Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021.03.16 - Minutes - Regular MeetingCITY OF DIAMOND BAR MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING MARCH 16, 2021 STUDY SESSION: 5:30 p.m. ► Refunding Options for the Diamond Bar Center Fixed Rate Bonds. Public Comments: None Study Session adjourned to the Regular City Council Meeting at 6:11 p.m. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Lyons called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Mayor Lyons announced that consistent with COVID-19 regulations, all Council Members and staff participated via teleconference and there was no physical location for public attendance. The Public was invited to join the meeting online or by phone at the numbers printed on the agenda. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: M/Lyons led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL: Council Members Andrew Chou, Stan Liu, Steve Tye, Mayor Pro Tem Ruth Low, Mayor Nancy Lyons Staff participating telephonically: Dan Fox, City Manager; Dave DeBerry, City Attorney; Ryan McLean, Assistant City Manager; Anthony Santos, Assistant to the City Manager; Amy Haug, Human Resources and Risk Manager; Ryan Wright, Parks and Recreation Director; David Liu, Public Works Director; Hal Ghafari, Public Works Manager/Assistant City Engineer; Anthony Jordan, Parks and Maintenance Superintendent; Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; Dianna Honeywell, Director of Finance; Marsha Roa, Public Information Manager; Cecilia Arellano, Public Information Coordinator; Kristina Santana, City Clerk Also Present: Lieutenant Steven Tousey, LA County Sheriff's Deputy; Leticia Pacillas, Los Angeles County Fire Department Community Services Liaison; Jim Robinson, Los Angeles County Fire Department Assistant Fire Chief APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As submitted. 1. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. CM/Fox announced that FD/Honeywell, who has been with the City for almost 10 years, would be leaving Diamond Bar end of day Friday, April 2"d to become the new Finance Director for the City of Yorba Linda. MARCH 1612021 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Tye moved, MPT/Low seconded, to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chou, Liu, Tye, MPT/Low, M/Lyons NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 3.1 APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FOR THE MARCH 2, 2021 REGULAR MEETING 3.2 RATIFIED CHECK REGISTER DATED FEBRUARY 25, 2021 THROUGH MARCH 10, 2021 TOTALING $1,051,629.610 3.3 APPROVED TREASURER'S STATEMENT FOR THE MONTH OF OCTOBER 2020. 3.4 APPROVED THE 2020 HOUSING ELEMENT ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT FOR FILING WITH THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (HCD) AND THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH (OPR). 3.5 PROCLAIMED MARCH AS AMERICAN RED CROSS MONTH. 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None. 5. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: 5.1 INTENT TO DISSOLVE LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41. C/Liu recused himself from consideration of Item 5.1 because he lives in District 41, and did not participate in the discussion. PWM/Ghafari presented the staff report. M/Lyons opened Item 5.1 for public comment. CC/Santana read the following emails into the record: John Catanzaro expressed his dismay about how this it will negatively affect residents and suggested the City seek grant funds to continue servicing the area and help defray costs during the pandemic. Linda and Dwight Baumann complained about the lack of information and reduced maintenance of the District. Joseph Lo Bue opposed the dissolution of District No's 39 and 41 and MARCH 16, 2021 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL favored an increase in the assessment fees. Joyce Mar said that while she voted in favor to increase assessments to bring revenues in line with ongoing maintenance costs, the measure failed and she would like for staff to pursue an alternative to dissolving District No. 41 while reducing costs such as, reducing frequency of landscape services to twice a month or less often and reducing the duration and frequency of irrigation to once a week. James Bagwell expressed his displeasure about the rush to dissolve District No. 41 instead of coming to consensus on an amicable and well thought out plan. Mindy Farabee was concerned about the City's intent to dissolve District No. 41 with very little warning, information and input from the residents, and requested an independent report on the health and quality of the current landscape provided. Buck Bullock was opposed to dissolving the district but supported an increase in assessment fees and was concerned about why the City Council waited so long to adjust the assessment fees to keep up with costs for maintaining District No's 39 and 41. Alex Stewart felt that the City did not adequately address costs over the years and asking for an increase of over 100 percent at one time was ill advised, leaving HOA's with a massive undertaking to take over the duties required to properly manage the landscaping requirements. He proposed the Council consider a moratorium while studying the situation for possible solutions as a prelude to reintroduction of Proposition 218. Don Pearce asked for clarification of the budget item for LLAD No. Al for fiscal year 2019-2020. Tony Lee asked if dissolving the districts meant that developers would have access to develop the open space and whether if prior to budget deficits, there were surpluses. He proposed that property owners and the City work together to maintain and improve these areas. Alan Karlin felt the Council should listen to the residents and work with them to resolve this issue. MPT/Low asked staff to recap the timeline for consideration of