAIT AND ASSOCIATES INC 2505510 ST REHAB PROJ-AREA 6 0.00 5,562.5010100 124618 04/25/18 TAITANDA TAIT AND ASSOCIATES INC 2505510 ST REHAB PROJ-AREA 6 0.00 27,151.2510100 124618 04/25/18 TAITANDA TAIT AND ASSOCIATES INC 0015551 ENG SVCS-SUNSET CRSS 0.00 9,500.75TOTAL CHECK 0.00 42,214.5010100 124619 04/25/18 THECOMDY THE COMDYN GROUP INC 0014070 GIS SUPPORT SVCS-4/13 0.00 4,596.1910100 124620 04/25/18 SCGAS THE GAS COMPANY 0014093 GAS SVCS-CITY HALL 0.00 403.2310100 124620 04/25/18 SCGAS THE GAS COMPANY 0015556 GAS SVCS-HERTIAGE 0.00 124.07TOTAL CHECK 0.00 527.3010100 124621 04/25/18 JACKSONS TRADITIONAL AUTO SUPPLY 0015333 GENERATOR-DBC 0.00 477.2010100 124621 04/25/18 JACKSONS TRADITIONAL AUTO SUPPLY 0015333 MEMO CREDIT-DBC 0.00 -116.37TOTAL CHECK 0.00 360.8310100 124622 04/25/18 TRANE TRANE SERVICE GROUP INC 0015333 MAINT SVCS-DBC 0.00 1,639.4410100 124623 04/25/18 TUCKERRA RAYMOND MICHAEL TUCKER 0015350 CONTRACT CLASS-FALL 0.00 600.0010100 124624 04/25/18 USHEALTH US HEALTHWORKS MEDICAL G 0014060 PRE-EMPLYMNT PHYSICAL 0.00 239.006.4.bPacket Pg. 146
SUNGARD PENTAMATION INC PAGE NUMBER: 8DATE: 04/25/2018 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACCTPA21TIME: 10:23:29 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUNDSELECTION CRITERIA: transact.ck_date between ’20180412 00:00:00.000’ and ’20180425 00:00:00.000’ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/18 FUND - 001 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME FUND/DIVISION -----DESCRIPTION------ SALES TAX AMOUNT10100 124625 04/25/18 VIZCARRA ROSARIO VIZCARRA 001 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 45.0010100 124626 04/25/18 GRAINGER W.W. GRAINGER INC. 0015554 SUPPLIES-RD MAINT 0.00 47.0710100 124627 04/25/18 WALNUTHI WALNUT HILLS FIRE PROTEC 0015333 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SVC 0.00 427.5110100 124627 04/25/18 WALNUTHI WALNUT HILLS FIRE PROTEC 0014093 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SVC 0.00 507.4210100 124627 04/25/18 WALNUTHI WALNUT HILLS FIRE PROTEC 0015556 FIRE EXTINGUISHER SVC 0.00 507.42TOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,442.3510100 124628 04/25/18 WVWATER WALNUT VALLEY WATER DIST 0015556 WATER SVCS-PARKS 0.00 1,899.1410100 124628 04/25/18 WVWATER WALNUT VALLEY WATER DIST 1415541 WATER SVCS-DIST 41 0.00 1,263.7010100 124628 04/25/18 WVWATER WALNUT VALLEY WATER DIST 1395539 WATER SVCS-DIST 39 0.00 1,702.6810100 124628 04/25/18 WVWATER WALNUT VALLEY WATER DIST 0014093 WATER SVCS-CITY HALL 0.00 333.5910100 124628 04/25/18 WVWATER WALNUT VALLEY WATER DIST 0015333 WATER SVCS-DBC 0.00 311.4610100 124628 04/25/18 WVWATER WALNUT VALLEY WATER DIST 1385538 WATER SVCS-DIST 38 0.00 318.9310100 124628 04/25/18 WVWATER WALNUT VALLEY WATER DIST 1385538 WATER SVCS-DIST 38 0.00 2,897.65TOTAL CHECK 0.00 8,727.1510100 124629 04/25/18 WANGKATH KATHERINE WANG 001 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 195.0010100 124630 04/25/18 WASHINGL LISA WASHINGTON 0015510 T & T COMM-APR 2018 0.00 45.0010100 124631 04/25/18 WAXIESAN WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 0014093 SUPPLIES-CITY HALL 0.00 181.2410100 124631 04/25/18 WAXIESAN WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 0015333 SUPPLIES-DBC 0.00 388.0810100 124631 04/25/18 WAXIESAN WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 0014093 SUPPLIES-CITY HALL 0.00 655.9110100 124631 04/25/18 WAXIESAN WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 0014093 SUPPLIES-CITY HALL 0.00 736.7210100 124631 04/25/18 WAXIESAN WAXIE SANITARY SUPPLY 0015333 SUPPLIES-DBC 0.00 536.47TOTAL CHECK 0.00 2,498.4210100 124632 04/25/18 WESTCOAS WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 0015558 TREE WATERING SVCS 0.00 369.0010100 124632 04/25/18 WESTCOAS WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 1415541 MAINT SVCS-DIST 41 0.00 1,189.6510100 124632 04/25/18 WESTCOAS WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 0015558 TREE MAINT SVCS-MAR 0.00 11,781.0010100 124632 04/25/18 WESTCOAS WEST COAST ARBORISTS INC 0015558 TREE MAINT SVCS-MAR 0.00 12,037.45TOTAL CHECK 0.00 25,377.1010100 124633 04/25/18 WHITEWIL WILLIAM WHITE 001 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 85.0010100 124634 04/25/18 WILLDANG WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL 001 PROF.SVCS-PR 17-9108 0.00 200.0010100 124634 04/25/18 WILLDANG WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL 001 PROF.SVCS-PR 17-998 0.00 400.0010100 124634 04/25/18 WILLDANG WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL 001 PROF.SVCS-PR 17-6629 0.00 400.0010100 124634 04/25/18 WILLDANG WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL 001 PROF.SVCS-PR 17-288 0.00 400.0010100 124634 04/25/18 WILLDANG WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL 001 PROF.SVCS-PR 14-5051 0.00 500.0010100 124634 04/25/18 WILLDANG WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 17-9108 0.00 -36.0010100 124634 04/25/18 WILLDANG WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 17-9108 0.00 36.0010100 124634 04/25/18 WILLDANG WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 14-5051 0.00 90.0010100 124634 04/25/18 WILLDANG WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 17-6629 0.00 72.0010100 124634 04/25/18 WILLDANG WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 17-288 0.00 72.0010100 124634 04/25/18 WILLDANG WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 17-998 0.00 72.0010100 124634 04/25/18 WILLDANG WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 14-5051 0.00 -90.0010100 124634 04/25/18 WILLDANG WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 17-998 0.00 -72.0010100 124634 04/25/18 WILLDANG WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 17-6629 0.00 -72.0010100 124634 04/25/18 WILLDANG WILLDAN GEOTECHNICAL 001 ADMIN FEE-PR 17-288 0.00 -72.006.4.bPacket Pg. 147
