Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/15/1994 Minutes - Regular MeetingMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MARCH 15, 1994 1. CALL TO ORDER: M/Werner called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in the AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The audience was led in the Pledge of Allegiance by Mayor Werner. ROLL CALL: Mayor Werner, Mayor Pro Tem Harmony, Council Members Ansari, Miller and Papen. Also present were Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; Frank Usher, Assistant City Manager; Michael Montgomery, Interim City Attorney; James DeStefano, Community Development Director; George Wentz, Interim City Engineer; Bob Rose, Community Services Director and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk. 2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, ETC. 2.3 PROCLAIMED APRIL 3 - 10, 1994 AS "FIFTY YEARS AGO: DARKNESS BEFORE DAWN" at Holocaust Memorial Museum. M/Werner presented the Proclamation. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Red Calkins, 240 Eagle Nest Dr., noted that the money spent for verifying and counting recall petition signatures could have been better spent on another project in the City. He stated that City On-line should not be used to communicate derogatory statements. Michael Lowe expressed concern that Diamond Bar Associates (DBA), in the process of suing the City, implied in a letter to M/Werner, MPT/Harmony and C/Ansari that they felt their project should be reconsidered because of the money they contributed to their election. He suggested that the subject Council Members set the record straight for the public. C/Ansari read the letter, which is of public record, sent to the Council Members from DBA, and she read her response to them as well. She explained she took the letter to the City Manager and the City Attorney for their advice and immediately drafted a response. She pointed out that she did not receive any money from any developer during her campaign. In response to an insinuation made in the DBA correspondence, C/Miller stated, as supported by CM/Belanger, that staff was never directed to prepare a negative staff report in regard to the DBA project, nor had any Council Member given direction to staff in relationship to the DBA lawsuit. He also stated that he had always maintained that he would not allow his personal decision whether to sue the developer or not affect the settlement of the City's lawsuit. MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 2 MPT/Harmony stated that it had been indicated at an Executive Session that the driving force of the lawsuit was whether C/Miller would agree to back off from any future suits with this developer. RECESS: M/Werner recessed the meeting at 7:25 p.m. RECONVENE: M/Werner reconvened the meeting at 7:35 p.m. 3. PUBLIC COMNENTS CONTINUED: C/Miller clarified that he always maintained that he would never do anything to hamper the resolution of litigation with the City and would do everything possible to resolve it; however, he would not give up his rights as an individual in the event that he chose to sue the developers for slander. M/Werner and C/Ansari concurred that C/Miller made that statement and that he has not done anything to hamper the settlement or harm the City in the settlement process of this litigation. C/Miller pointed out that he did not receive a copy of the letter from the developer, but did from C/Ansari. He expressed concern that MPT/Harmony had made many statements that cannot be substantiated. MPT/Harmony stated that, to his understanding, the promise from C/Miller and C/Papen not to sue the developer had been an obstacle regarding negotiations in the settlement of the DBA lawsuit. He expressed concern regarding the City's cost in attorney fees for individual Council Members' lawsuits. C/Ansari reiterated that the letter from the developer was made public record immediately upon receipt. C/Papen pointed out that the Council had not approved the DBA project because safety factors could not be mitigated appropriately; however, the DBA has continued to request the Council to reconsider their decision. She stated that, for the record, she has not participated in the settlement agreement regarding this lawsuit and feels the City would win if the case went to trial. She expressed concern that MPT/Harmony is misrepresenting important matters to the public. M/Werner confirmed that he, too, received a letter from ,- DBA and felt the letter was outrageous and showed poor judgement. He stated that he did respond to the letter requesting a clarification on some comments made in the letter. He then read, for the record, portions of the letter he wrote in response, to which he has not yet received a response back from DBA. He expressed his MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 3 opinion that, though the letter was written in poor taste, reaching a settlement with this developer may still be preferable, and will be discussed later in Closed Session. MPT/Harmony stated that he received the letter from DBA as well, and anyone desiring a copy of the letter should contact the City Clerk. He expressed his opinion that the contents of the letter appear to be harmless. C/Papen noted that the Rules of Council Conduct indicate that it is inappropriate for Council Members and staff to discuss anything with the participants in a lawsuit, yet three Council Members have met with DBA representatives. 