Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout08/03/1999 Minutes - Regular Meeting2 3. CITY OF DIAMOND BAR SOLID WASTE STANDARDS TOWN HALL MEETING August 3, 1999 CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Chang called the Town Hall Meeting to order at 4:15 p.m. in the South Coast Air Quality Management District Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. ROLL CALL: Council Members Ansari, Herrera, Huff, Mayor ProTem O'Connor and Mayor Chang. Also present were: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager; David Liu, Deputy Public Works Director; Mike Nelson, Communications & Marketing Director; Lynda Burgess, City Clerk; Kellee Fritzal, Assistant to the City Manager and Anne Haraksin, Senior Administrative Assistant. PRESENTATION: J. Michael Huls, Integrated Environmental Services Coordinator, stated that California law requires cities to reduce, re -use and recycle (diversion) up to 50% of its municipal refuse from disposal by January 1, 2000. As a result, a task force was formed to study this issue. The task force's recommendations were reviewed by staff and formed the basis for the proposed ordinance. He presented the major provisions of the draft ordinance and proposed changes to that ordinance. 4. PUBLIC INPUTiQUESTIONS & ANSWERS: Martha Bruske felt that the ordinance was more concerned with fines than with the .convenience and comfort of the residents. She looked for correlation between the draft ordinance and the City's Property Maintenance Ordinance. The Property Maintenance Ordinance is not mentioned. There are no comments relative to the fact that lids need to be tightly closed, when cans are supposed to be placed out for pickup, when residents are to take their trashcans in and where they are supposed to be stored. Further, she asked that the issue of illegal dumping be cleared up before the ordinance is signed. She favored a schedule of one day, one carrier, one tract because trash pickup is noisy and results in plastic bags, etc. blowing around, which she hoped will be cleared up the by the recycling container. Don Gravdahl presented figures to back up his theory that single family residences will carry the weight of the proposed program. Paul Pistano, Athens Services, said his company would like the ordinance to provide for a two -container system. In this type of system, the green waste goes in one container and all trash and recyclables go into another container. Through the MRFing process, the recycling material is removed. AUGUST 3, 1999 MTG. PAGE 2 SOLID WASTE TOWN HALL Some of the advantages of this program are 100% automatic compliance and lower cost to residents due to fewer trucks on the street. With the MRFing process, the current container is used for commercial pickup, which guarantees 100% participation. Brian Stirratt, Brian Stirratt & Assoc., an environmental engineering company specializing in landfill and landfill design solid waste management, said that as a consultant to this City, he was concerned about why. he was not requested to help the City with its ordinance. He agreed with Mr. Pistano that the two -bin system would get the City a much better return for its investment. His main concern was that the consolidation of waste companies resulted in a major increase in rates with the explanation that disposal rates were higher. Landfill rates in this area are the lowest they have ever been. There is a lot of competition and consolidation and he recommended that there be a process for Council to review any rate increases that occur in D.B., both on a commercial basis and a residential basis. Clyde Hennessee said he was not concerned about whether the City uses a two or three bin system, he simply didn't want to pay more for trash pickup. Red Calkins said he is concerned about compliance with respect to the second sentence of Section 1: (b). J. Michael Huls acknowledged Martha Bruske's statements and said they would be considered. Over 200 communities in California have implemented variable rate programs. While illegal disposal is a bit of a problem, it was a problem prior to the implementation. It has not been found to be a significant problem when there is proper education and enforcement of existing ordinances and laws. The EPA and the State have both agreed that illegal disposal is not a reason to not implement a variable rate program. With respect to what to do with current containers, some may be compatible with the new system. Otherwise, the hauler would retrieve them. With respect to the proposed ordinance, all sectors will participate in this process and it is incumbent upon the City to assure that all sectors are participating. One of the issues involved in any kind of program development is that we're not specifying exactly what specific system multi -family complexes and business would have to implement. What we are proposing is that there would be a provision that recyclables cannot be thrown away. We would require that the haulers offer and solicit viable programs for multi -family complexes to implement. If there were dissatisfaction on the part of either party, the City would act as the mediator to help develop a program that would fit the particular complex. All will participate and all will pay their fair share. All options continue to be open at this time. Regarding the amount of material collected in each sector, multi -family residential (4000 units) generate about 1.5 tons per year. Single family residents generate about 2 tons per year. AUGUST 3, 1999 MTG. PAGE 3 SOLID WASTE TOWN HALL One of the primary differences between single family and multi -family residential is green waste - about 24,000 tons per year. In terms of cost, the City of Walnut implemented a three -barrel system, which included a franchise fee of approximately 15% and their rates went from $14 to $16 per month. There are no incentives in their contract, so that if less is produced, the cost remains the same. Even though there are no incentives, recycling