SUNGARD PENTAMATION INC PAGE NUMBER: 9DATE: 04/25/2018 CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ACCTPA21TIME: 10:23:29 CHECK REGISTER - DISBURSEMENT FUNDSELECTION CRITERIA: transact.ck_date between ’20180412 00:00:00.000’ and ’20180425 00:00:00.000’ACCOUNTING PERIOD: 10/18 FUND - 001 - GENERAL FUND CASH ACCT CHECK NO ISSUE DT VENDOR NAME FUND/DIVISION -----DESCRIPTION------ SALES TAX AMOUNTTOTAL CHECK 0.00 1,900.0010100 124635 04/25/18 WINSTONT TERESITA WINSTON 001 RECREATION REFUND 0.00 160.0010100 124636 04/25/18 WONGJENN JENNIE WONG 001 FACILITY REFUND-DBC 0.00 210.0010100 124636 04/25/18 WONGJENN JENNIE WONG 001 FACILITY REFUND-DBC 0.00 350.0010100 124636 04/25/18 WONGJENN JENNIE WONG 001 FACILITY REFUND-DBC 0.00 150.00TOTAL CHECK 0.00 710.0010100 124637 04/25/18 WONGLISA LISA WONG 001 FACILITY REFUND-S/CYN 0.00 100.0010100 124638 04/25/18 WOODRUFF WOODRUFF SPRADLING & SMA 0014020 LEGAL SVCS-P/WORKS 0.00 894.6010100 124638 04/25/18 WOODRUFF WOODRUFF SPRADLING & SMA 0014020 LEGAL SVCS-T/HERMANOS 0.00 553.8010100 124638 04/25/18 WOODRUFF WOODRUFF SPRADLING & SMA 0014020 LEGAL SVCS-COMM DEV 0.00 702.9010100 124638 04/25/18 WOODRUFF WOODRUFF SPRADLING & SMA 0014020 LEGAL SVCS-MILLENNIUM 0.00 1,713.4010100 124638 04/25/18 WOODRUFF WOODRUFF SPRADLING & SMA 0014020 LEGAL SVCS-CMGR 0.00 1,291.4510100 124638 04/25/18 WOODRUFF WOODRUFF SPRADLING & SMA 0014020 LEGAL SVCS-COMM SVCS 0.00 213.0010100 124638 04/25/18 WOODRUFF WOODRUFF SPRADLING & SMA 0014020 LEGAL SVCS-COUNCIL 0.00 2,215.2010100 124638 04/25/18 WOODRUFF WOODRUFF SPRADLING & SMA 0014020 LEGAL SVCS-GENERAL 0.00 149.1010100 124638 04/25/18 WOODRUFF WOODRUFF SPRADLING & SMA 001 LEGAL SVCS-PL 2015-43 0.00 63.90TOTAL CHECK 0.00 7,797.3510100 PP08/18 04/18/18 PERSRETI PERS RETIREMENT FUND 001 SURVIVOR BENEFIT 0.00 52.0810100 PP08/18 04/18/18 PERSRETI PERS RETIREMENT FUND 001 RETIRE CONTRIB-PEPRA 0.00 2,494.5510100 PP08/18 04/18/18 PERSRETI PERS RETIREMENT FUND 001 RETIRE CONTRIB-EE 0.00 27,353.44TOTAL CHECK 0.00 29,900.0710100 08/18 PP 04/18/18 VANTAGEP VANTAGEPOINT TRNSFR AGNT 001 4/20/18-P/R DEDUCTIONS 0.00 6,181.6810100 08/18 PP 04/18/18 VANTAGEP VANTAGEPOINT TRNSFR AGNT 001 4/20/18-P/R DEDUCTIONS 0.00 4,297.97TOTAL CHECK 0.00 10,479.6510100 08-PP 18 04/18/18 PAYROLL PAYROLL TRANSFER 001 P/R TRANSFER-08/PP 08 0.00 185,106.4010100 08-PP 18 04/18/18 PAYROLL PAYROLL TRANSFER 112 P/R TRANSFER-08/PP 08 0.00 7,100.5910100 08-PP 18 04/18/18 PAYROLL PAYROLL TRANSFER 113 P/R TRANSFER-08/PP 08 0.00 4,125.2210100 08-PP 18 04/18/18 PAYROLL PAYROLL TRANSFER 115 P/R TRANSFER-08/PP 08 0.00 12,303.7410100 08-PP 18 04/18/18 PAYROLL PAYROLL TRANSFER 138 P/R TRANSFER-08/PP 08 0.00 1,164.3610100 08-PP 18 04/18/18 PAYROLL PAYROLL TRANSFER 139 P/R TRANSFER-08/PP 08 0.00 671.1910100 08-PP 18 04/18/18 PAYROLL PAYROLL TRANSFER 141 P/R TRANSFER-08/PP 08 0.00 564.34TOTAL CHECK 0.00 211,035.8410100 PP 08/18 04/18/18 TASC TASC 001 4/20/18-P/R DEDUCTIONS 0.00 1,279.1610100 PP-08/18 04/18/18 PERSRET1 PERS RETIREMENT 001 RETIRE CONTRIB-PEPRA 0.00 190.7410100 PP-08/18 04/18/18 PERSRET1 PERS RETIREMENT 001 RETIRE CONTRIB-EE 0.00 230.0410100 PP-08/18 04/18/18 PERSRET1 PERS RETIREMENT 001 SURVIVOR BENEFIT 0.00 8.00TOTAL CHECK 0.00 428.78TOTAL CASH ACCOUNT 0.00 1,195,454.20TOTAL FUND 0.00 1,195,454.20TOTAL REPORT 0.00 1,195,454.206.4.bPacket Pg. 148
Agenda #: 6.5
Meeting Date: May 1, 2018
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Daniel Fox, City Manager
TITLE: TREASURER'S STATEMENT FOR MARCH 2018
STRATEGIC
GOAL:
Responsible Stewardship of Public Resources
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
No Fiscal Impact.
BACKGROUND:
Per City policy, the Finance Department presents the monthly Treasurer’s Statement for
the City Council’s review and approval. This statement shows the cash balances with a
breakdown of various investment accounts and the yield to matur ity from investments.
This statement also includes an investment portfolio management report which details
the activities of investments. All investments have been made in accordance with the
City’s Investment Policy.
PREPARED BY:
6.5
Packet Pg. 149
REVIEWED BY:
Attachments:
1. 6.5.a March 2018 Treasurer's Report
2. 6.5.b March 2018 Investment Portfolio Summary
6.5
Packet Pg. 150
6.5.a
Packet Pg. 151
6.5.a
Packet Pg. 152
6.5.b
Packet Pg. 153
6.5.b
Packet Pg. 154
6.5.b
Packet Pg. 155
6.5.b
Packet Pg. 156
Agenda #: 6.6
Meeting Date: May 1, 2018
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Daniel Fox, City Manager
TITLE: VOTING DELEGATE FOR THE 2018 SCAG REGIONAL
CONFERENCE AND GENERAL ASSEMBLY.
RECOMMENDATION:
Appoint Council Member Jimmy Lin to serve as the voting delegate at the 2018 SCAG
Regional Conference and General Assembly.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None.
DISCUSSION:
The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) will be meeting for its
2018 Regional Conference & General Assembly in Indian Wells on May 3 rd and 4th.
Delegate (Council Member Nancy Lyons) and Alternate Delegate (Mayor Ruth Low) are
unavailable to attend. The City Council may appoint a delegate to vote on matters
presented during the conference. Council Member Jimmy Lin will be attending the
conference and is available to serve as the voting delegate representing the City of
Diamond Bar.
Therefore, it is recommended that the City Council appoint Council Member Jimmy Lin
to serve as the voting delegate at the 2018 SCAG Regional Conference and General
Assembly.
PREPARED BY:
6.6
Packet Pg. 157
REVIEWED BY:
6.6
Packet Pg. 158
Agenda #: 6.7
Meeting Date: May 1, 2018
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Daniel Fox, City Manager
TITLE: PURCHASE OF VARIOUS SITE FURNISHINGS FOR PANTERA PARK
AND STARSHINE PARK.
STRATEGIC
GOAL:
Responsible Stewardship of Public Resources
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve, and authorize the City Manager to issue, a purchase order for new site
furnishings in the amount of $56,978.33 to Outdoor Creations Inc.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
Due to the age and condition of the existing site furnishings at Pantera Park and
Starshine Park, $60,000 has been included in the FY 2017-2018 budget for the
purchase of new site furnishings as follows:
Parks and Facilities Maintenance Fund: $40,684.33
Integrated Waste Management Fund 115: $16,294.00
Based on the sole source bid received, the total purchase order amount for the items
specified is $56,978.33.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSSION:
To date, eleven of the City’s seventeen parks have been outfitted/replaced with site
furnishings from Outdoor Creations Inc. The parks scheduled to be renovated with the
new furnishings in this fiscal year are Pantera Park and Starshine Park. Pantera Park’s
furniture was installed in 1998 giving it a twenty year lifespan. Furthermore, some of the
items are mismatched and should be replaced accordingly. Starshine Park’s furniture
was installed in 2006 giving it a twelve year lifespan. The items and the quantities of
these new furnishings are listed in the following tables:
6.7
Packet Pg. 159
Pantera Park
Qty. Model Description
12 408SK 26" x 84" contour bench with armrest
15 100S 92" Smooth Top Picnic Table
6 300A-CR Family BBQ with clean out door
28 503 Square Waste Receptacle
Starshine Park
Qty. Model Description
3 408SK 26" x 84" contour bench with armrest
2 100S 92" Smooth Top Picnic Table
6 300A-CR Family BBQ with clean out door
4 503 Square Waste Receptacle
Outdoor creations Inc. is a direct manufacturer of heavy duty outdoor furnishings and
architectural pieces. Over the years, the City has chosen to utilize Outdoor Creations
Inc. as the provider of our park site furnishings due to the durability and quality of the
products that they produce.