deficits for these districts. PWD/Liu explained that on an annual basis, the Council has the details of each of the three landscape assessment districts (No's 38) 39 and 41). The discussion about General Fund subsidies began in 2005 and since that time, Council has looked at the expenditures/costs of operating and maintaining these districts while attempting to work within the incoming revenues. When Diamond Bar became a City in 1989 and before Prop 218, the City had the ability to annually adjust the MARCH 1612021 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL assessments, collect the revenues and make sure they were properly allocated and spent within the respective districts. The passage of Prop 218 tied the City's hands so that unless the City was able to get the voters to support increases, there were no other options but to continue to seek other financial resources. As a result, the City has been subsidizing each district accordingly, based on the annual landscaping efforts. MPT/Low asked if there had been an accumulation of surplus that was used to fund maintenance up to this point and PWD/Liu explained that, the City is obligated to make sure that revenues collected are properly allocated and spent within each district. MPT/Low asked for confirmation that during the past 10 years, any reserves collected during the early years would have been long gone because otherwise, General Fund monies would not have been used. PWD/Liu said that MPT/Low's statement was correct. MPT/Low asked how much the City has contributed from the General Fund during the past five years in order to maintain District No. 41. PWD/Liu responded that in fiscal year 2019/2020 the amount was $26510000 Over the years the amount has varied depending on the adopted maintenance effort and adjusted services including elimination of certain types of maintenance work, none of which are safety related. PWD/Liu further stated that in 2019 when Council initiated the process for the Prop 218 election, staff began its outreach to property owners and conducted noticed community meetings to answer questions and provide information to the property owners as well as, on the City 's website in order to meet the August 15th deadline to make adjustments to the annual assessments in addition to having the districts consolidated for the tax roll. With the passage of Prop 218 it was made clear that if a public agency wanted to consider any increases in assessments, it would require a simple majority of approval by the property owners. In District No. 41, Prop 218 was defeated by a 75 percent "no" votes. MPT/Low asked for comment on a speakers question about whether a developer could develop open spaces that are currently mapped in LLAD No. 41. CM/Fox responded that it would not be possible because the property is owned by the homeowners association as part of the development that currently exists and they exist as non -developable lots. To be clear, none of the property being discussed is publicly or City owned, it is all privately owned property and what would normally be the responsibility of a homeowners association or individual homeowner for normal maintenance. Mr. Pearce also referred to a 2019 report and budget which in fact, was the Prop 218 budget that was proposed to increase the assessments for that district which was overwhelmingly rejected by the voters. MARCH 16, 2021 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL MPT/Low said that because the maintenance area belongs to the HOA and property owners, the City has no jurisdiction to get the homeowners to do anything. CM/Fox stated that the property lines are drawn and the individual property owners/HOA would be held accountable for maintaining their property in conformance with the City 's Property Maintenance Standards. C/Chou asked for response to public comments regarding concerns about service levels and in what condition the City would be returning the property to the homeowners. PMS/Jordan responded that with respect to current conditions, the City's priority was and continues to be, that anything safety related such as fire breaks and fire brushing, including hand work behind individual properties to clear brush and tractor work in larger open space areas as well as, goat work to perform fuel reduction continue to be maintained on an annual basis. Currently, there are areas that are better served. Staff has attempted to maintain all areas as consistently as possible, but unfortunately, funding levels experienced over the years have not been sufficient for the City to maintain, replenish, and renew several of the landscaping areas. As a result, there are slopes that are bare and others that have gone from maintained slopes to firebreak areas where water has been turned off. While those areas are not ignored, staff modifies the types of maintenance performed by converting them from a maintained slope to a firebreak, as previously mentioned. Staff does the best with what is available and prioritizes slopes with more visibility such as those along Pathfinder Road and Peaceful Hills. C/Chou asked if moving forward, the City expects the HOA and/or homeowners to install sprinkler systems in the hillsides. PMS/Jordan responded that the current irrigation systems would remain in place and intact so that the HOA/property owners would not incur the expense of installing new irrigation systems. In some areas, system maintenance was halted so there may be some expense to rehab and repair some of the systems. As a whole, the majority of the irrigation systems will remain intact and be serviceable. If the homeowners decide to collectively maintain some of the slopes they commonly share, there are systems in place that would be adequate to fulfill all of the irrigation needs. C/Chou asked if this were out to a vote once again, would it mean that the homeowners would be responsible