Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/17/1994 Minutes - Regular MeetingMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR MAY 17, 1994 1. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Werner called the meeting to order at 7:10 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 Don Schad. ROLL CALL: Mayor Pro Tem Harmony, Council Members Ansari, and Papen. Mayor Werner and Council Member Miller were excused. Also present were Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; Frank Usher, Assistant City Manager; Michael Montgomery, Interim City Attorney; George Wentz, Interim City Engineer; Bob Rose, Community Services Director and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk. 2. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, PROCLAMATIONS, CERTIFICATES, ETC. 2.1 Introduction of new D.B. Team Sergeant of the Walnut Sheriff Department - Lt. Henson invited everyone to attend the Walnut Station Open House on Saturday, June 11, 1994 from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. He then introduced new Team Sergeant Brian Smith. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Richard Callard, 24105 Palomino Dr., expressed support for the Sister City Program and exchange of cultural education and activities between D.B. and one or more Sister Cities in other countries. He reviewed the goals of the Sister Cities Program and explained that it is a citizen -run organization. He invited all interested persons to a formation meeting on a date to be announced at the next City Council meeting. Barbara Thompson, 665 Strongbow Dr., expressed concern that the new addition to her house was- approved by City inspectors, though it currently does not meet City Code due to faulty construction. She requested that the Council accept her claim and not reject it as is recommended in item 6.4 of the Consent Calendar. MPT/Harmony stated that the City Attorney suggested that the matter be referred to the District Attorney. ICA/Montgomery stated that the matter was referred to the District Attorney, with a copy being sent to Consumer Affairs, but no response was yet received. Further, under the law, the City and its inspectors are not liable, as was indicated by Carl Warren & Co., the City's Risk Manager. Don Schad commented on how well the traffic signals at Brea Canyon and Pathfinder Roads are synchronized. He then asked the Council to reconsider the Tree Ordinance. MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 2 Barbara Beach-Courchesne expressed concern that C/Papen still had not signed the Mission Statement, which indicates she does not agree with the standards outlined. She stated that the recall committee filed a challenge relative to the number of qualified signatures needed to place the recall petition on the ballot. Red Calkins, 240 Eagle Nest Dr., announced that there will be a meeting regarding the proposed City of Industry MRF on June 23, 1994, at 9:30 a.m. at 15651 E. Stafford St., in the Council Chamber of the City of Industry. He stated that anyone unable to attend the meeting can write a letter opposing the MRF to the City of Industry, P.O. Box 336, to the attention of the City Engineer. Max Maxwell stated that the recall committee feels confident that they obtained adequate signatures for the recall effort. He suggested that Council Members Papen and Miller not vote on major land use decisions that may be brought before the Council until the issue is resolved. He requested that item 8.9 of the agenda be brought forward for consideration since it had been continued for the last several months. Steve Nice, Rising Star Dr., recommended that the Council not take any action regarding the status of any and all City staff positions, nor any and all projects requiring the removal of map restrictions until the outcome of legal action regarding the recall efforts is resolved. 4. COUNCIL COMMENTS: C/Papen invited Carl Rosen, President, Chamber of Commerce, to announce the new cable television program regarding the City of D.B. Mr. Rosen stated that the new program called "Diamond Bar", which features an overview of the City and City events, is sponsored by the Chamber in conjunction with Jones Intercable, and airs twice a month preceding the Council sessions at 6:30 p.m. C/Papen stated that the City will begin a program of selling transit passes for Metrolink, Foothill Transit and MTA buses at City Hall, designed to comply with Federal and State Clean Air laws and to improve congestion management in the City. She suggested that anyone desiring more information regarding the efforts to oppose the City of Industry's MRF should attend the Citizens Committee meeting on May 18 at 7:00 p.m., in AQMD Room CC -6. She then expressed concern that the — following items have not yet been placed on the agenda even though she received concurrence from three other Council Members: discussion regarding the $10,000 donation to the library for materials and regarding the new Brown Act requirement for Council subcommittees. She further stated it would be appropriate for Mr. Schad, as MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 3 a Planning Commissioner, to request the Planning Commission to agendize the