2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATION, CERTIFICATES, ETC. (CONTINUED) 2.1 Anne Stephens made a brief presentation regarding Safe Communities Week and presented the City with a Proclamation on behalf of Supervisor Deane Dana. 2.2 M/Werner presented Anne Stephens, field representative for Supervisor Deane Dana's office, with a City Tile for her service to the City. Ms. Stephens then introduced Mishal Mathai, her replacement. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS CONTINUED: Oscar Law pointed out that DBA contributed money to other individuals for their candidacy for City Council, not just to C/Ansari, MPT/Harmony and M/Werner. He suggested that a political action committee should also be required by law to disclose the principals of the committee, the source of money received and the benefactors of the money contributed. Calvin Lin, 24168 Lodge Pole Rd., expressed opposition to the proposed sewer system in The Country. He requested the City to provide information verifying the report indicating a need for this sewer system. CM/Belanger stated that a workshop had been scheduled for March 21, 1994 at 7:00 p.m. at the Clubhouse located on Lazy Meadow Dr. in The Country to discuss this project. ICE/Wentz stated that staff will meet with Mr. Lin again to discuss his concerns and ensure that he receives the information he has requested in a timely manner. A resident, speaking on behalf of Trish Bene and himself, expressed support of the Council allowing a one-time waiver of fees for use of Heritage Park Community Center for fund raising activities. MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 4 Don Schad, 1824 Shaded Wood Rd., thanked all individuals involved who made the tree planting program at Peterson Park a success. Ron Pineira, 148 Rock River, expressed concern that there are two trash collection days in north D.B. that has resulted in increased noise and safety hazards, and has deteriorated the aesthetic appearance of the neighborhoods because trash cans are left out four days out of the week. Jim Paul, referring to item 6.10 of the Consent Calendar, requested the Council to investigate whether or not the County would install a traffic signal at the corner of CALBOURNE and Golden Springs, perhaps sharing the costs with the City. Frank Dursa, 2533 Harmony Hill Dr., questioned why Western Waste bills their customers for services in advance. He suggested that Western Waste clarify who is eligible for Senior Citizen discounts. He also suggested that Western Waste inform their customers that they do have the option to use their own trash bins. He then stated that the Council should review and consider lowering the amount of money for a contract the City Manager is allowed to approve administr,; 'vely. CM/Belanger, in response to the concerns- ised regarding Western Waste, stated that staff has ,a d to meet with Western Waste and Waste Management to discuss trash day pick up, as well as rate procedures. M/Werner requested staff to reconvene the Solid Waste subcommittee and to review the regulations to determine if there is an opportunity to open the level of competition. William Gross, 21637 High Bluff Rd., stated that the process of verifying signatures on recall petitions is continuing. He expressed concern that Councilmembers Miller and Papen were present during the entire recall process of counting signatures, which may have sent a negative message to the employees. He then stated that JCC and DBA were involved in the recall efforts because developers have a vested interest in the future of the City, and are also interested in preserving the quality of life. He noted that C/Papen received twice as much money than the recall group from Dr. LaPeter contributing to her campaign for election as Assembly person. C/Papen pointed out that the money she received was given after the vote on the JCC project, and she did not vote again once the funds were received. C/Miller pointed out that there seems to be a lot of MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 5 money contributed to organizations chaired by Mr. Gross. MPT/Harmony stated he lunched with Dr. Buffington, one of the developers, in a very public place because they have been friends for years and will remain so. Katherine Williams, D.B. Jr. Women's Club, expressed support of the City Council allowing a one-time waiver of fees for use of Heritage Park Community Center for fund raising activities. She pointed out that a vast majority of the money raised goes back into the community. Dr. Bishop Rhodes, suggested that the City Council learn to get along with each other, particularly in a public forum, otherwise the City will suffer. Steve Nice, Rising Star Dr., expressed concern that City On-line is being used as a forum for political bashing. He suggested that there should be standards developed for use of City On-line, and access rescinded if those standards are not followed. 