In accordance with the City’s Purchasing Ordinance, the sole source purchase of the
furnishings from Outdoor Creations Inc. for a total purchase order amount of $56,978.33
has been reviewed and approved by the Finance Director.
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Attachments:
1. 6.7.a Pantera Park Quote 3-19-18
2. 6.7.b Starshine Park Quote 3-19-18
3. 6.7.c Detail Sheets
6.7
Packet Pg. 160
QUOTATION
AUTHORIZED SALES PERSONS SIGNATURE
Tim Hudson 3/19/2018
Signature Date
PH# 530-365-6106
FX# 530-365-5129
Cell# 530-338-8367 Date:4/25/2018
email P.O. #
tim@outdoorcreations.com
SOLD TO SHIP TO
Name:City of Diamond Bar Name:Pantera Park
Contact:Jason Williams Contact:
Phone#:909-839-7059 Phone#:
Fax#:Fax#:
Address:21810 Copley Dr, Diamond Bar Ca 91765 Address:738 Pantera Dr
jwilliams@diamondbarca.gov Diamond Bar
Sales Rep.Terms (circle one)F.O.B.
Established credit Yes, net 30 OR No, 50% deposit & balance Anderson, CA
Tim Hudson C.O.D
Qty.Model #Description (accessory colors, logo details, etc)Concrete Color $ Price/Unit $ Extended Price
Pantera Park
12 408SK 26" x 84" contour bench with armrest, Skateboard resistant Soft Grey 625.00 7500.00
Smooth Finish, Acrylic Sealer
15 100S 92" Smooth Top Picnic Table Soft Grey 685.00 10275.00
Smooth Finish, Acrylic Sealer
6 300A-CR Family BBQ with clean out door & 2 Painted Flame Hot Coal Logo's Soft Grey 730.00 4380.00
Smooth Finish, Acrylic Sealer
28 503 Square Waste Receptacle with revel square & Plastic Liner Soft Grey 465.00 13020.00
Smooth Finish, Bronze Powder Coated Lid, Acrylic Sealer
1 Shipping 6000.00 6000.00
SUBTOTAL 41175.00
PLEASE FILL IN THE INFORMATION BELOW AND READ PAGE 2 SALES TAX 3911.63
WITH TERMS AND CONDITIONS.TOTAL 45086.63
STANDARD DELIVERY A.R.O. AND APPROVED SUBMITTALS IS 10-12 WEEKS (Does not apply to custom products).
ESTIMATED / REQUIRED DELIVERY DATE:
PLEASE READ PAGE 2, FILL IN REQUIRED INFORMATION AND SIGN TO PLACE YOUR ORDER.
6.7.a
Packet Pg. 161
PAGE 2
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1. Terms of payment: If you have established credit with Outdoor Creations, we will extend net 30 days. If you DO NOT have
established credit then a 50% deposit will be required and the balance C.O.D..
2. Late payments: If you are extended net 30 terms and do not pay in net 30, an 18% APR will be added to all overdue invoices.
3. Rush orders: Orders needing to be delivered in less than 6 weeks, require 50% deposit & balance due upon delivery (C.O.D.)
Date needs to be established and agreed upon at time of order.
4. Production - 10-12 weeks is standard delivery time ARO, however, where submittals are required, the 10-12 weeks
lead time does not start until after receipt of all approved submittals. Standard lead time DOES NOT apply to CUSTOM Items!!!!
5. Handling - unless otherwise arranged, customer is responsible for having a forklift (minimum 4000 lb & 160 inches of lift) for
offloading.
6. All prices above are good 30 days from date of quote. Due to the volatility of materials, fuel etc. we can not honor quotes over
30 days.
7. Delivery requirements: It is imperative that if there is any change in the date of delivery from our standpoint or yours, that we
keep each other notified of such changes. It is possible that, if we are ready to deliver, and delivery is denied, an invoice will be
mailed and a 50% payment will be required before a new date is established for delivery.
8. Fuel surcharges: As the price of fuel increases it may be necessary to add a fuel surcharge to your invoice. A fuel surcharge
would be charged as a percent of the total order where freight is included in the price or an added freight charge where freight is
separate.
9. PLEASE ENTER YOUR ADDRESS FOR MAILING INVOICES:
Company Name
Address
City State Zip Code
10. IF YOUR ARE A CONTRACTOR, PLEASE ENTER THE ADDRESS OF THE OWNER OF THE PROJECT:
Owner Name
Address
City State Zip Code
11. Please sign below and return via fax to confirm your order for the item(s) listed above and agree with terms and conditions.
Signature Date
Remit Payment to: 2270 Barney Street, Anderson, CA 96007 * (530) 365-6106 FAX (530) 365-5129
6.7.a
Packet Pg. 162
QUOTATION
AUTHORIZED SALES PERSONS SIGNATURE
Tim Hudson 3/19/2018
Signature Date
PH# 530-365-6106
FX# 530-365-5129
Cell# 530-338-8367 Date:4/25/2018
email P.O. #
tim@outdoorcreations.com
SOLD TO SHIP TO
Name:City of Diamond Bar Name:Starshine Park
Contact:Jason Williams Contact:
Phone#:909-839-7059 Phone#:
Fax#:Fax#:
Address:21810 Copley Dr, Diamond Bar Ca 91765 Address:20839 Starshine Rd
jwilliams@diamondbarca.gov Diamond Bar
Sales Rep.Terms (circle one)F.O.B.
Established credit Yes, net 30 OR No, 50% deposit & balance Anderson, CA
Tim Hudson C.O.D
Qty.Model #Description (accessory colors, logo details, etc)Concrete Color $ Price/Unit $ Extended Price
Starshine Park
3 408SK 26" x 84" contour bench with armrest, Skateboard resistant Terra Cotta 625.00 1875.00
Smooth Finish, Acrylic Sealer
2 100S 92" Smooth Top Picnic Table Terra Cotta 685.00 1370.00
Smooth Finish, Acrylic Sealer
6 300A-CR Family BBQ with clean out door & 2 Painted Flame Hot Coal Logo's Terra Cotta 730.00 4380.00
Smooth Finish, Acrylic Sealer
4 503 Square Waste Receptacle with revel square & Plastic Liner Terra Cotta 465.00 1860.00
Smooth Finish, Bronze Powder Coated Lid, Acrylic Sealer
1 Shipping 1375.00 1375.00
Note:
Pricing is based on Purchase at the same time Pantera Park is
Purchased. (This pricing is quantity discount pricing)
SUBTOTAL 10860.00
PLEASE FILL IN THE INFORMATION BELOW AND READ PAGE 2 SALES TAX 1031.70
WITH TERMS AND CONDITIONS.TOTAL 11891.70
STANDARD DELIVERY A.R.O. AND APPROVED SUBMITTALS IS 10-12 WEEKS (Does not apply to custom products).
ESTIMATED / REQUIRED DELIVERY DATE:
PLEASE READ PAGE 2, FILL IN REQUIRED INFORMATION AND SIGN TO PLACE YOUR ORDER.
6.7.b
Packet Pg. 163
PAGE 2
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1. Terms of payment: If you have established credit with Outdoor Creations, we will extend net 30 days. If you DO NOT have
established credit then a 50% deposit will be required and the balance C.O.D..
2. Late payments: If you are extended net 30 terms and do not pay in net 30, an 18% APR will be added to all overdue invoices.
3. Rush orders: Orders needing to be delivered in less than 6 weeks, require 50% deposit & balance due upon delivery (C.O.D.)
Date needs to be established and agreed upon at time of order.
4. Production - 10-12 weeks is standard delivery time ARO, however, where submittals are required, the 10-12 weeks
lead time does not start until after receipt of all approved submittals. Standard lead time DOES NOT apply to CUSTOM Items!!!!