Tree Ordinance for review and recommendation to the Council. She then stated that she did not and would not sign the Mission Statement because it is nothing more than rules learned in kindergarten and because those rules are not being enforced by the Council equally. She pointed out that some comments made criticizing certain Council Members are recorded in the Minutes, yet similar comments directed to the Mayor are stricken. C/Ansari stated that a list of addresses of local legislators is available at City Hall for anyone wishing to express support of Assemblyman Horcher's proposition to amend AB2969 to include opposition of the proposed City of Industry's MRF, which would address the legitimate concern of citizens living in the surrounding cities of the proposed City of Industry MRF. She also stated that AB2815 is being considered by the Ways and Means Committee on May 18, 1994, which requests that a defendant of a crime be tested if there is any possibility that blood, semen, saliva and any other body fluid capable of transmitting HIV has been transferred from a defendant to a victim, and that the victims be told the results of the test. She reported that she had been invited to be a member of a YWCA committee formed to stop racial injustice and promote multicultural awareness. She stated that the Council's Multi -Cultural Committee, designed to bring about cultural awareness, human resources and a better understanding of each other as citizens of the community meets the first Monday of every month at 7:00 p.m., in the AQMD Building. In response to C/Papen's concern that her requests for agendized items have been disregarded, C/Ansari pointed out that perhaps the reason one of the items is not on the agenda is because there is not a full Council present. She stressed the importance of respect for each other and the need to communicate concerns appropriately. MPT/Harmony brought forth the City of Industry's environmental impact statement to illustrate the numerous documents prepared by the City of Industry to support their MRF and to respond to each concern made regarding their proposal. He stated that the City hired a consulting firm to challenge them, but it is absolutely necessary and required, on a political level, that individual efforts opposing the MRF are received. He reported that there was been a strong response to a flier faxed to the community and many have signed up to participate in the committee opposing the MRF. He announced that Congressman Kim would be a guest at Sidewalk City Hall to answer questions at K -Mart from 11:00 a.m. to 3:00. He further stated that C/Papen will be at Sidewalk City Hall on June 28, 1994 from 11:00 a.m. MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 4 to 3:00 p.m. at the Lucky Store. He then displayed the Economic Development Brochure on the overhead and explained that it is designed to promote the City's economic development. He indicated that a citizen expressed concern at Sidewalk City Hall regarding the increase in crime in one particular neighborhood and their desire to close off the area as a private community. He requested staff to research the issue to determine the feasibility of creating a private community. He requested staff to continue to assist the Montefino Homeowners in perfecting their case in their lawsuit against Presley Homes. 5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 Planning Commission - May 23, 1994 - 7:00 P.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.2 General Plan Advisory Committee - May 24, 1994, 7:00 p.m., Heritage Park Commun. Center, 2900 Brea Canyon Rd. 5.3 Parks & Recreation Commission - May 26, 1994 - 7:00 p.m., Heritage Park Commun. Center, 2900 Brea Canyon Rd. 5.4 Memorial Day Holiday Observance - May 30, 1994 - City Hall closed. 5.5 City Council Public Hearing - May 31, 1994 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.6 City Council Meeting - June 7, 1994 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.7 MRF Committee - May 18, 1994 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Room CC -6, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.8 Finance Committee - May 26, 1994 - 3:30 p.m., City Hall, 21660 E. Copley Dr. 5.9 Computer Advisory Committee - May 25, 1994, AQMD Bldg., 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.10 Multi -cultural Committee - June 6, 1994 - 7:00 p.m., AQMD Bldg., 21865 E. Copley Dr. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Papen moved, C/Ansari seconded to approve the Consent Calendar. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Papen, Ansari, MPT/Harmony NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, M/Werner 6.1 APPROVED MINUTES: 6.1.1 Regular Meeting of April 19, 1994 - as submitted. — 6.1.2 Adjourned Regular Meeting of May 2, 1994 - as Submitted. 6.2 RECEIVED & FILED PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular meeting of February 24, 1994. MAY 17, 1994 7. PAGE 5 6.3 APPROVED VOUCHER REGISTER - Dated May 17, 1994. 6.4 REJECTED CLAIM FOR DAMAGES - Filed by Robert and Barbara Thompson on April 28, 1994 - rejected the Claim and referred the matter for further action to Carl Warren & Co., the City's Risk Manager. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Papen, Ansari, MPT/Harmony NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, M/Werner PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 RESOLUTION NO. 94-21: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ADOPTING A NON -DISPOSAL FACILITY ELEMENT (NDFE) AS REQUIRED BY ASSEMBLY BILL 3001 - Asst. to CM/Butzlaff reported that Public Resources Code Section 41730 et seq. requires every city and county to prepare and adopt a non -disposal facility element (NDFE) for all new non -disposal facilities and any expansions of existing facilities needed to implement local source reduction and recycling programs. MPT/Harmony opened the Public Hearing. Richard Callard inquired as to what is being proposed for the NDFE. Asst. to CM/Butzlaff explained that the statute merely requires the City to identify those facilities to be used now, or proposed in the future for implementing the source reduction recycling element. John Summers, 21864 Stone Pine, expressed concern that unless the City is specific in the actions to be taken, the State could force the City to do something that may be undesirable to the Community. Asst. to CM/Butzlaff explained that the resolution merely identifies existing facilities available, and planned facilities to be used in the future for its source reduction recycling element. CM/Belanger stated that the City proposes to use the following locations: Red Star Fertilizer in Corona; Puente Hills Materials Recovery Facility; Green Waste Processing at Spadra Landfill; Recyc Inc. located at the 91 and 15 freeway; CBT Materials Recovery and Transfers Facility in MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 6 Anaheim; C & R Waste Recovery in Stanton; the Waste Transfer & Recycling Facility located at the 405 and Harbor fwys. in L.A.; the Bradley Recycling Center in Sun Valley and the Chino Institute for Men Western Waste Industry's Facility. Max Maxwell, 3211 Bent Twig In, inquired if any of the locations had been used before. ACM/Butzlaff stated that several of the facilities are currently being used by the City. He further stated that the element is updated every five years and will not have to be updated until the year 2000. With no further testimony offered, MPT/Harmony closed the Public Hearing. C/Papen inquired why some of the locations currently being used are not included in the list, such as the Redwood in Chino, the facility in Baldwin Park and the Western Land Fill in Corona. Asst. to CM/Butzlaff explained that the primary reason those types of facilities were not included in the Element is because of the definition of "non -disposable," which would exclude intermediate processing centers receiving only recyclable material. C/Ansari moved, C/Papen seconded to adopt Resolution No. 94-21 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ADOPTING A NON -DISPOSAL FACILITY ELEMENT (NDFE) AS REQUIRED BY ASSEMBLY BILL 3001. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Papen, Ansari, MPT/Harmony NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, M/Werner 7.2 ORDINANCE NO. 5A (1991): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING CHAPTER 22.66 OF TITLE 22, AS AMENDED, AND CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY CODE, AS HERETOFORE ADOPTED, PERTAINING TO THE REGULATION OF SIGNAGE IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR - AP/Searcy reported that the Planning Commission reviewed the Sign Code and the interim Ordinance and recommended the Ordinance be made a part of the permanent Sign Code, amending it in order to permit temporary signs and expedite the monument sign review process. He then reviewed the recommended MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 7 amendments as outlined in the staff report. C/Papen asked if the current provision in the Sign Code, which allows businesses to display temporary signs for a period of 60 days a year, allows that 60 -day period to run consecutively, and if it would be the same for the the 90 -day provision. AP/Searcy stated that the applicant has the option of displaying temporary signs either in increments or all at one time with both the 60 -day and the 90 -day provisions, and would include a maximum request for four permits a year. MPT/Harmony opened the Public Hearing. Carl Rosen, President, Chamber of Commerce, expressed support for the Sign Code, with the exception of item (h) pertaining to the $100 deposit requirement, which he felt was an additional burden on businesses and staff time. He stated that, as indicated in the staff report, enforcement of the temporary sign permits has not proven problematic, though it must be monitored constantly by Code Enforcement. CM/Belanger, in response to MPT/Harmony, explained that the purpose of the $100 deposit is to provide an incentive to the permittee to remove the sign in a timely fashion within the permit period. John Summers, 21864 Stone Pine, stated that since the $100 deposit is refundable upon removal of the sign, the business community should not object to the provision. He pointed out that the problem with many communities is temporary signs that are not removed. With no further testimony offered, MPT/Harmony closed the Public