4. COUNCIL COMMENTS: C/Papen reported that she went to Washington, D.C. on behalf of the Metropolitan Transit Authority to testify on behalf of the National Highway System for the completion of Rte. 30 through the City of Laverne and Claremont out to San Bernardino County. She announced that there will be a groundbreaking for the new Metro Link Station at Cal State University L.A. on March 30, 1994. She suggested that it would be more appropriate if staff made the arrangements for scheduling the Sidewalk City Hall shifts, rather than having one Council Member in control of the program. It should be regulated like all the Councilfs other policies. C/Miller concurred with Dr. Rhodes that the City will not be able to conduct City -business appropriately until the City Council can conduct meetings in an appropriate manner. C/Ansari, noting that the new Council has been in office for 100 days, reviewed the following goals established and pursued by the Council: the City is striving toward initiating an economic development program to help the business community; an ad hoc committee will be formed to receive financial support to fund the library past June 1994; the Material Recovery Facility (MRF) sub -committee met last night to discuss issues of concern; all but one lawsuit against the City has been resolved; the City has actively pursued programs for Senior Citizens; received repayment of money from the County owed to the City from property tax basis; and obtained HUD funds to help needy residents. She pointed out that the City Council has done a good job in the first 100 days in office. MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 6 C/Harmony pointed out the success of Sidewalk City Hall in communicating with the residents. He stated that GPAC is doing a fine job in revising the General Plan in detail. He commended the organizations who participated in the tree planting program at Peterson Park. He stated that the MRF sub -committee is composed of dynamic individuals formed to stop the location of the City of Industry's proposed MRF. He then referred to a letter received from Thomas Wolff Jr., manager of the Alpha Beta Center, stating that the loss of the Hamburger Hamlet Restaurant at the Country Hills Towne Center was only partly due to citizen objections. C/Miller read a passage that he suggested be read at each meeting, which referred to each person's decision to be good. M/Werner stated that there will be an announcement published in the newspaper and put on the City On-line bulletin board asking for volunteers to serve on a newly created committee to provide technical assistance for the City's pilot telecommunications project. He stated that the first meeting will be held at 7:30 p.m., Wednesday, April 6, 1994 at the Heritage Park Center, 2900 Brea Canyon Rd. He stated that there has also been a card,, published called "In Touch with City Hall," availablle' every City department, for the purpose of solicit -1, responses from the community on concerns and opini regarding the community. 5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 PANTERA PARK WORKSHOP - March 17, 1994 - 7:00 p.m., Heritage Park Community Center, 2900 S. Brea Canyon Rd. 5.2 GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING - March 22, 1994 - 7:00 p.m., Heritage Park Community Center, 2900 S. Brea Canyon Rd. 5.3 PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION - March 24, 1994 - 7:00 p.m., Heritage Park Community Center, 2900 S. Brea Canyon Rd. 5.4 PLANNING COMMISSION - March 28, 1994 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Hearing Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.5 GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE - March 29, 1994 - 7:00 p.m., Heritage Park Community Center, 2900 S. Brea Canyon Rd. 5.6 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - April 5, 1994 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.7 COUNTY -WIDE HOUSEHOLD HAZARDOUS WASTE ROUNDUP - March 26, 1994 - 9:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m., 1300 Bridge Gate Dr. MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 7 6. CONSENT CALENDAR:C Miller, It was moved by / seconded by MPT/Harmony to approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Items No. 6.7.1, 6.8, and ;6.10. C/Papen announced that she would abstain from voting on Item No. 6.6. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: er, Papen, MMPPT�Harmonyland M/Werner NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 6.1 VOUCHER REGISTER - Approved Voucher Register dated March 15, 1994 in the amount of $222,818.81. 