5. Handling - unless otherwise arranged, customer is responsible for having a forklift (minimum 4000 lb & 160 inches of lift) for
offloading.
6. All prices above are good 30 days from date of quote. Due to the volatility of materials, fuel etc. we can not honor quotes over
30 days.
7. Delivery requirements: It is imperative that if there is any change in the date of delivery from our standpoint or yours, that we
keep each other notified of such changes. It is possible that, if we are ready to deliver, and delivery is denied, an invoice will be
mailed and a 50% payment will be required before a new date is established for delivery.
8. Fuel surcharges: As the price of fuel increases it may be necessary to add a fuel surcharge to your invoice. A fuel surcharge
would be charged as a percent of the total order where freight is included in the price or an added freight charge where freight is
separate.
9. PLEASE ENTER YOUR ADDRESS FOR MAILING INVOICES:
Company Name
Address
City State Zip Code
10. IF YOUR ARE A CONTRACTOR, PLEASE ENTER THE ADDRESS OF THE OWNER OF THE PROJECT:
Owner Name
Address
City State Zip Code
11. Please sign below and return via fax to confirm your order for the item(s) listed above and agree with terms and conditions.
Signature Date
Remit Payment to: 2270 Barney Street, Anderson, CA 96007 * (530) 365-6106 FAX (530) 365-5129
6.7.b
Packet Pg. 164
MODEL #408SK CONCRETE BENCH WITH BACK, ARMRESTSAND SKATE DETERRENTS - (1) PIECE WITH CONTOURED SEAT
PANTERA PARK - DIAMOND BAR, CA
OUTDOOR CREATIONS, INC.SCALE: 1” = 24”
DRAWN BY: MNC 3/20/18
OUTDOOR
CREATIONS
INC.
2270 Barney StreetAnderson, CA 96007(530) 365-6106FAX (530) 365-5129
NOTES:
1. Concrete mix design to include a mixture of Portland Cement, water, coarse and fine aggregates, pure mineral oxide coloring
agents (when applicable) to yield a minimum compressivestrength of 5000 psi.2. Final product shall be reinforced with #4 and #5 rebar grid.3. Product is cast in 1-piece with no assembly required.
4. Hairline cracks may develop over time. These are not structural failures, but inherent characteristics of the materialitself.5. Air pockets are a common occurrence in precast products.
The frequency and size of air pockets are variable and to be expected, especially on vertical surfaces.6. Concrete corners and edges will chip if not handled accordingto guidelines. Patch kits are available but may or may not blend
and can be variable.7. There is a level of care and maintenance associated with your product and is the responsibility of the end user. Choosing the right sealer can help minimize those costs.
WEIGHT: 2000 LBS
TEXTURE: Smooth
COLOR: Increte Soft Gray
SEALER: Standard Acrylic
DRAIN
36"
19"
24 1/2"
INSTALLATION RECOMMENDATIONS::1. Bench requires epoxy applied to cover bottom of entire leg.2. Epoxy adhesive should be checked
periodically to ensure continued adhesion.
3. Bench may also be mechanically attached.
1 1/4"
FRONT ELEVATION
REAR ELEVATION
SECTION
Contoured Seat
1"
3 1/2"
1”
4"
Integrally Cast
Anti-Skate System
CUSTOMER APPROVAL x________________________________________
84"
6"27"36"6"
6.7.c
Packet Pg. 165
MODEL #100S CONCRETE PICNIC TABLE
PANTERA PARK - DIAMOND BAR, CA
OUTDOOR CREATIONS, INC.SCALE: 1” = 32”
DRAWN BY: MNC 3/20/18
OUTDOOR
CREATIONS
INC.
2270 Barney StreetAnderson, CA 96007(530) 365-6106FAX (530) 365-5129
65"
11"
33"
32"
24"
92”
43"
65"
18"
NOTES:
1. Concrete mix design to include a mixture of Portland Cement, water, coarse and fine aggregates, pure mineral oxide coloringagents (when applicable) to yield a minimum compressivestrength of 5000 psi.
2. Final product shall be reinforced with #4 and #5 rebar grid.3. Product is cast in 1-piece with no assembly required.4. Hairline cracks may develop over time. These are not structural failures, but inherent characteristics of the material
itself.5. Air pockets are a common occurrence in precast products. The frequency and size of air pockets are variable and to be expected, especially on vertical surfaces.
6. Concrete corners and edges will chip if not handled accordingto guidelines. Patch kits are available but may or may not blendand can be variable.7. There is a level of care and maintenance associated with your
product and is the responsibility of the end user. Choosing the right sealer can help minimize those costs.
WEIGHT: 2450 LBS
TEXTURE: Smooth
COLOR: Increte Soft Gray
SEALER: Standard Acrylic
4"
* Wheelchair Accessibilityavailable at both ends of
table to meet A.D.A. Guidelines
CUSTOMER APPROVAL x________________________________________
6.7.c
Packet Pg. 166
MODEL #300A CONCRETE FAMILY BARBECUE WITH
PAINTED FLAMESPANTERA PARK - DIAMOND BAR, CA
OUTDOOR CREATIONS, INC.SCALE: 1” = 24”
DRAWN BY: MNC 3/20/18
OUTDOOR
CREATIONS
INC.
2270 Barney StreetAnderson, CA 96007(530) 365-6106FAX (530) 365-5129
NOTES:
1. Concrete mix design to include a mixture of Portland Cement,
water, coarse and fine aggregates, pure mineral oxide coloringagents (when applicable) to yield a minimum compressivestrength of 5000 psi.2. Final product shall be reinforced with #4 and #5 rebar grid.
3. Product is cast in 1-piece with no assembly required.4. Hairline cracks may develop over time. These are not structural failures, but inherent characteristics of the materialitself.
5. Air pockets are a common occurrence in precast products. The frequency and size of air pockets are variable and to be expected, especially on vertical surfaces.6. Concrete corners and edges will chip if not handled according
to guidelines. Patch kits are available but may or may not blendand can be variable.7. There is a level of care and maintenance associated with your product and is the responsibility of the end user. Choosing the right sealer can help minimize those costs.
WEIGHT: 1800 LBS
TEXTURE: Smooth
COLOR: Increte Soft Gray
SEALER: Standard Acrylic
SECTION
TOP VIEW
SIDE ELEVATION
15 3/4"
13"
Concealed hinge allows door to be raisedand locked in upright position for ashremoval
32"
34"
34"
4"
6"
Laser-Cut, Non-welded
Grill System
Cleanout Door
32"
32"
CUSTOMER APPROVAL x________________________________________
Cast in
“HOT COALS”Flame logo on (2)opposing sides
painted red/white
6.7.c
Packet Pg. 167
MODEL #503 CONCRETE TRASH RECEPTACLE - SQUAREPANTERA PARK - DIAMOND BAR, CA
OUTDOOR CREATIONS, INC.SCALE: 1” = 24”
DRAWN BY: MNC 3/20/18
OUTDOOR
CREATIONS
INC.
2270 Barney StreetAnderson, CA 96007(530) 365-6106FAX (530) 365-5129
NOTES:
1. Concrete mix design to include a mixture of Portland Cement, water, coarse and fine aggregates, pure mineral oxide coloringagents (when applicable) to yield a minimum compressivestrength of 5000 psi.
2. Final product shall be reinforced with #4 and #5 rebar grid.3. Product is cast in 1-piece with no assembly required.4. Hairline cracks may develop over time. These are not structural failures, but inherent characteristics of the material
itself.5. Air pockets are a common occurrence in precast products. The frequency and size of air pockets are variable and to be expected, especially on vertical surfaces.
6. Concrete corners and edges will chip if not handled accordingto guidelines. Patch kits are available but may or may not blendand can be variable.7. There is a level of care and maintenance associated with your
product and is the responsibility of the end user. Choosing the right sealer can help minimize those costs.
WEIGHT: 1600 LBSTEXTURE: Smooth COLOR: Increte Soft GraySEALER: Standard Acrylic
SECTIONELEVATION
PLAN
Threaded steelinserts for attaching
bag hangers and lid
retaining cable
Lid made from 14 gauge steelpowder coated bronze with 8 1/2”trash opening. Attached
to casting with 1/8” x 24” stainlesssteel aircraft security cable.Other colors available upon request.