Hearing. CM/Belanger, in response to C/Papen, stated that if a check is given for the $100 deposit, it would be cashed to assure the funds are available; staff would then issue a City check in that amount to the applicant when the permit is terminated. He stated that a larger fee of $125 could be required, as suggested by C/Papen, refunding a portion of it upon termination of the permit. C/Papen suggested either making the entire $125 a fee, so there is no claim for a refund unless the applicant complies with the terms, or lowering the deposit amount to $50. MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 8 Council concurred to lower the amount to require a $50 deposit. MPT/Harmony requested clarification regarding roof signs and projecting signs. AP/Searcy stated that the new provision would allow inflatables that are connected to the roof, with a maximum height of 75 feet above grade, as well as other types of temporary signs placed on the roof for a short period of time. CM/Belanger stated that inflatables must conform to building safety regulations in terms of how they are anchored to the building. In response to MPT/Harmony's concern, he stated that there are no limitations regarding the maximum number of permits for inflatables that can be issued at any given time. He stated that the number of inflatables has not been a problem in the past, though there could be a potential problem in the future. In response to MPT/Harmony, AP/Searcy explained that proposed freestanding monument signs would _ need to meet the approved planned sign program requirements of the shopping center, or be approved by staff based on its architectural conformity to the area and other such requirements of the Sign Ordinance. C/Ansari requested clarification regarding the limitations of political signs. ICA/Montgomery stated that maximum height limits on free-standing signs must apply to all signs in the City, which include political signs. He stated that political signs are to be removed at the conclusion of the political event. CM/Belanger stated that signs on private property, other than height limitations, are not governed by the Code in terms of duration. C/Papen moved to approve for first reading by title only and waive full reading of Ordinance No. 5A(1991) as amended. ICA/Montgomery suggested that the Council may desire to hold the matter over to the next meeting — since there is not a full Council and waiving full reading requires four votes. With consensus of Council, the matter was continued to the next meeting. MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 9 7.3 (A) ORDINANCE NO. 02A(1990: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 02(1990) ADOPTING REQUIREMENTS AND STANDARDS RELATING TO THE COLLECTION, RECYCLING TRANSPORTATION, AND DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE, RECYCLABLE AND COMPOSTABLE MATERIALS (B) RESOLUTION NO. 90-95B: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR ESTABLISHING A PERMIT SYSTEM FOR THE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL OF SOLID WASTE. C/Papen, concerned that Ordinance No. 02A(1990) does not contain redline or strikeouts indicating changes made, suggested that the matter be held over to the next meeting, following public testimony. Asst. to CM/Butzlaff presented the staff report, high -lighting the significant changes to Ordinance No. 02A (1990) and Resolution No. 90-95B, which includes language more reflective of the changes that have occurred in solid waste management as a result of the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989. He pointed out that one of the proposed amendments empowers the City Manager to determine which day of the week is best suited for refuse collection services. C/Papen noted that Page 6, item 2, of the Resolution indicates that hours of collection are 6:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. but hours of collection indicated on page 7 is 6:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. She suggested that the hours be made consistent, and changed to 7:00 or 8:00 a.m. so residents are not disturbed. Noting that permits expire the second year after they are granted, as indicated on Page 11, section 9, Term and Renewal, she stated that since renewal would be December 1, 1995, the same year as a Council election, the new Council should be given 90 days after the election before the matter was placed on the agenda. Referring to Page 19, she suggested that staff require reports to be submitted on diskettes, along with a hard copy, so that they can be analyzed and modified easily. Asst. to CM/Butzlaff stated, in response to C/Ansari, that Western Waste notified residents that a 95 gal. container would be provided for trash, as well as two 18 gal. recycling bins. He stated that residents may use their own trash containers as long as they adhere to City specifications. MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 10 ICA/Montgomery, clarifying his earlier advice, stated that the law had changed and first reading can be waived by unanimous vote of those present on the Council; therefore the Council could approve item 7.2, Ordinance No. 5A(1991) for first reading, by number and title only. MPT/Harmony opened