6.2 TREASURER'S REPORT - Month of February 1994 - Received & filed. 6.3 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular Meeting of February 14, 1994 - Received and filed. 6.4 REJECTION OF CLAIMS: 6.4.1 FILED BY COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - Claim for Indemnification - (Mora Wills, et al) on February 22, 1994 - Rejected claim and referred matter for further action to Carl Warren & Co., the City's Risk Manager. 6.4.2 FILED BY COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - Claim for Indemnification - (Ramos and Martinez) - Rejected request and referred the matter for further action to Carl Warren & Co., the City's Risk Manager. 6.5 RELEASE OF WATER IMPROVEMENTS SURETY BOND POSTED FOR TRACT 36741 (Montefino Condominium Complex) - Released Surety Bond No. 5218967 for installation of water mains and fire hydrants on Bodega Way and Colombard Ln. in the amount of $94,000 for faithful ..performance and $47,000 for labor and material. 6.6 NOTICE OF COMPLETION - FOR INSTALLATION OF A METAL BEAM GUARD RAILING ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF GRAND AVENUE AT ROLLING KNOLL ROAD - accept the work performed by C & W Fence Co. Inc. and authorized the City Clerk to file the Notice of Completion and release any retentions upon completion of the appropriate notice period. 6.7 LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NUMBERS 38, 39 AND 41: MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 8 6.7.2 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 94-12: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ORDERING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE AND TO FILE A REPORT RELATED TO MAINTENANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 39 AND ANY ASSESSMENTS THEREON FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994-95. 6.7.3 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 94-13: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ORDERING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE AND TO FILE A REPORT RELATED TO MAINTENANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 AND ANY ASSESSMENTS THEREON FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994-95. 6.9 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 93-66A: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING THE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE USE OF FACILITIES OPERATED BY THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR. MATTERS WITHDRAWN FROM CONSENT CALENDAR: 6.7.1 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 94-14: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ORDERING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE AND FILE A REPORT RELATED TO MAINTENANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38 AND ANY ASSESSMENTS THEREON FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994-95 - C/Miller requested that the language "and City-wide graffiti removal," and any reference to graffiti, be removed because it is inappropriate to include such language in a Landscape Assessment District, which expands the service levels beyond what the district was intended to do. CM/Belanger stated that staff would not propose to do City-wide graffiti removal within the context of a Landscape District; however, if there were to be any graffiti removal activities, it would be related only to those facilities maintained by the District, if this is so desired by the City Council. MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 9 C/Miller moved, C/Papen seconded to adopt Resolution No. 94-14 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ORDERING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE AND TO FILE A REPORT RELATED TO MAINTENANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38 AND ANY ASSESSMENTS THEREON FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994-95, as amended by the removal of the words "City-wide graffiti removal." With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, Papen, Ansari, MPT/ Harmony, M/Werner NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None 6.8 ASSESSMENT ENGINEERING SERVICES CONTRACT FOR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS NO. 38, 39 AND 41 - CM/Belanger clarified that the professional engineering services contract to GFB-Friedrich & Associates, Inc. is a three year contract. The fee will be the same for each year, totaling $28,200 over the three year period. He stated that the inflation factor within the contract, relating to the increase in the amount for services only, had been stricken. He recommended that the Council award a professional engineering services contract to GFB- Friedrich & Associates, Inc., in an amount not to exceed $28,200 for Fiscal Years 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1996-97, plus a contingency amount of $5,000. CM/Belanger, in response to M/Werner, explained that staff recommended GFB-Friedrich and Associates, Inc., because the company focuses all its activities on assessment engineering and has been given high recommendations from other clients of this company. ICA/Montgomery suggested that concerns regarding prospective bidders be discussed in Closed Session. The City Council concurred to hold the matter over to Closed Session. 