30 gallon plastic liner
22 3/4"
8 1/2"
Open Casting Base
8 1/2"
22 3/4"
34"
30"
Radius 1/2”
Outside Corners
1 1/2"4"
30"
30"
CUSTOMER APPROVAL x________________________________________
6.7.c
Packet Pg. 168
Agenda #: 8.1
Meeting Date: May 1, 2018
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Daniel Fox, City Manager
TITLE: 2017 PUBLIC SAFETY ANNUAL REPORT
STRATEGIC
GOAL:
Safe, Sustainable & Healthy Community
RECOMMENDATION:
Receive and file.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None.
DISCUSSION:
The Public Safety Annual Report provides the City Council and community with a
detailed overview of local crime statistics, crime prevention strategies, and public
education and partnerships for calendar year 2017 (Attachment 1). As outlined in the
report, Diamond Bar continued the trend of very low violent crime rates, finishing with
the fourth-lowest violent crime total in the City’s history. However, the City did
experience an increase in property crimes, particularly burglary and larceny, when
compared to 2016. The following table provides a comparison between 2017 and 2016
Part 1 Crime totals:
Category 2017 2016 Percentage Change
Total Violent Crime 57 66 -13.6%
Total Property Crime 1043 934 11.7%
Total Part 1 Crime 1100 1000 11.1%
For additional data and analysis, please see pages 9 -15 in the attached report.
In 2017, the City launched a series of public neighborhood meetings known as “Let’s
Talk Public Safety” (LTPS). This very successful series was met with enthusiasm and
support from attendees (approximately 1,000 attended the seven meetings) and
provided enhanced public engagement and education opportunities critical to reducing
8.1
Packet Pg. 169
property crimes in the City. Meeting topics included emergency preparedness, fire
safety tips, and crime prevention strategies.
Engagement efforts played a role in increasing calls for service by 17%, providing
evidence that the “see something, say something” message has been effective. The
Let’s Talk Public Safety series has taken City Hall and the Sheriff’s S tation to the public,
building partnerships with residents and business owners.
To maintain this momentum and encourage additional partnerships and further reduce
property crime, the next phase of the LTPS program has been developed. Phase 2
features a variety of engagement and outreach techniques, including, but not limited to:
o City membership in the Taking Back Our Communities Coalition
o Increased budgetary appropriations for special/undercover operations and
suppression patrols
o RING Home Security Grant Program (launched Tuesday, April 3, 2018).
o New LTPS Public Safety Leaflets with practical crime prevention tips on a variety
of topics.
o Safety Speaks blog, a web-based communication center published by Deputy
Scheller.
o Monthly “Coffee with a Cop” series, hosted weekday mornings at local coffee
establishments. Informal, conversational dialogue with residents and deputies
with crime prevention tips and Q&A opportunities. Series begins Tuesday May 8,
from 7-9am at It’s-A-Grind coffee shop. Subsequent meetings will be held at
coffee shops throughout town.
o Quarterly Senior Safety Seminars held at Diamond Bar Center, with focus on
fraud prevention. Series begins May 15 from 10 -11:30am.
o Emergency notification system membership drive to coincide with new system
rollout in July 2018.
o Neighborhood and Business Watch program expansion efforts.
o Revised and Updated Let’s Talk Public Safety public meetings (schedule TBD).
o Web-based public safety video series, with short 30-60 second videos with topics
focusing on crime prevention tips.
o Annual Block Captain Meeting/Training
When combined with strategic suppression patrols and undercover operations by the
City’s Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department team, the LTPS engagement and
education program has resulted in significant improvement to this point in 2018. Year-
to-date performance shows a dramatic reduction in many categories, including:
Category Percentage Change
Total Part 1 Crime -21.5%
Total Violent Crime -22.7%
Total Property Crime -21.4%
Burglary -39.8%
Larceny -16%
8.1
Packet Pg. 170
Reducing property crime requires a proactive approach and a cooperative partnership
with residents and business owners. The LTPS program has resulted in measurable
improvements to date. Staff will provide regular updates to the City Council as additional
components are introduced to gauge effectiveness going forward.
PREPARED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
Attachments:
1. 8.1.a 2017 Public Safety Report
8.1
Packet Pg. 171
0 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
Public Safety
Annual Report 2017
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 172
1 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
PUBLIC SAFETY ANNUAL REPORT - 2017
TABLE OF CONTENTS
BACKGROUND..................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Contract Law Enforcement Program ......................................................................................................................... 3
Diamond Bar/Walnut Station ....................................................................................................................................... 3
Command Staff/Leadership Team ............................................................................................................................. 3
Contract Law Expenditures .......................................................................................................................................... 4
LAW ENFORCEMENT DEPLOYMENT AND VOLUNTEERS ................................................................................................. 5
Contract Law Personnel................................................................................................................................................ 5
Volunteers on Patrol ....................................................................................................................................................... 6
Crime Statistics Analysis ..................................................................................................................................................... 6
Part I Crimes Defined ..................................................................................................................................................... 6
Calls for Service .............................................................................................................................................................. 7
Arrests ............................................................................................................................................................................... 8
2017 Summary ................................................................................................................................................................. 8
One-Year Comparison (2017 vs. 2016) ....................................................................................................................... 9
Historical Comparison .................................................................................................................................................. 10
Five Year Comparison (2013-2017)............................................................................................................................ 11
Historical Comparison .................................................................................................................................................. 13
Local Agency Comparison – Crime Rate Per 10,000 Population ........................................................................ 14
Traffic Statistics .............................................................................................................................................................. 15
Crime Prevention, Outreach, & Advocacy Efforts ...................................................................................................... 16
Special Operations ...................................................................................................................................................... 16
Taking Back Our Communities Coalition ................................................................................................................. 17
Neighborhood Watch ................................................................................................................................................ 18
Let’s Talk Public Safety Neighborhood Meeting Series ......................................................................................... 19
Success Through Awareness & Resistance (STAR) Program ................................................................................. 20
Use of Technology ........................................................................................................................................................ 20
DB-Watch and DB-Prepared E-Newsletters ............................................................................................................. 20
Report for Reward ........................................................................................................................................................ 20
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 173
2 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
REPORT INFORMATION
City of Diamond Bar | 21810 Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA 91765
909.839.7010 | info@diamondbarca.gov | www.diamondbarca.gov
Source: City of Diamond Bar, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, and Federal Bureau of Investigation
INTRODUCTION
Since incorporation, the City Council has made public safety its top priority, maintaining a fully
funded contract law enforcement program with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. This
commitment has resulted in Diamond Bar’s standing as one of the safest communities in the San
Gabriel Valley.
This report will provide background on the City’s law enforcement program as well as an analysis of
2016 crime statistics and historic performance.
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 174
3 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
BACKGROUND
Contract Law
Enforcement Program
Diamond Bar’s law
enforcement services are
provided by the Los Angeles
County Sheriff’s Department
under the Municipal Law
Enforcement Service
Agreement (MLESA) with the
County of Los Angeles. The
“contract law” model was
pioneered by the County and dates back to 1954, when Lakewood became the first
City to partner with the Sheriff’s Department. Using this initial agreement as a template,
42 of the County’s 88 cities followed suit and joined the Contract Law Enforcement
Program. The Contract Law Enforcement Program allows cities like Diamond Bar to
develop a customized policing program that accounts for unique community
characteristics and priorities at an extremely cost-effective rate and without incurring
the significant indebtedness and long-term liability required to finance a municipal
police department. Furthermore, the contract law model provides Diamond Bar with
access to the full resources of the nation’s largest Sheriff’s Department, from Aero
Bureau to SWAT.
Diamond Bar/Walnut Station
The Diamond Bar law enforcement team is housed out of the Diamond Bar/Walnut
Station, located at 21695 Valley Blvd. in Walnut and can be reached by phone at 909-
595-2264.
Command Staff/Leadership Team
Captain Al Reyes serves as the leader of Diamond Bar/Walnut Station personnel.
Captain Reyes took command in 2016. Lieutenant Phil Marquez is Diamond Bar’s
Service Area Lieutenant, providing direct day-to-day coordination with the City
Manager and staff on all law enforcement and crime prevention matters.
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 175
4 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
Contract Law Expenditures
The City’s contract law expenses comprised of the per-unit cost for each deputy plus a
percentage-based fee known as the Liability Trust Fund (LTF). The LTF is a County-
controlled surcharge applied to fund liability-related issues resulting from the delivery of
law enforcement services to contract cities. The LTF in FY 2017-18 is 10%. All contract
cities pay the same rate.
