Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/14/1990 Minutes - Special MeetingMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AUGUST 14, 1990 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Werner called the meeting to order at 6:04 p.m. in the Council Chambers, W.V.U.S.D., 880 S. Lemon Avenue, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance ALLEGIANCE: by Mayor Werner. ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Papen, Kim, Horcher, Mayor Pro Tem Forbing and Mayor Werner. Also present were City Manager Robert L. Van Nort, Deputy City Attorney William P. Curley, III and Deputy City Clerk Tommye A. Nice. COUNCIL COMMENTS: M/Werner stated that C/Horcher, C/Papen, CM/Van Nort and he had attended the California Transportation Commission meeting this morning and received a written commitment from LACTC to recommend that the Commission initiate design work for the 57/60 interchange to enable development of a HOV lane through Diamond Bar. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Ms. Carol Braley, 106 N. Rock River Dr., reported that the fence on Prospectors Road belonging to ^� the Ramada Inn is broken again and in terrible condition and that the parkway is not being maintained. Mr. Warren Sizemore, 22743 White Fir Ln., inquired into the reasons why "yard sale" signs are being taken down on weekends. Mr. Mike Rodriguez, 245 Cottonwood Cove, suggested that a stop sign be installed on the corner of Cottonwood Cove and Palo Cedro due to excessive speeds in this area. Mrs. Sunny Martindale, 1333 Rapidview Dr., stated that the W.V.U.S.D. has indicated that the City must hire a crossing guard if one is deemed necessary for the corner of Colima and Lemon. CM/Van Nort stated that her concern would be directed to the Traffic and Transportation Committee for their review. CONSENT CALENDAR: CM/Van Nort announced that the only item on the Consent Calendar was for information only, specifically, the Calendar of Events. He further stated that the Traffic and Transportation Committee would be meeting at the W.V.U.S.D. Board Room at 6:00 p.m. on August 23, 1990. Schedule Future A. City Council Regular Meeting - August Meetings 21, 1990 - 6:00 p.m., W.V.U.S.D., 880 S. Lemon Ave. AUGUST 14, 1990 PAGE 2 B. Area "D" Civil Defense - August 22, 1990 - 7:30 p.m., Walnut Sheriff's Station Assembly Room. C. Traffic and Transportation Committee - August 23, 1990 - 6:00 p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room D. Planning Commission - August 27, 1990 - 6:30 p.m., W.V.U.S.D. Board Room E. Congressman David Dreier Office Hours - September 12, 1990 - 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. - City Hall F. Joint General Planning Advisory Committee/All Committees and Commissions General Plan Meeting - September 22, 1990, location: Ramada Inn, time to be announced. G. Strategic Planning Workshop - Scheduled for September 27, 1990 - 3:00 p.m. - Ramada Inn. HEARING: At 6:17 p.m., M/Werner excused C/Horcher and MPT/Forbing from participation in discussions regarding this matter due to conflicts of interest. Mr. Bill George, L.A. County Sanitation Districts, stated that AB 939 requires Cities to have plans drawn up that prove that they will be able to divert 25% of their solid waste by 1995 and 50% by the year 2000. He further stated that Cities must do a "waste characterization" study showing what is in the solid waste. Cities must determine what they have and how much is being thrown away; how much and what is being recycled and add those amounts together to determine the 25% diversion rate. 5 key things required by the Legislation include: source reduction, recycling, composting, how to handle special waste (sewage sludge, asbestos shingles, etc.) and household hazardous waste. After these determinations have been made, there are 3 other things needed to be determined: how to pay (funding mechanisms), where the waste will go for the next 15 years and how to get the public involved. He further stated that he had been in Sacramento and that the Bill is still being modified. He indicated that a plan must be approved by the Council with environmental documentation by 1991 and that a draft plan should be prepared by March 1, 1991 to meet requirements by July 1, 1991. If the plan is not prepared, two penalties can be levied on the City including an administrative fine of $10,000. If plans AUGUST 14, 1990 PAGE 3 have not been approved by the Council toward