the Public Hearing. Dr. Lawrence Rhodes, P.O. Box 2258, Walnut, suggested that grass clippings be required to be composted. He stated that the Ordinance does not specify how residents are supposed to dispose of animal waste. Asst. to CM/Butzlaff stated that special arrangements have to be made through the waste companies to collect animal waste, such as livestock manure. Richard Callard, 24105 Palomino, stated that there needs to be green waste separation. Michael Hulse, Integrated Waste Management _ Coordinator, stated that green waste separation is an important part of the overall source reduction recycling program for the City which is a voluntary program; however, there is an inadequate market to handle all the material for the disposition of green waste. He stated that they are in the process of implementing a curbside collection program for multifamily complexes. He then stated that, upon the passage of the new permit system, a voluntary program would be implemented for green waste, establishing a fair and equitable price. Barbara Beach-Courchesne, 2021 Peaceful Hills Rd., inquired as to who determines if waste haulers are exercising due diligence in disposal of hazardous waste. She stated that the City should continue to work toward encouraging more haulers to compete. She further stated that even though 6:30 a.m. is early for trash collection, it is equally important to allow haulers enough time in a day to collect trash. Frank Dursa, 2533 Harmony Hill Dr., stated that he was pleased it was clarified that residents can use their own trash bins. He expressed support with early trash collection on Mondays, since that is the day it has been collected for years, as well as with having more than one hauler in the community. Al Simonian, Western Waste Industries, pointed out that, prior to Incorporation, there was one single MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 11 hauler in the City until Western Waste offered a competitive price introducing a totally new system. He stated that of their 7,000 customers, only 30 have changed trash collectors, indicating that the majority are pleased with the service. He stated that Western Waste is a part of the community, and has raised money for school equipment and YMCA programs. He then stated that if the City forces Western Waste to go back to a Monday schedule, it will put them out of business in D.B., resulting in only one hauler in the City and thus eliminating the competition so desired by the community. In response to MPT/Harmony, Mr. Simonian stated that they cannot continue to put 13 trucks into the City on one day because for the last five years they have been losing money servicing D.B. He pointed out that if both Waste Management and Western Waste were to pick up trash on the same day, there would be 24 to 26 trucks on the street in one day. He stated that they have made capital investments for the future of waste management by investing million of dollars on facilities to grind green waste on a 20 -acre site, and by being in the process of permitting an 80 -acre site for composting. Mr. Summers stated that Western Waste's future investments are not related to the current contract with the City. He expressed support with having more than one contractor in the City and questioned Western Waste's ability to service the City. Martha Bruske, 600 S. Great Bend Dr., suggested that the Council work toward stopping scavengers from taking recyclables. She expressed concern that the Council may become more concerned for the profits made by the carrier than for the citizens concerned over noise, aesthetics and litter. She suggested that the City be sectioned so that each area is covered during the same day. Max Maxwell pointed out that Western Waste must be making some sort of profit in order to be able to make capital investments. He expressed support of a Monday schedule for all trash collection so trash bins are only left out one day a week. Dr. Rhodes suggested that any trash haulers contracting with the City be required not to use the proposed City of Industry MRF under any circumstances. With no further testimony offered, MPT/Harmony closed the Public Hearing. MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 12 C/Papen inquired if street sweepers, or any other such company in the City, are regulated to operate only one day of the week. CM/Belanger stated that street sweepers operate five days a week and that private businesses are not regulated in the same manner as the waste haulers who utilize city streets to do business on a contractual basis. C/Papen suggested that it would be more beneficial if the City were divided into zones, having the street sweepers follow the next day, so that there are not two or three trash trucks going up and down one street. Council concurred to continue the matter to the next meeting, directing staff to highlight changes made to Ordinance No. 02A(1990). RECESS: MPT/Harmony recessed the meeting at 9:20 p.m. RECONVENE: MPT/Harmony reconvened the meeting at 10:05 p.m. 8. OLD BUSINESS: 8.1 SELECTION OF CITY ATTORNEY - CM/Belanger reported that eleven firms submitted proposals in response to the City's solicitation for Attorney services. He stated that