for everything or could the City build in a tiered system to help the homeowners absorb the increase over a number of years. CM/Fox responded that there may be an opportunity to phase certain things in or out, but the problem is that every year the City would be subject to a Prop 218 vote to establish new assessments which becomes very challenging to predict and implement. CA/DeBerry responded to C/Chou that if the assessment is not being increased it is a different type of majority protest, which is that a majority MARCH 16, 2021 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL of property owners in the district would have to send in ballots disapproving of the assessment and that has never happened to the City when it is maintaining the assessment at its present level. The other majority protest procedure applies when cities are attempting to increase the assessment and in that case, the City receives ballots. If the majority of the ballots received are "no" the assessment increase cannot be imposed. In the past, as a backstop to assessments not being approved, the City has retained the current assessments. CA/DeBerry said he is not sure there is a procedure for weaning the property owners off of the districts which would mean the City would continue to subsidize the maintenance of the private property with General Fund monies. There have been prior efforts to gauge the community's interest in increasing the assessment, which never went to the extent of putting it to a vote as was done in 2019 because in prior years there did not seem to be an appetite within the district for increasing the assessments and the City's response until 2019 was to decrease the maintenance rather than attempt to increase assessments. C/Chou said he was asking if there was a way to gradually increase the landscaping assessment over the next three to five years and according to CA/DeBerry it would require an approval vote every year. CA/DeBerry responded that C/Chou was absolutely correct. It is possible that through one vote there could be a tiered approach over a period of years. C/Chou felt that flexibility in structuring the increase might be helpful and more acceptable to the property owners/HOA. C/Tye said that a speaker asked what Diamond Bar would give up if it dissolves LLAD No's 41 and 39 and his response is that the City would give up its fiscal burden of an LLAD that was not keeping up with costs related to it. Another speaker said that the City waited 30 years to implement the increase. C/Tye responded that as a policy decision of other Councils that decision was driven by what PWD/Liu and CA/DeBerry indicated, that at some point the assessment was lowered and at other points it was raised incrementally until it reached the cap. At this point in time, the City cannot go beyond that cap without an affirmative vote of Prop 218. Prop 218 does not necessarily handicap the City as much as provide an opportunity to reach out to the public to let them know the situation and ask how they want it handled. And when that vote went out everyone was told what they were paying and what it would be if they voted "yes" and this is what it will be if they vote "no" and the vote was overwhelmingly "no". Having said that, it sounds to him like residents were unsure or confused about the information that was shared and what a "yes" vote meant on a Prop 218 vote. He said he found it interesting that everyone who spoke on this matter tonight or submitted an email indicated that they voted affirmatively for the increase. C/Tye asked for confirmation that a subsidy of $265,000 was just for LLAD MARCH 16, 2021 PAGE 7 CITY COUNCIL No. 41. PWD/Liu respondedthat he previously misspoke. Specifically, for the General Fund subsidy in the current Fiscal Year the subsidy is about $143,000 for LLAD No. 41 only and the total of $265,000 includes both districts. C/Tye responded to a speaker that this is not an accounting mess and nothing has been hidden. This is about making a decision year by year to decide whether the City shall continue to subsidize the LLADs and to be clear, no surplus has ever been put to other uses. C/Tye said he heard a couple of ideas that make sense to him. Someone said there should be a one-year moratorium on any action so the consequences could be thoroughly vetted. Another speaker said he would like to see everyone work together to work something out and C/Tye said he believes that was the best path forward because folks now better understand the situation. There are about 1800 residents in a community of 60,000 who are being subsidized to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, a situation that needs to be rectified. This Council (prior to C/Liu's service) made a decision with the Prop 218 vote to go lump sum because if the increases were tiered over a period of time, the City would continue to subsidize both districts well into the future. It is now 2021 and this Council finds itself in a position of having to find a solution for having to subsidize these LLAD's over a period of many years, which is a major subsidy in today's budget and has been such over the past several years. M/Lyons said she greatly appreciates the discussion among her colleagues and issues brought to the Council by folks who spoke on this item. M/Lyons suggested that the Council move forward with the resolution of intent to dissolve the districts and at the same time, allow the HOA's the option of putting together a plan for why their homeowners should vote for this increase, pass the resolution and have the election to see if they wanted to vote for the increase to allow the City to continue its maintenance program for the districts. CA/DeBerry said there could be a dual process moving forward wherein the Council would adopt the Resolution of Intent to Dissolve and move forward with the dissolution making it effective