implementation, the City cannot move the waste outside City limits. M/Werner asked what benefit would be derived by using one firm as opposed to several. Mr. George replied that it is not required by AB939, but using one hauler is beneficial in order to monitor the recycling program. M/Werner then asked if there was any reason why the City could not impose on the haulers the responsibility of ensuring that the City is in compliance with AB939. Mr. George explained that the way in which the City will be implementing the program must be in place by July 1, 1991. The plan must be updated between 12 and 18 months after July 1. The City's plan must be submitted to the L.A. County Public Works Department as part of the County's plan for submittal to the State by a certain date. M/Werner opened the Hearing for public comment. Mr. Alan Milner, Box 11217, Santa Rosa, stated that he was a consultant to Western Waste and would be willing to field questions regarding AB 939 and the firm he is representing. Mr. Ray Anderson, Webster's Disposal, 13940 E. Live Oak, Baldwin Park, brought in a survey conducted by his firm. He pointed out that they had received 1,855 cards out of 9,000 question- naires sent and that it concluded that each resident wanted to have a choice in which waste hauler they used, that they did not want a franchise fee, that they would be willing to participate in a recycling program, that they would be willing to separate green waste, and that they were satisfied with the waste hauler they are currently using. He suggested that the Council look at the RFP process and make it more fair. C/Papen asked if Webster's Disposal would be willing, if the City did not go with an exclusive franchise, to charge the community the same amount that was indicated in their proposal. Mr. Anderson stated that they would be willing to look I into that prospect. AUGUST 14, 1990 PAGE 4 Mr. Robert Philibosian, 725 S. Figueroa St., Los Angeles, Counsel for Western Waste Ind., spoke in favor of an exclusive franchise due to the need to keep the City in compliance with AB 939. Mrs. O.G. Wycoff, 414 N. Del Sol Ln., stated that she has used Webster's Disposal for many years and is very happy with the service they provide. She further stated that she would be willing to pay more for their service and would like to see them stay in Diamond Bar. Mrs. Evelyn and Mr. Philip Kuida, 22635 Dry Creek Rd., spoke in favor of freedom of choice. Ms. Mae Benson, 24023 Willow Creek Rd., stated that she has used Webster's Disposal for many years and is happy with their service. She further stated that she would like to see the residents of the community able to vote on the hauler of their choice, but would be willing to have one hauler in the community. j^ Mrs. Sunny Martindale, 1333 Rapidview Dr., stated that she likes the hauler she has, and does not like to see more than one truck in her neighborhood. She expressed concern over the conflict of interest that 4 out of 5 Councilmembers may have. She further stated that due to the anti-trust suits that have been brought against both Western Waste and Athens Disposal, they should be excluded from bidding on the franchise. The remaining haulers should bid on specifics laid out by the Council and an impartial committee, knowledgeable on these matters, should be selected to make a determination. Mr. Frank Dursa, 2533 Harmony Hill Dr., stated that at one of the Council's last meetings, they had been presented with a petition with 360 signatures opposing an exclusive franchise fee and desiring the freedom to pick the hauler of their choice. He suggested that Council start looking at what the residents of Diamond Bar want. —, AUGUST 14, 1990 PAGE 5 Mr. Al Rumpilla, 23958 Golden Springs, commented on both AB 939 and the report that had been prepared by staff. He felt that there is no real hurry in implementing an exclusive franchise at this time. He stated that the State may fine a City, but before they do, a Public Hearing would be held. He further stated that at this time, the Board overseeing AB 939 is still being put together and that in September there is going to be a complete revision of the Bill. I Mr. David Cope, 316 S. Del Sol Ln., spoke in favor of Webster's Disposal. He stated that he would like to see the Council keep a free market in trash hauling, which he believes will keep companies in tune to the needs of the City. Mr. Red Calkins, 240 Eagle Nest Dr., stated that 3,000 