each Council Member was provided with evaluation forms, to be compiled after the forms are completed, and will provide the information to the Council to assist them in their selection process. The next phase will be to set up an interview schedule of those firms desired by the Council followed by a vote of those firms recommended by Council. C/Papen suggested that each Council Member inform staff of the days they are available for the interviews. She further stated that she was concerned about the late hour, and suggested that since this is not an action item, there is no need for public comments, particularly in regard to the late hour when the Council still has more business to conduct. She suggested that if there is to be public comment allowed, the individual should be requested to direct his/her comments only to the issue at hand. Barbara Beach-Courchesne noted that one of the areas of great concern in the past centered on the perception that at times the City Attorney did not provide sound legal advice, resulting in contentious and costly law -suits. She suggested MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 13 that, given that perception, citizen representatives should be included in the interviews and recommendations relative to selection of a new attorney. She expressed opposition to replacement of ICA/Montgomery since detailed examination of his performance indicates that he has provided sound advice and has saved the City millions of dollars in settled lawsuits: Wilbur Smith, 21630 Fairwind In., suggested that the eleven proposals should be public information since the position and legal advice is of utmost importance to the City and its citizens. CM/Belanger stated that the selection of the City Attorney can be a matter for Closed Session; however, the names of the firms and the forms being used to rate the proposals are not of a confidential nature at all and are available to the public. ICA/Montgomery stated that all of the data submitted by the firms are matters of public record excluding each Council Member's personal analysis and rating. C/Papen questioned why there was not an interview process at the time ICA/Montgomery was hired by the Council, nor was there a proposal submitted to the entire Council. ICA/Montgomery stated that the interview process is a matter of policy. He also stated that he submitted a letter to the Council, at the request of M/Werner, stating the terms under which he would be willing to serve as Interim City Attorney. Max Maxwell expressed his opinion that ICA/Montgomery set an improved standard for the City, and represented the City well the last few months. He expressed support for selecting ICA/Montgomery if he submitted a proposal. Frank Dursa, 2533 Harmony Hill Dr., expressed support for selecting ICA/Montgomery for City Attorney. MPT/Harmony suggested that the matter be continued to the next regularly -scheduled meeting to involve the entire Council in the selection process. He expressed concurrence with a suggestion made by an audience member during Public Comments that there should not be any personnel changes until the legal issue of the recall action is resolved. MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 14 C/Papen pointed out that eleven law firms have waited to be interviewed and that the matter should not be postponed any longer. She stated that all five elected Council Members have equal rights, despite any legal actions submitted by clients of the current City Attorney, who may have to disqualify himself from dealing with the issue. She pointed out that the Council is merely making a decision on the dates to conduct interviews. She inquired if the following dates are convenient: May 27, 1994, May 31, 1994 and June 3, 1994. ICA/Montgomery clarified that he was the personal attorney for Mr. Gross in his business dealings and for the Concerned Citizens; however, he never represented the Recall Committee. C/Ansari stated that the City already received a reply from the State Bar Assn. and the FPPC indicating that Mr. Montgomery has no conflict of interest. MPT/Harmony stated that he is not available the three dates indicated by C/Papen. 8.2 SANITARY SEWERS IN "THE COUNTRY" - CM/Belanger reported that staff prepared responses, questions, comments and concerns raised at the April 19 meeting and recommended that the Council authorize negotiation of a contract with CPW Geosciences (CPWG) not to exceed $75,000, for professional services for further investigation, studies, reports and recommendations. He reported that staff received a letter from representatives of some of the homeowners in the affected areas requesting Council to defer any action for 90 days in order to allow several critical tasks, specified in the letter, to be completed. Les Brown, 2696 Shady Ridge, reported that 12 of the 17 lots identified in the Kleinfelder report had been improved so septic systems are currently functional. He stated that if the critical tasks discussed in the letter are completed, the remaining lots should be improved to a similarly operative condition, or at least identify those tasks that should be done. C/Ansari commended the residents for pursuing the issue and exploring all channels