6.10 RESOLUTION NO. 94-15: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CALIFORNIA, CONSENTING TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PORTION OF GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE WITHIN SAID CITY AS A PART OF MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 10 THE SYSTEM OF HIGHWAYS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - C/Ansari, referring to the request made by Jim Paul, inquired if there have been traffic studies conducted at Calbourne. CM/Belanger stated that staff had been directed to initiate warrant studies at that location. ICE/Wentz, in response to C/Papen, confirmed that the matter regarding the request the r Traffic 1& study would be evaluated by Transportation Commission. C/Ansari questioned if the flashing lights proposed by the County would be needed if it were determined that a traffic signal was warranted at Calbourne or another location. CM/Belanger stated that staff will review both types of signalization as complimentary, and not as mutually exclusive. ICE/Wentz noted that the flashing light is to warn motorists of possible pedestrian crossing ahead. If a signal is found to be warranted at Calbourne, there will be discussion with the County to encourage their participation in the cost of that signal. M/Werner suggested that perhaps the County may consider installing a traffic signal, which can be activated by a pedestrian, at the cart path. ICE/Wentz pointed out that in order to install a signal at that location, there would have to be significant findings to warrant such a signal. He suggested that the City Council approve the flashing beacons, and pursue the signal further to supplement the County's proposal. MPT/Harmony moved, M/Werner seconded to defer the matter to the Traffic & Transportation Commission for a full analysis. C/Papen noted that the County would not be making such a request unless it was not absolutely necessary. The flashing light for the golf course had been needed for quite a while. Motion failed 2-3 by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - MPT/Harmony, M/Werner NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, Papen, Ansari ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None MARCH 15, 1994 7. 8. PAGE 11 C/Miller moved, C/Papen seconded to adopt Resolution No. 94-15 consenting to establishment of a portion of Golden Springs Dr. within the City as part of the System of Highways of the L.A. County; and that the City investigate the feasibility of a traffic light at Calbourne, utilizing the City's normal process in such matters. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, Papen, Ansari, MPT/Harmony, M/Werner NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE HELD OLD BUSINESS: 8.1 SECOND READING - ORDINANCE NO. 01(1994): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR REPEALING CHAPTER 15.30 (HOUSING CODE) OF THE DIAMOND BAR CITY CODE, AS HERETOFORE ADOPTED, ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 15.30 TO THE DIAMOND BAR CITY CODE AND ADOPTING, BY REFERENCE, THE BUILDING AND PROPERTY REHABILITATION CHAPTER 99 OF TITLE 26 OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY BUILDING CODE, 1988 EDITION TOGETHER WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS, ADDITIONS, DELETIONS AND EXCEPTIONS - CM/Belanger recommended that the City Council approve the second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 01(1994). C/Papen explained that she requested the item be tabled to allow her time to review Chapter 99 and the Housing Code. She expressed opposition to repealing the Housing Code to adopt Chapter 99 because the following chapters in the Uniform Housing Code would be eliminated since it is not in Chapter 99: Chapter 5, entitled Space and Occupancy Standards; Chapter 6, entitled Structural Requirements; and Chapter 7, entitled Mechanical Requirements. She then noted that the current Housing Code lists 15 items under Inadequate Sanitation, but only 5 items in the Building Code; and 9 items listed under Structural Hazards in Housing Code, and only 5 in the Building Code. She suggested that rather than repealing one code to adopt another, it may be more appropriate to adopt both and accept any duplications. ICA/Montgomery stated that since it appears that the City Council is in concurrence with the suggested amendment, the item must be carried over MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 12 to the next meeting for adoption since the ordinance will have been substantially altered. M/Werner, upon the concurrence of the Council, directed staff to make the appropriate changes and bring the Ordinance back before the City Council at the next meeting for second reading. 