only if the property owners of LLAD No's 41 and 39 again voted against an increase in assessments. CA/DeBerry said this situation has occurred in a couple of jurisdictions he represented. In both cases, the voters turned down the increase in assessments and the city had to reduce the maintenance the next year to stay within budget and informed the property owners they would have to dissolve the LLAD's because they could not maintain them. In this case the HOA's gathered together for meetings with the property owners and assured the City Council they could get the increases. A Prop 218 hearing was held on the increased assessments and the property owners MARCH 16, 2021 PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL approved it. CM/Fox outlined the process for moving forward with the dual plan timeline and related costs. C/Tye felt it was time for everyone to work together which means the City might be subsidizing the LLAD's for another year to get it done right. It is important that the Council respect the large number of homeowners who have spoken on this issue this evening and it behooves Council to move forward and get this done as comfortably as possible for all parties. M/Lyons felt the Resolution should be adopted and the process should move forward to keep the momentum going to eliminate the subsidy from the budget. In the meantime, if the residents are willing to approve the increases and continue having the City perform landscape maintenance they can make that decision and vote "yes" on Prop 218 and continue paying the assessments with their property taxes. CM/Fox said he agreed with M/Lyons that the process forward as proposed to not lose the opportunity to get the new assessments on next year's tax rolls. MPT/Low moved, C/Chou seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 2021-09 declaring the City 's Intention to Dissolve Landscape Assessment District No. 41, direct staff to advertise the Public Hearing before the City Council at its May 4, 2021 regular meeting and direct staff to work with the HOAs to prepare a new Prop 218 ballot measure by July 2021. AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chou, Tye, MPT/Low, M/Lyons NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Liu Councilmember Liu returned to the meeting. 5.2 INTENT TO DISSOLVE LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 39. C/Chou and MPT/Low recused themselves from consideration of Item 5.2 because they live in District 39, and did not participate in the discussion. PWM/Ghafari presented the staff report. M/Lyons asked for Public Comment on Item 5.2. Robin Smith said that landscape costs are soaring due to conventional landscape practices and shorter -lived plantings of invasive exotic species requiring irrigation rather than native conservational landscape practices. She suggested the City consider cost-effective natural habitat and MARCH 16, 2021 PAGE 9 CITY COUNCIL California native plants for open space areas and that Council establish a subcommittee of Council members and residents to seek education about the opportunity to move forward with restoring open spaces, brush areas and slope areas with improved native slope materials. M/Lyons closed Public Comments. C/Tye believed the Council should move forward with approval of the Resolution as it did for District No. 41 to make it as accommodating as possible to work something out. CM/Fox responded to M/Lyons that there are no Homeowner Associations within District No. 39 and what staff has consistently heard is whether the City will continue to maintain the private mini -parks, trails and other City - owned properties and the answer to that question is "yes". C/Liu asked for the voter turnout numbers for District No. 39 on Prop 218 and PWD/Liu responded that within District No. 39 there are approximately 1,250 parcels and a total of 481 ballots were validated in the Prop 218 vote. Of the 481 ballots cast, the count was 103 "yes" and 378 "no". C/Liu asked if staff had collaborated with homeowners to bring the maintenance costs down and what would the roles be of the City and homeowners before and after the solution. CM/Fox responded that as with the other LLAD's, staff has worked to reduce the amount of subsidies through lower levels of service before the Proposition 218 increase vote, which was overwhelmingly rejected which was substantially less than the District No. 41 subsidy. CM/Fox reiterated that upon dissolving the LLAD's, all properties will be returned to the homeowners as private property and the City will continue to maintain the public property which includes the five mini -parks, trails and the large open space area adjacent to the Diamond Bar Center. M/Lyons said she did not believe it was necessary to take a dual track approach for District No. 39 and C/Tye said he agreed. C/Tye moved, C/Liu seconded, to Adopt Resolution No. 2021 -1 0 declaring the City's Intention to Dissolve Landscape Assessment District No. 39 and direct staff to advertise the Public Hearing before the City Council at its May 4, 2021 Regular Meeting. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Liu, Tye, M/Lyons NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chou, MPT/Low C/Chou and MPT/Low returned to the meeting. MARCH 16, 2021 PAGE 10 CITY COUNCIL 5.3 PUBLIC SAFETY ANNUAL REPORT. ACM/McLean presented the staff report which included information related to the City's Animal Control program, the Diamond Bar Fire Department Team, the Diamond Bar Law Enforcement Team, Statistics and Trends for each department and an overview of ongoing public engagement efforts which is available on the City's website. C/Chou said he was very proud of the work done and the way in which the City Council, staff and public came together to provide these services and keep the crime statistics low. C/Liu said he appreciated staff's work on Public Safety and community programs and the dedication of the 2400 member Volunteer Patrol. He asked what more could be done to assist the Volunteer Patrol and asked for an explanation of the increase in non -stranger rape case. ACM/McLean responded that each year the City Council approves funding to assist the Volunteer Patrol with equipment and promotion of the program. With respect to rape cases in Diamond Bar, the alleged perpetrator of the incident was someone that was known to and associated with the victim. C/Tye said that in his opinion, the Inland Valley Humane Society does a terrific job, the fire department provides great support and noted the reduction in numbers due to COVID. Overall, Diamond Bar is a great place to live and this Council stays on top of the Sheriff's Department to make sure they are providing the service residents expect and that they are focusing on specific areas as called out. Thanks to ACM/McLean for a great report. MPT/Low thanked ACM/McLean for a great report and said she was very proud of the City's law enforcement team, animal control, fire department and the LASD team who assist the City Council with its goal to provide for the safety of the community, borne out by the empirical numbers. She asked if the SR57/60 collision numbers included collisions that occur on the freeway or collisions that occur on the City's streets and ACM/McLean responded that they are collisions that occur on City streets and information about freeway collisions come from the California State Patrol. MPT/Low asked if this report was posted on the City's website and ACM/McLean responded that it will be posted on the website immediately after the Council receives and files the report. MPT/Low asked if news blast information is available to the public and ACM/McLean responded that the information is available through the Sheriff's Department. The City's process for distribution is to repost the information posted by the Sheriff's Department, on the City's website and social media, as well as on the monthly updates on open Dashboard In addition, members of the public can always call City Hall for information. MARCH 16, 2021 PAGE 11 CITY COUNCIL M/Lyons said it was a terrific report and such a pleasure to live in a safe City. In addition to missing the Volunteer Patrol dinner this year, there was no Public Safety dinner and she hopes by this fall the Volunteer Patrol can be recognized for their accomplishments. The Council moved to receive and file the Public Safety Annual Report by consensus 6. COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS AND MEETING ATTENDANCE REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS: C/Chou spoke about the LLAD's, the COVID shutdown announced a year ago, and students returning to school. He thanked staff for their work during a very difficult year and said he was anxious for a return to business as usual. C/Liu announced the opening of the elementary schools on April 19tn 7tn and 8t" grade on April 26t" and the yet unscheduled opening of the high schools with the option for students to continue distance learning at home. He thanked staff for the detailed presentations, his colleagues for the discussions and the community for continuing to provide a safe environment during COVID. He thanked the public and law enforcement for the discussion regarding catalytic converter thefts which impacted many residents and thanked M/Lyons for attending and listening to residents' concerns regarding the dissolution of the landscape districts. He thanked FD/Honeywell for her 10 years of amazing service to the City and wished her the best, and thanked PRD/Wright and his staff for creating the 32nd Diamond Bar Birthday Windmill Hunt for the month of April. Please enjoy and celebrate Easter safely. C/Tye said it was great hearing from Dr. Bob Taylor, Superintendent, Walnut Valley Unified School District and two of his principals during the recent Rotary meeting about the process for reopening of schools. He congratulated FD/Honeywell, thanked her for her imprint on Diamond Bar finances and for her imprint on the Diamond Bar Finance Department which has been transformed since she joined the Diamond Bar family, and wished her Godspeed in future ventures as she heads to Yorba Linda. MPT/Low echoed C/Tye's comments regarding FD/Honeywell who has helped Diamond Bar with initiation of so many good policies and procedures as well as, a total upgrade of the finance system, balanced budgets and budget presentations. She thanked ACM/McLean for his report and the Volunteer Patrol for the great work on behalf of the community and residents who participated in tonight's meeting. Happy Birthday and best wishes for a wonderful year to M/Lyons. M/Lyons announced that yesterday she nominated C/Liu to the Contract Cities Los Angeles County Liability Trust Fund Committee who, with his business background, she felt would make a great addition to the group and hopes he gets the votes to serve. Before the Council meets again, some will be celebrating MARCH 16, 2021 PAGE 12 CITY COUNCIL Passover and some will be celebrating Easter, all of whom she wished a joyous celebration and happy holiday. FD/Honeywell is a hard worker who has done a great job with the City's investment portfolio and her audits are superb, but most importantly, she is a very patient person who answers all City Council questions openly and thoroughly. On a personal note, M/Lyons said she appreciates the great help she has received from FD/Honeywell and that Yorba Linda is very lucky to have her join their staff. Congratulations to FD/Honeywell. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Lyons adjourned the Regular City Council Meeting at 8:59 p.m. in honor of FD/Honeywell. Respectfully submitted: Kristina Santana, City Clerk The foregoing minutes ,are hereby approved this 16th day of March, 2021. Nancy Loons Mayor v