before the City undertook the project. Fred Janz, 2683 Shady Ridge, stated that most people do not have trouble with septic tanks and it would seem inappropriate to convert to sewer pumps. MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 15 He stated that the City should wait to expend the $75,000 in an area inaccessible to the majority of the community. Kay Brown, 2696 Shady Ridge In., expressed opposition to awarding a contract to CPWG since only one member of the ad hoc committee of "The Country" was present during the selection process and he was opposed to the choice made. C/Papen pointed out that three people from "The Country" were on the evaluation committee including Jim Gardner, General Manager of the Homeowners' Assn. Martha Bruske stated that Council is being negligent in postponing the issue since soil saturated with fecal material is a serious health concern that should be closely monitored. C/Papen inquired how an additional 90 days on this issue would affect the RFP. ICE/Wentz stated that the current bid on the RFP is for a 60 -day period; however, there should be no problem negotiating with the preferred consultant prior to the 60 -day period. C/Papen moved, C/Ansari seconded to suspend further action on the contract for 45 days, and giving "The Country" Homeowners' Assn. a 90 -day period to accomplish the specified tasks, requiring a written status report on their progress in 45 days. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Papen, Ansari, MPT/Harmony NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, M/Werner 8.5 RESOLUTION NO. 94-22: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FILED PURSUANT TO SECTION 22623 OF THE CALIFORNIA STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE WITH RESPECT TO THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38; AND DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR CERTAIN LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE WITHIN SAID DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994-95; AND FIXING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OF OBJECTIONS HEREON - CM/Belanger reported that, pursuant to Council direction on March 15, 1994, staff prepared the Engineer's Reports for District Nos. 38, 39 and 41 for FY 1994-95. He recommended that the Council adopt the resolutions declaring the City's MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 16 intention to levy and collect assessments for the districts and direct the City Clerk to advertise Public Hearings at the Council meeting of June 7, 1994. MPT/Harmony suggested that personnel services costs of $37,500 be reduced to reflect an 8% administration level, which is commensurate with higher figures the County used when administering their assessment districts. He stated that an assessment district is a specific charge for a specific service, and including this high percentage for administration in the assessment district is a way of feeding money into the General Fund. C/Papen pointed out that District No. 38 is the only district currently under construction, and will be under construction for many years, and lowering the fees delay completing the beautification of the City. She stated that the reason the other districts have a low administrative fee is because there are only maintenance costs. She then suggested that the public notice should also include the dollar amount for next year's fee as compared to last year's fee. MPT/Harmony inquired which personnel services are involved in administrative costs. CM/Belanger stated that 20% of the Community Services Director's salary, 20% of the Park Superintendent's salary and 20% of the Park Maintenance person's salary are calculated in the budget for personnel services. Wilbur Smith, 21630 Fairwind Ln., concurred that it would be beneficial to know the assessment amount for the different districts, as well as anticipated projects for each of the areas and the costs involved. Richard Callard, 24105 Palomino, requested a more thorough staff report to inform residents of the intent of each district. CM/Belanger stated that staff will prepare exhibits for the Public Hearing which will outline the parcels located within each district respectively, as well as indicate which areas are being maintained by the district. He emphasized that staff is not recommending increases in any of the three districts' current rates, which are: District No. 38 is recommended to remain at $15; District No. 39 is recommended to remain at $73.50; MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 17 and District No. 41 is recommended to remain at $220.50. He stated that there are no capitals projects proposed for District No. 41 or District No. 39; however, a capital project is proposed for District No. 38, which is construction of medians from Gona Ct. to the westerly city limits. He then explained that the Engineer's Report is an indica- tion of the number of parcels within the districts, the amount of revenue to be generated given the assessment, and a budget related to maintenance activities that would occur in each of the districts respectively. He stated that the Assessment Engineer will redo the budget to reflect the 8% administrative cost, as