8.2 VERBAL PROGRESS REPORT ON GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE - M/Werner reported that the GPAC proceedings are moving forward, and are now being facilitated by City consultant Dale Beland. He stated that a concern was raised regarding a possible imbalance of the composition of the GPAC committee members, whereby it is felt that the developers are more represented than property owners living in the community. He stated that perhaps there may be an appearance of an imbalance; however, if the entire makeup of the GPAC is considered, the imbalance probably would not amount to much. He stated that he would prefer not to change the rules at this time; however, when the document comes before the City Council, he will try to reconcile any issues that may appear to have had an imbalance. MPT/Harmony expressed concern with having developers who are not residents participate on GPAC as voting members. He suggested that those developers that are non-residents be removed from the GPAC. C/Ansari, who has hosted all GPAC meetings, expressed her support with leaving the composition of GPAC as it is now. She stated that she has been noting that her appointees to the GPAC have voted differently from each other on various issues. Most people, builders, developers, and/or residents are not voting together as a group. She pointed out that the document will still have to go through the Planning Commission and the City Council review process. C/Miller stated that it would seem counter productive, at this point in time, to begin replacing and removing members of a body that has been working together this long on revising the General Plan. Steve Nice, Rising Star Dr., an appointee on GPAC, pointed out that GPAC members, who are residents of the City, are representing voters at a ratio of approximately 2,000:1, yet the developers, who are non-residents of the City, are being represented by 5 GPAC members at a ratio of 3:1. The MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 13 misrepresentation is obvious. He stated that many GPAC members have been trying to express this concern for the last few months but have been unable to do so because the matter has been held over from meeting to meeting. He stated that it is obvious that the developers are voting together on issues. Though the input from the developers are important, they should not have the voting privileges. He stated that the Planning Commissioners that are members of GPAC also should not have voting representation since the document will come before them for review. In response to M/Werner, he expressed his opinion that the process has begun to move forward expeditiously with the assistance of Dale Beland; however, it is important that the residents of D.B. be properly represented by adjusting the voting privileges. He stated that he would rate his satisfaction of the decisions made at about 50%. A resident pointed out that since it requires 2/3 of the majority of those GPAC members present at a meeting to approve a motion, then there is no chance for 5 developers to have any control other than their personal persuasion. CDD/DeStefano clarified that a quorum requires the presence of 2/3 of the 34 GPAC members, and a majority vote requires 1/2 plus one of those in attendance. Max Maxwell expressed his opinion that non-residents should not have voting privileges on an issue as important as the General Plan. He indicated that though the GPAC review process was moving along too slowly in the beginning, it has now been accelerated much too fast that many members are unclear on the issues they are voting upon. He inquired how it was decided to allow the developers voting privileges. CDD/DeStefano explained that the decision to invite the developers occurred during a discussion at the January 1994 Council meeting, and a consensus was reached to allow their representatives a vote. There was also some discussion at the first GPAC meeting of January 11, 1994 determining the five representatives for the developers. Max Maxwell stated that the developers input is appreciated; however, the City Council should only allow voting privileges to residents. He expressed concern that the General Plan revision process is once again being ram -rodded through, and controlled MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 14 by the City Council without full input from the citizens. Barbara Beach-Courchesne concurred that there is an imbalance in the representation on the GPAC. She stated that it is obvious that the developers vote in a block. She expressed her concern that the General Plan is written in highly technical language not understood by the general public. She also expressed concern that Don Schad, an environmentalist that is now a Planning Commissioner, was told that he could no longer speak at GPAC meetings, yet Jan Dabney, a developer, is allowed to make a 45 minute presentation. This