homes in the City are recycling and that Webster's Disposal is picking them up which will be included in the total amount that the State will look at. He further stated that he would like the freedom to decide who he uses. Mr. Joe McManus, 23561 Coyote Springs Dr., stated that all the companies that have submitted RFP's have been sued. He further stated that he did not want a lot of trucks running around the City picking up waste. He read a letter he had written to C/Kim which was published by the Highlander and the Windmill. Mr. Gene Jarvis, 1299 Diamond Bar Blvd., spoke on the article that Mr. McManus had written. Mr. Joe Kowalski, 1475 Deerfoot, suggested that the Council study the process a little more. He is opposed to an exclusive franchise. Mr. Saul Altadonna, 770 S. Lincoln, is opposed to a solid waste franchise. Ms. Lorna Houck, 212 Alvado Rd., felt that the City should strive to be an example for other cities, as in the recycling program and pointed out that Webster's Disposal has been handling the recycling program in North Diamond Bar. �- Ms. Joann Monthener, 1038 Summitridge Rd., asked Mr. George questions regarding AB 939. Mr. Michael Lowe, 1124 "D" Cleghorn, spoke in favor of franchising, asked Council to take a look at the long term effects, and do what is best for the community. AUGUST 14, 1990 PAGE 6 Ms. Diane Grosse, 2356 Canyon Park, an employee of Webster's Disposal, suggested that the Council re-evaluate the process and get a vote of the people. Mr. Bob Martindale, 1333 Rapidview Dr., suggested that Council seek help from an expert on the solid waste issue. Mr. Robert Philibosian, spoke regarding the Anti -Trust case against Western Waste. Ms. Helen Helke, 244 Palo Cedro, agreed with the concept of freedom of choice and that she has been recycling for years. RECESS: M/Werner recessed the meeting at 8:05 p.m. RECONVENE: M/Werner reconvened the meeting at 8:20 p.m. Mr. Bill George, 378 N. Prospectors Rd., stated that he was in favor of an exclusive franchise and felt that no matter who the City chooses, it will receive good service. Mr. Alan Milner, consultant for Western �^ Waste, stated that he has been working with - 20 cities on the issue of AB 939 and the development of their integrated waste management plan. He indicated that AB 939 is serious business and that plans must be in place by July 1, 1991. In order for the plans to be in place, they must be given to the County for adoption by that date. He urged the Council to look at the Legislation regarding the City's obligations. M/Werner asked Mr. Milner what the cost would be for hiring a consultant. Mr. Milner stated that the rule of thumb is $20,000 to $40,000 for a waste composition study and $40,000 to $60,000 to put together the plan. With no further testimony being offered, M/Werner closed the Hearing. M/Werner moved to table the proposal process I^ and allow businesses for a time specific (1992) to continue doing business in the City pursuant to a regulatory license ordinance. AUGUST 14, 1990 PAGE 7 J Motion died for lack of a second. C/Kim moved, M/Werner seconded to postpone the solid waste issue for 90 days. M/Werner moved to amend C/Kim's motion to direct staff to solicit proposals from a consultant (Resource Reduction Recycling Element Consultant) for the purpose of initiating the process of preparing the plan. C/Kim seconded the amendment. CM/Van Nort stated that at the next Council meeting a proposal to join the East San Gabriel Valley Cities Consortium would be before them which has been organized to help cities prepare their plans. C/Papen suggested that the Council move forward, meet in two weeks, pick one firm of the two selected, have staff meet with them and see if an exclusive franchise could be negotiated. If the results are not satisfactory with Council, then reject the process and pick another firm to meet with. With a vote of 2 to 1 (C/Papen voting No), the motion carried. C/Papen asked staff to send letters to the waste haulers rescinding the 5 year "window of oppor- tunity" for 90 days. ANNOUNCEMENTS: C/Papen stated that she appreciated everyone's patience and respect during the meeting. C/Kim stated that this was another part of the democratic process and was pleased to be involved. M/Werner thanked the audience for their orderly presentations. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Werner adjourned the meeting at 9:00 p.m. i�� TCMMYE A._NIC Deputy Cites Clerk ATTEST: ayor