suggested by MPT/ Harmony, if so desired by the Council. C/Ansari requested that staff prepare the report on the assessment districts to be ready for public review prior to the Public Hearing. C/Papen expressed her opinion that the Council not change the Engineer's Report based upon an arbitrary figure of 8%, as was recommended by MPT/Harmony. She stated that the City Engineer properly evaluated the amount of time needed by staff to assure that the districts are properly managed. C/Papen moved, C/Ansari seconded to adopt Resolution No. 94-22, setting a Public Hearing for Landscape District No. 38 on June 7, 1994; Resolution No. 94-23, setting a Public Hearing for Landscape District No. 39 on June 7, 1994; and Resolution No. 94-24, setting a Public Hearing for Landscape District No. 41 on June 7, 1994. C/Ansari stated that she did not have enough information at the time to consider changing the administrative costs to 8% of the fee. MPT/Harmony, concerned with C/Papen's impression that his suggested change was arbitrary, explained that his research two years ago showed that the County does not charge 20% for administrative fees on the districts, but rather that 8% is one of the higher figures charged by the County. He stated that D.B. substantially increased the fees upon incorporation, and is overtaxing its residents. He pointed out that this is a good time for the City to decrease taxes. C/Ansari stated that she would second C/Papen's motion, amending it to request staff to investigate the feasibility of reducing the fee for personnel. MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 18 C/Papen moved, C/Ansari seconded to adopt Resolution No. 94-22 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FILED PURSUANT TO SECTION 22623 OF THE CALIFORNIA STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE WITH RESPECT TO THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38; AND DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR CERTAIN LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE WITHIN SAID DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994-95 AND FIXING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OF OBJECTIONS HEREON. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Papen, Ansari, MPT/Harmony NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, M/Werner 8.6 RESOLUTION NO. 94-23: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FILED PURSUANT TO SECTION 22623 OF THE CALIFORNIA STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE WITH RESPECT THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 39; AND DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR CERTAIN LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE WITHIN SAID DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994-95; AND FIXING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OF OBJECTIONS HEREON - C/Papen moved, C/Ansari seconded to adopt Resolution No. 94-23. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Papen, Ansari, MPT/Harmony NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, M/Werner 8.7 RESOLUTION NO. 94-24: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FILED PURSUANT TO SECTION 22623 OF THE CALIFORNIA STREETS AND HIGHWAYS CODE WITH RESPECT TO THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41; AND DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO LEVY AND COLLECT ASSESSMENTS FOR CERTAIN LANDSCAPING MAINTENANCE WITHIN SAID DISTRICT FOR FISCAL YEAR 1994-95; AND FIXING A TIME AND PLACE FOR HEARING OF OBJECTIONS HEREON - C/Papen moved, C/Ansari seconded to adopt Resolution No. 94-24. With the following Roll Call vote, motion carried: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Papen, Ansari, MPT/Harmony NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Miller, M/Werner MAY 17, 1994 PAGE 19 C/Papen left the meeting at 11:05 p.m. 8.3 RESOLUTION NO. 93-05A: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 93-05 ESTABLISHING "NO RIGHT TURN, 4:00 P.M. - 7:00 P.M., MONDAY -FRIDAY, EXCEPT SCHOOL BUSES" SIGNS ON ROLLING KNOLL ROAD AND COUNTRY VIEW DRIVE AT GRAND AVENUE - Continued to June 7, 1994. 8.4 AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION/MODIFICATION OF HANDICAP ACCESS RAMPS AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS IN DIAMOND BAR - Continued to June 7, 1994. 8.8 DISCUSSION RE: COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE FOR LIBRARY SERVICES - Continued to June 7, 1994. 8.9 MATTER OF REQUEST FOR INFORMATION FROM FORMER CITY ATTORNEY - Continued to June 7, 1994. 8.10 DISCUSSION RE: GENERAL PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE PROGRESS ON PREPARATION OF THE GENERAL PLAN; TIMETABLE FOR COMPLETION OF THE GENERAL PLAN IN ORDER TO PLACE IT ON THE NOVEMBER GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT - Continued to June 7, 1994. 9. NEW BUSINESS: 9.1 DISCUSSION RE: PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT SIGNS CARRYING NAMES OF COUNCIL MEMBERS - Continued to June 7, 1994. 10. ANNOUNCEMENTS: None. 11. CLOSED SESSION: None held. 12. ADJOURNMENT: Due to the lack of a quorum, the meeting was adjourned at 11:05 p.m. 6*x-� LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk ATTEST: yor