is one example of the imbalance of the GPAC process. She stated that she would rate her satisfaction of the decisions made at about 50% to 60%. M/Werner, in response to C/Papen, explained that GPAC did not make rules regarding the speaking privileges; however, there is a concern that with more than two commissioners at a GPAC meeting, it becomes a public meeting of that commission. CDD/DeStefano stated that, with the reorganization of the Planning Commission at their March 14, 1994 meeting, the Commission decided to appoint Don Schad to be representative of GPAC with David Meyer, the chairman. Though the representatives do not have voting privileges, they are not restricted from participating in the discussion process; however, they were advised to proceed cautiously with respect to the input provided at the GPAC meeting since they will be making a recommendation to the City Council. ICA/Montgomery stated that since the GPAC meetings are noticed, there are no problems with more than two commissioners attending a meeting, nor is there a problem with Planning Commissioners expressing opinions and participating in discussion, as long as they keep an open mind. C/Papen suggested that, for consistency purposes, the members from the commissions appointed to the GPAC should remain the same, unless there has been a change in chairmanship. i Tom Van Winkle stated that the proponents of the two referendums and those who participated in the last election desire controlled growth and low growth. The City Council needs to act accordingly to meet the needs of those citizens. MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 15 Bernie Mazur, a developer representative of GPAC, in response to M/Werner, stated that he tries to vote on issues that he feels the general populous would vote, however, if it relates to the issue of density in the back area of The Country Estates, he would vote in a specific way. He stated that he does not vote in unison with the other developers, nor is he interested in voting with the other developers, noting that each of the developers have their own issues to grind, and vote according to their own conscious. He stated that developers, though not citizens, do pay taxes in the community, and they are members of the community who are concerned abut the direction it is taking. George Barrett expressed his opinion that people who don't have to live with the rules or regulations they help make, should not be allowed to participate in making the rules and regulations. M/Werner suggested that it may be beneficial if a tally is kept of the votes on each issue so the City Council can get a sense of whether there is an imbalance. Max Maxwell stated that the issue is not on how people vote, but rather the issue is open discussion and political maneuvering. He stated the formality of the meetings not only hinder open discussion between GPAC members but is also precludes open public discussion. He expressed concern that some developers have spoken for lengthy periods of time, yet Don Schad, who has never missed a GPAC meeting, may not speak. It appears that the developers control the meeting to some degree. He recommended that the developers voting privileges be rescinded. C/Ansari suggested that a tally count of each vote be kept on each issue, She asked Mr. Maxwell to dist his concerns that he would like addressed. M/Werner, noting the late hour, suggested that the remaining items on the agenda be held over to an Adjourned City Council meeting and that the City Council meeting be adjourned following Closed Session. He suggested that this discussion also be continued to allow the GPAC to discuss the issue as j well. MPT/Harmony moved, C/Ansari seconded to continue the remaining agenda items to an adjourned City Council meeting on March 23, 1994. MARCH 15, 1994 PAGE 16 8.3 BUSINESS RETENTION, ATTRACTION & DEVELOPMENT - Continued to Adjourned Regular Meeting of March 23, 1994 8.4 MATTER OF REQUEST FOR INFORMATION FROM FORMER CITY - Matter continued to Adjourned Regular Meeting of March 23, 1994 9. NEW BUSINESS: 9.1 ANNOUNCEMENT OF NAMES OF MEMBERS OF MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITY (MRF) AND CULTURAL ARTS COMMITTEE - Continued matter to Adjourned Regular Meeting of March 23, 1994 9.2 FY 1993-94 MUNICIPAL BUDGET AMENDMENT - NUMBER 2 - Continued matter to Adjourned Regular Meeting on March 23, 1994 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS: 11. CLOSED SESSION: M/Werner recessed the meeting at 11:05 p.m. to Closed Session. Litigation (G.C. 54956.9), Diamond Bar Associates v. City. ICA/Montgomery announced that the Council had approved Amicus Participation in a case involving the City of Pacifica, Dutton v. Quinn, at no cost to the City of Diamond Bar. No actions were taken regarding the case Diamond Bar Associates v. City. 12. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, the meeting was adjourned at 12:10 a.m. to March 23, 1994. LYNDA BURGESS, city CIeLK ATTEST: Mayor