The City’s base contract law personnel cost for FY 2017-18 is $5,621,795 plus LTF of
$561,250. In addition to these personnel costs, the City purchases a block of 560 lessons
by the STAR Deputy at an annual cost of $102,402, bringing the City’s annual base
personnel cost to $6,285,446. This total represents approximately 21.5% of the General
Fund budget, a rate significantly lower than those required to operate an in-house
police department and one that is not burdened by long-term facility, equipment,
liability and personnel/retirement costs.
As shown in the table below, public safety personnel costs have continued to increase.
This is due to a number of factors, including labor contract increases, rising LTF rates and
the fact that previously vacant positions/retirements were refilled at full-time rates. This
trend is likely to continue into future years, with further personnel cost increases and
high LTF rates due to large jury awards. Further, the City’s Growth Deputy position
expires effective March 1, 2018, ending an 18-month reduced personnel rate for the
new traffic car position.
Fiscal Year Base Personnel Cost + STAR LTF Rate
2017-18 $6,285,446 (Budgeted) 10%
2016-17 $6,022,660 9.5%
2015-16 $5,650,840 6%
2014-15 $5,418,963 4%
2013-14 $5,106,005 4%
2012-13 $5,134,877 4%
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 176
5 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
LAW ENFORCEMENT DEPLOYMENT AND VOLUNTEERS
Contract Law Personnel
The City’s FY 2017-18 contract law deployment is as follows:
The City’s contract law rates are all-inclusive, meaning that the City is not charged for
the full complement of command, detective, and administrative staff such as the
Captain, Service Area Lieutenant, Detective Bureau, and other support personnel,
facilities, equipment, or emergency deployments in response to an emergency or
disaster.
The City’s patrol deputies are assigned to one of three shifts, with personnel levels
ranging from four to eight deputies per shift. Personnel levels are adjusted by the
Captain and Service Area Lieutenant based on trends and operations and may be
supplemented on any shift by additional personnel, including the Special Assignment
Team.
The Special Assignment Team (made up of 40-Hour Deputy, No Relief positions) is a
community policing program designed to provide maximum flexibility and
responsiveness. In addition to conducting suppression patrols, traffic enforcement, and
special investigations targeting specific crime trends, Special Assignment Team
deputies work directly with residents and business owners to provide a consistent
customer service presence from law enforcement. They also provide additional
specialized traffic enforcement, lead Neighborhood Watch, represent the Department
at public meetings and events, and handle community relations.
Position Number of Personnel
40-Hour Deputy 1
56-Hour Deputy 10
40-Hour Deputy, No Relief (Special Assignment Team) 5
STAR Deputy 1
Law Enforcement Technician, with Vehicle 1
Community Services Assistant, with Vehicle 1
Total Contract Personnel: 19
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 177
6 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
Volunteers on Patrol
Diamond Bar Volunteers
on Patrol (VOPs) play a
key role in the City’s
public safety program.
These dedicated
residents of all ages
provide significant
assistance to the Station
and Diamond Bar
community. VOPs
perform non-hazardous
duties such as residential
vacation checks, park safety checks, traffic control operations, and other directed
patrol assignments. The City Council honors Diamond Bar Volunteers on Patrol at an
annual holiday appreciation dinner.
A total of 32 VOPs serve Diamond Bar, with 23 on patrol and 9 serving the public at the
Station. In 2017, the VOPs provided 12,069 hours of service to the community. Using the
LASD hourly volunteer rate of $27.59 per hour, the VOPs provided $343,483.74 in value to
Diamond Bar.
CRIME STATISTICS ANALYSIS
The following analysis is based on statistics provided by LASD for the 2017 calendar year.
Part I Crimes Defined
Part I crimes are reported in two categories: Violent and Property crimes.
Violent Crimes include:
• Homicide
• Rape
• Aggravated Assault
• Robbery
Property Crimes include:
• Burglary
• Larceny theft
• Grand Theft Auto
• Arson (not included in this analysis for comparison due to its exclusion from FBI
Uniform Crime reporting data)
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 178
7 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
These standardized classifications are reported to the FBI and are collectively known as
“index” crimes because the crimes are considered serious, tend to be reported more
reliably than others, and are reported directly to the local police versus another
agency.
Calls for Service
In 2017, total calls for service increase significantly from the previous year. The majority
of the increase was due to a jump in Routine calls. Staff and LASD leadership believe
this increase is in part attributable to the Let’s Talk Public Safety series and increased
Neighborhood Watch meetings, both of which strongly encouraged attendees to
immediately report any suspicious behavior or activity.
Calls For Service & Response Times – One Year Comparison
Category 2017 2016 Hist. Avg. Difference % Change
Total Calls For Svc. 12255 10470 11960 1785 17.0%
Emergency 184 395 253 -211 -53.4%
Priority 2189 1633 2003 556 34%
Routine 9882 8442 9705 1440 17.1%
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 179
8 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
Arrests
In 2016, 189 of 684 total arrests were as a result of warrant arrests via the courts rather
than the result of local criminal activity. The decrease in total arrests in 2017 is primarily
due to a significant reduction in warrant and narcotics arrests.
Total Arrests – One Year Comparison
Category 2017 2016 Difference % Change
Total Arrests 531 684 -153 -22.4%
2017 Summary
Since the adoption of a series of major criminal justice reforms began in 2014, Diamond
Bar has experienced three consecutive years with increased Total Part I Crimes, almost
solely as a result of increases in property crimes. When compared to 28 years of
performance, 2017 Total Part I Crimes were the 17th lowest in the City’s history, a ranking
driven by the 19th lowest Part I Property Crime totals. Part I Violent Crime totals remain
extremely low, ranking fourth-lowest in the City’s history.
In recent years, station detectives and the LASD Major Crimes Unit have found that
some Los Angeles County communities with high median incomes and property values,
low unemployment, and immediate freeway access have been targeted by organized
transient burglary crews based in the Los Angeles area. For example, Diamond Bar
experienced a spike in residential burglaries in January 2017, coinciding with Chinese
New Year, a period in which many residents are traveling or celebrating at home with
gifts. During this period, the burglary total was 77.8% higher than the average monthly
total for the balance of the year. In the course of investigating these crimes, station
detectives and the LASD Major Crimes Unit found evidence suggesting that Los
Angeles-based crews were targeting areas known to have many Chinese New Year
celebrants. Noticing these trends, LASD and City coordinated saturation patrols and
undercover operations, resulting in burglary reductions for the balance of the year.
These tactics were carried over into the 2018 holiday season, also resulting in burglary
reductions.
In spite of these challenges, Diamond Bar continues to be recognized as a safe
community. Safehome.org recently ranked Diamond Bar as the 8th safest city in
California, based on a population of 50,000 or greater. Safehome.org is a home security
company that publishes an annual list of safest cities based on a methodology that
factors in annual FBI Uniform Crime Reporting data, crime trends, law enforcement
personnel allocations, and community demographic metrics.
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 180
9 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
One-Year Comparison (2017 vs. 2016)
In 2017, Total Violent Crimes decreased by 13.6% from 2016, led by a significant 29.8%
decrease in aggravated assaults. Property crimes increased by 11.7%, mostly due to a
spike in larceny thefts. A complete comparison is shown in the tables below.
Part I Crime – One Year Comparison
Category 2017 2016 Difference % Change
Total Pt. 1 Crime 1100 1000 100 11.1%
Pt. 1 Rate/10,000 193.14 175.76 17.38 9.9%
Part I Violent Crime – One Year Comparison
Category 2017 2016 Difference % Change
Total Violent Crimes 57 66 -9 -13.6%
Violent Rate/10,000 10.01 11.60 -1.59 -13.7%
Homicide 0 2 -2 -100%
Rape 5 4 1 25%
Robbery 25 22 3 13.6%
Aggravated Assault 27 38 -11 -29.8%
Part I Property Crime – One Year Comparison
Category 2017 2016 Difference % Change
Total Property Crimes 1043 934 109 11.7%
Property Rate/10,000 183.13 162.40 20.73 12.7%
Burglary 381 365 16 4.4%
Larceny 592 497 95 19.1%
Grand Theft Auto 70 72 -2 -2.8%
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 181
10 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
Breaking down 2017 further shows that burglary and larceny accounted for 88% of all
Part I Crime in Diamond Bar in 2017. The following table breaks down each, comparing
the results to the previous year.
Part I Property Crime: Burglary & Larceny - One Year Comparison
Category 2017 2016 Difference % Change
Total Burglary 381 365 17 4.7%
Residential 251 232 19 8.2%
Commercial or Vehicle 130 133 -3 -2.3%
Total Larceny 592 497 103 21.1%
Vehicle 302 189 113 59.8%
Other 290 308 -18 -5.2%
Historical Comparison
To look beyond the small sample size in a year-to-year comparison, it is helpful to
compare current data with performance over a longer horizon. In 2017, Total Part I
Crimes and Total Part I Violent Crimes were 6.7% and 59.1% lower than the 28-year
historical averages, while Total Part I Property Crimes were up by approximately 0.2%.
However, the City’s historic averages outpace historical medians across all categories,
indicating that the historical average is influenced upward by the higher-crime totals in
the City’s early years immediately following incorporation. Thus, the historical median
may provide a more balanced and accurate comparison. In 2017, Total Part I Crime
and Total Part I Property Crime each outpaced the historical median by approximately
9%, while Total Part I Violent Crime was lower by approximately 47.5%.
Part I Crime – Historical Comparison
Category 2017 Hist. Avg. %
Difference
Hist.
Median
%
Difference
Total Pt. 1 Crime 1100 1179.79 -6.8% 1006.5 9.3%
Pt. 1 Rate/10,000 193.14 206.96 -6.7% 177.04 9.1%
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 182
11 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
Part I Violent Crime – Historical Comparison
Category 2017 Hist. Avg. % Difference Hist.
Median % Difference
Total Violent Crimes 57 139.3 -59.1% 108.5 -47.5%
Violent Rate/10,000 10.01 24.45 -59.1% 18.6 -46.2%
Homicide 0 1.2 -100% 1 -100%
Rape 5 5.3 -5.7% 5 0%
Robbery 25 45.4 -44.9% 40.5 -38.3%
Aggravated Assault 27 87.5 -69.1% 63.5 -57.5%
Part I Property Crime – Historical Comparison
Category 2017 Hist. Avg. % Difference Hist.
Median % Difference
Total Property Crimes 1043 1040.43 0.2% 937 11.3%
Property Rate/10,000 183.13 182.52 0.3% 166.37 10.1%
Burglary 381 309.9 22.9% 296.5 28.5%
Larceny 592 560.9 5.5% 521.5 13.5%
GTA 70 169.6 -58.7% 130.5 -46.4%
Five Year Comparison (2013-2017)
To provide a more recent sample that is less subject to the impacts of high-crime years
early in the City’s history, a five-year snapshot comparison is also included in this
analysis. From 2013 to 2017, the City experienced two of its five lowest annual crime
totals (2014 and 2015, with 2014 having the City’s lowest historic crime totals). The
property crime-driven increases following these record-setting years results in the
differences between 2017 Total Part I Crime performance and the 5-year averages. No
matter the historic perspective used, Part I Violent Crime remains at near record low
levels.
Part I Crime – 5-Year Comparison (2013-2017)
Category 2017 5-Year
Avg. % Difference 5-Year
Med. % Difference
Total Pt. 1 Crime 1100 937 17.4% 948 16%
Pt. 1 Rate/10,000 193.14 164.82 17.2% 167.43 15.4%
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 183
12 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
Part I Violent Crime – 5-Year Comparison (2013-2017)
Category 2017 5-Year
Avg. % Difference 5-Year
Med. % Difference
Total Violent Crimes 57 58.2 -2.1% 58 -1.7%
Violent Rate/10,000 10.01 10.24 -2.2% 10.16 -1.5%
Homicide 0 0.6 -100% 0 N/A
Rape 5 4.4 13.6% 4 25%
Robbery 25 22.4 11.6% 24 4.2%
Aggravated Assault 27 30.8 -12.3% 30 -10%
Part I Property Crime – 5-Year Comparison (2013-2017)
Category 2017 5-Year
Avg. % Difference 5-Year
Med. % Difference
Total Property
Crimes 1043 878.8 18.7% 887 17.6%
Property
Rate/10,000 183.13 154.58 18.5% 156.66 16.9%
Burglary 381 326.6 16.7% 344 10.8%
Larceny 592 479.4 23.5% 477 24.1%
GTA 70 72.8 -3.8% 70 0%
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 184
13 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
Historical Comparison
The following charts plot the historic Part 1 Crime trends dating back to 1990,
demonstrating that Diamond Bar crime rates have trended downward since
incorporation and early Cityhood. 2017 Total Part I Crime is down approximately 38%,
Part I Violent Crime is down approximately 79%, and Part I Property Crime is down
approximately 28% from the 1990-1994 averages. These results demonstrate the benefits
of local control and the LASD community policing model.
186317481852
1693171015731720
1334
1101
931 893 929 909 993 977 1006113111911116980 856 836
1007948
772 865 10001100
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
1990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017REPORTED P1 CRIMESYEAR
Diamond Bar Total Part 1 Crime Statistics *
1990-Present
Total Part 1 Crime
253 250
310
278 277
222
261 246
161 143 118 136
109 93 75
107 108 133
84 86
48 58 55 61 49 58 66 57
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
1990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017REPORTED VIOLENT CRIMESYEAR
Diamond Bar Total Part 1 Violent Crime Statistics *
1990-Present
Subtotal - Part 1 Violent Crimes
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 185
14 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
Local Agency Comparison – Crime Rate Per 10,000 Population
Directly comparing the performance of one city versus another can be difficult. Each
city experiences crime trends based on the features and characteristics unique to that
community, and these can vary greatly even among neighbors. For example, cities
1610149815421415143313511459
1088
940
788 775 793 800 900 902 899 102310581032
894 808 778
952 887
723 807 9341043
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
1990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017REPORTED P1 PROPERTY CRIMESYEAR
Diamond Bar Total Part 1 Property Crime Statistics *
1990-Present
Subtotal - Part 1 Property Crimes
0.00
50.00
100.00
150.00
200.00
250.00
300.00
350.00
400.00
1990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017Part 1 Crime Rate Per 10,000 PopulationYEAR
Diamond Bar Total Part 1 Crime Rate Per 10,000 Population *
1990-Present
Part 1 Crime Rate Per 10,000
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 186
15 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
with large commercial/retail centers or tourist populations may also experience a
greater volume of crime than those without a regional or national destination. If a direct
comparison is to be done, the most effective way to compare local agency
performance is not via raw totals but on a per capita basis. To do so, LASD uses a metric
that calculates the number of crimes reported per 10,000 in population. A comparison
of Diamond Bar to other East Division LASD contract cities is included below, sorted by
Crime Rate Per 10,000 Population, high to low. Note: Unincorporated Rowland Heights is
not a contract city but is included here as a reference due to its status as an immediate
neighbor to Diamond Bar.
East Patrol Division Local Agency Comparison –
Crime Rate Per 10,000 Population
City 2017 2016 Difference % Change
Industry 42987.00 55637.71 -12650.7 -22.7%
South El Monte 380.17 334.70 45.47 13.6%
Rosemead 274.73 259.59 15.14 5.8%
San Dimas 230.22 249.72 -19.5 -7.8%
Diamond Bar 193.14 175.76 17.38 9.9%
Rowland
Heights* 193.10 186.64 6.46 3.5%
Duarte 192.23 203.46 -11.23 -5.5%
La Habra
Heights 186.59 212.90 -26.31 -12.4%
Walnut 175.55 181.26 -5.71 -3.2%
Temple City 166.76 173.77 -7.01 -4.0%
La Canada
Flint. 146.24 156.64 -10.4 -6.6%
La Puente 144.39 172.84 -28.45 -16.5%
Bradbury 88.50 58.24 30.26 52.0%
Traffic Statistics
Diamond Bar’s location at one of the most congested freeway interchanges in the
nation presents serious and unique traffic enforcement challenges, including significant
levels of cut-through traffic. School zones are further impacted by the fact that a
significant portion of students commute to school from outside Diamond Bar.
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 187
16 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
Traffic enforcement, complimented by improved traffic management infrastructure
(signal synchronization, traffic management system, Neighborhood Traffic
Management System, etc.) is key to managing traffic demands safely. In addition to
targeted enforcement by the dedicated traffic enforcement car, patrol deputies on all
shifts provide enforcement. Supplemental enforcement is provided by the Special
Assignment Team on an as-needed basis.
In 2017, the City’s traffic enforcement car was assigned the task of reducing dangerous
driving conditions via education and enforcement. In addition to general patrols,
targeted enforcement was conducted at specific locations throughout the City. This
strategy resulted in a 97.1% increase in hazardous citations issued over 2016 totals. The
following chart includes traffic collision and citation information for the past two annual
reporting periods.
Traffic Statistics
Category 2017 2016 Difference % Change
Total Collisions 562 563 -1 -0.09%
Injury 113 104 9 8.7%
Fatal 3 1 2 200%
DUI Collisions 7 4 3 75%
Total Citations 1524 1,355 169 12.5%
Hazardous (Moving
Violations) 1382 701 681 97.1%
Non-Hazardous 142 654 -512 -78.3%
CRIME PREVENTION, OUTREACH, & ADVOCACY
EFFORTS
In addition to daily patrols, the City uses a diverse array of supplemental techniques to
prevent and reduce crime and develop partnerships in the community.
Special Operations
In addition to the funding of regular law enforcement personnel, the annual municipal
budget includes appropriations for as-needed special operations outside the scope of
daily patrols. Multiple special operations were conducted in 2017, with each focusing
on burglary suppression. Suppression operations may include expanded patrol units,
undercover personnel and vehicles, and targeted surveillance, with allocated
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 188
17 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
resources fully dedicated for the specific task. 2017 burglary suppression operations
resulted in a total of 23 arrests. On average, the burglary rate fell by an average of
40.3% during active suppression operation periods. The City Council-adopted budget
includes an increased special operations funding appropriation to continue and
expand targeted suppression efforts in 2018.
Taking Back Our Communities Coalition
In October 2017, the City Council voted unanimously to join the Taking Back Our
Communities Coalition, with Mayor Low and Council Member Lyons serving as
delegates.
Many regional community leaders believe there is a correlation between these criminal
justice reforms and a general increase in property crimes across the state. In an effort to
promote public education and community advocacy surrounding the unintended
adverse public safety impacts of recent changes to California's criminal law, the Taking
Back Our Communities Coalition was born with the following objectives:
• Raise public awareness of why crime is increasing in California.
• Advocate for legislative changes to improve law enforcement's ability to
respond to crime.
• Provide a consistent message surrounding the facts and impacts of AB 109,
Proposition 47, and Proposition 57.
A summary of AB 109 and Propositions 47 and 57 is included below for reference.
In 2011, the legislature passed and Governor Brown signed Assembly Bill 109 (AB 109),
known as the Public Safety Realignment bill, resulting in the transfer of responsibility of
newly-convicted low-level offenders from state prisons to local county jails. County
officials report that this transfer of responsibility has resulted in overcrowding of local jail
facilities, forcing the implementation of alternatives to incarceration.
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 189
18 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
In 2014, California voters passed Proposition 47, known as the Reduced Penalties for
Some Crimes Initiative. This measure required misdemeanor sentencing for many
formerly felony crimes, including larceny and burglary, provided the value of the stolen
goods was less than $950, and the personal use of illegal drugs.
In 2016, California voters passed Proposition 57, known as the Public Safety and
Rehabilitation Act. This measure expedites parole consideration for nonviolent offenders
and provides incentive-based sentence-reduction opportunities to inmates based on
good behavior and prison rehabilitative program participation and completion. This has
reduced incarceration time for many property crime violations.
Neighborhood Watch
The Diamond Bar Neighborhood Watch program is a partnership between the City’s
Public Safety Team and the community. Led by Community Relations Deputy Aaron
Scheller, Diamond Bar Neighborhood Watch groups actively participate in preventing
criminal activity before it starts and assist law enforcement in developing solutions to
local issues. Participants are called upon to reach out to their neighbors to organize
groups united to prevent crime. Established groups become the additional “eyes and
ears” necessary to keep their neighborhoods safe.
Neighborhood leaders, or “Block Captains”, serve as the primary liaison between the
neighborhood and law enforcement, distributing information and coordinating
meetings. For security reasons, the identities and locations of Block Captains are not
revealed to the public. Neighborhoods with active groups feature City-provided
Neighborhood Watch signage.
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 190
19 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
Neighborhood Watch groups generally meet in the evenings in a small group setting,
usually hosted by the neighborhood Block Captain. The meetings feature an interactive
presentation with the audio/visual capabilities of the City’s portable Neighborhood
Watch trailer. Topics of discussion include, but are not limited to:
• Crime Prevention and Burglary Suppression
• Home Safety and Security
• Emergency Preparedness
• Reporting Suspicious Activity
In 2017, the City’s “Let’s Talk Public Safety” series and
targeted marketing campaign resulted in a dramatic
increase in Neighborhood Watch participation, with groups more than doubling from
approximately 40 in 2016 to 84 in 2017.
Let’s Talk Public Safety Neighborhood Meeting Series
Throughout 2017, the City hosted neighborhood-specific public safety engagement
and education meetings known as “Let’s Talk Public Safety” (LTPS). LTPS is a local,
neighborhood-based meeting series in which Sheriff’s and Fire Department
representatives join City staff for an in-depth look at the City’s public safety programs,
including:
• City emergency preparedness, response, and Emergency Operations Center
(EOC) activation.
• Personal and family emergency preparedness, including development of a
family response plan, emergency kit, and home preparedness techniques.
• Home fire prevention, including development of evacuation plans and
defensible spaces.
• Crime and burglary prevention techniques and Neighborhood Watch program.
• Security tips, including visibility, video cameras, and lighting.
• Post-meeting availability for questions/concerns on all City matters.
The final LTPS meeting of the first series was held February 21, 2018, at which point all
Diamond Bar addresses received an invitation to participate. Approximately 800-1000
residents attended the seven meeting series.
Staff is now in the process of developing the structure for the next round of resident
engagement meetings, including a new format, presentation materials, and public
engagement and information campaign. The comprehensive new series will begin in
2018.
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 191
20 City of Diamond Bar Public Safety Annual Report for 2017
Success Through Awareness & Resistance (STAR) Program
The City continues to participate in the STAR program, which provides drug, gang, and
violence prevention education to fourth through sixth grade students in Diamond Bar
schools. Lessons cover proven techniques to avoid drug use and gang membership
and overcome peer pressure, as well as information on internet safety, bullying
prevention, and other important topics.
The STAR program, which began in 1985, features instruction by specially trained
Sheriff’s deputies. In 2017, these instructors provided more than 500 lessons to Diamond
Bar students.
Use of Technology
In partnership with LASD, the City Council continues to fund the purchase and support
the use of crime prevention tools. The City continues to use GDP trackers to conduct
sting operations designed to reduce package theft. The City has implemented the
security camera pilot program, using portable wildlife cameras to monitor key
neighborhood entry points. Camera locations are rotated based on trends, with the still
photos produced providing key evidence to ongoing major crimes burglary
investigations. The cameras are operated as a partnership between the City and LASD.
The City has also funded the deployment of two patrol vehicles equipped with
Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) technology, which allows for collection and
analysis of license plate data to alert field units of felony wants, stolen vehicles, or other
criminal activity associated with the vehicle in an effort apprehend outstanding criminal
suspects if they travel through Diamond Bar.
DB-Watch and DB-Prepared E-Newsletters
Monthly electronic newsletters are available on the City’s website and via e-mail to
subscribers. The DB-Watch e-newsletter focuses on crime prevention tips, while DB-
Prepared offers emergency preparedness techniques. These monthly newsletters are
also shared with Neighborhood Watch captains in regular communications.
Report for Reward
The Report for Reward program continues, encouraging residents to come forward with
information that leads to the arrest of burglary and larceny suspects. Under the
program, residents are eligible for a reward of up to $500 for information that leads to
the arrest of burglary suspects.
Since implementation in 2014, ten Diamond Bar residents have received a reward for
their assistance in identifying and reporting burglary suspects, including three for their
actions in 2017.
8.1.a
Packet Pg. 192