increased 260% the first month by virtue of the three -barrel system. With respect to cost, some of the cities that have been referenced happen to have municipal systems, which cost more than private systems. The- key is negotiating and bidding. If we accept what a hauler gives us, we deserve what we get. He believed that all haulers would like to have a commun- ity like D.B. to service on an exclusive basis. Negotiation, bidding, length of contract - these are all things that can be done to decrease cost over the long run. In response to C/Huff, Mr. Huls stated that the EPA report estimates a 10- 65% decrease in the amount of waste disposed as a result of implementing a variable rate system. Claremont's implementation of the three -barrel system has increased the diversion in the residential sector to approximately 55%. With respect to maintaining containers, it is a shared responsibility between the hauler and the resident. The hauler has a responsibility to provide equipment in good operating condition. On the other hand, it is incumbent upon the City to insure that residents do not treat the equipment in other than a good manner. C/Huff suggested that language stating "normal wear and tear" be inserted in the ordinance. The Solid Waste Task Force considered a two -barrel system. However, it felt that to meet the intent of the law, we needed to encourage people to be good stewards of the resources and the two -barrel system encourages waste, whereas a three -barrel system encourages recycling. C/Herrera did not find where the ordinance specifies that it would be a two - barrel or three -barrel system. Mr. Huls stated that the language of the ordinance indicates "up to three barrels." If the hauler that the City selects does not have access to a MRF, there is no directional authority to send waste to a MRF. However, that is a consideration that can be added to the ordinance - to clearly identify post - collection processing and things of that nature. CM/Belanger asked for Council's direction with respect to comments made during this and prior town hall meetings. MPT/O'Connor asked what other cities do with respect to bulky item pickup on a monthly basis. AUGUST 3, 1999 MTG. PAGE 4 SOLID WASTE TOWN HALL CM/Belanger said that in many systems, those types of special collections are included as a part of the contract between the city and the hauler. Our approach is different in that we attempt, through the ordinance, to get cooperation from the haulers in an open market system to provide these programs. C/Ansari stated that, in the past, there has been no difficulty getting the hauler to assist with bulky item pickup. MPT/O'Connor said she would like the ordinance to be as flexible as possible to insure the possibility of optional systems. CM/Belanger pointed out that the draft ordinance is flexible and that there are no limitations at this time. However, the City is proposing the implementation of programs because the current system is not getting the City to the goals it is required to achieve. There is currently one hauler that collects 96% of the refuse collected in the City without any restrictions in an open market system. So, to suggest that putting in a three bin system or a two -bin system. is going to eliminate competition is a little bit over the top. D.B. has had as open a system as is possible in a competitive market for the last several years. The City is getting to the point where it may need to consider using a single hauler. Council has not yet determined how the City will get to that point. It can be done through ordinance or through some kind of open market bid process. With an open market bid process, Council needs to suggest the kind of system that it wants so that bidders know what to bid against. 5. CLOSING COMMENTS/NEXT MEETINGS: To be determined. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to conduct, Mayor Chang adjourned the Town Hall Meeting at 5:45 p.m. LYNDA BURGESS City Clerk ATTEST: Mayor MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AUGUST 3, 1999 STUDY SESSION: 4:15 p.m., SCAQMD Auditorium Town Hall Meeting regarding Solid Waste. Present: Council Members Herrera, Huff, Mayor Pro Tem O'Connor and Mayor Chang. Council Member Ansari arrived at 5:45 p.m. Also present were: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager; David Liu, Deputy Public Works Director; Mike Nelson, Communications and Marketing Director; Kellee Fritzal, Assistant to the City Manager, and Anne Haraksin, Senior Administrative Assistant. Study Session adjourned at 5:45 p.m. CLOSED SESSION 5:45 p.m. a) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation, Government Code Section 54954.5: City of Diamond Bar vs. State of California (C/O'Connor recused herself from discussion of this matter) b) Conference with Legal Counsel - Pending Litigation, Government Code Section 54954.5: City of Diamond Bar vs. State of California (C/O'Connor recused herself from discussion of this matter) C) Conference with Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation, Government Code Section 54954.5: Amrut Patel, et al, vs. City of Diamond Bar 2. CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Chang called the regular City Council meeting to order at 6:45 p.m. in the Auditorium of the South Coast Air Quality Management District, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, California. ROLL CALL: Council Members Ansari, Herrera, Huff, Mayor ProTem O'Connor and Mayor Chang. Also present were: Terrence L. Belanger, City Manager; Mike Jenkins, City Attorney, James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager; David Liu, Deputy Public Works Director; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Linda Magnuson, Finance Director; Mike Nelson, Communications & Marketing Director, and Lynda Burgess, City Clerk. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Fire Chief Gil Herrera. INVOCATION: The Invocation was given Reverend James Kelly, St. Denis Catholic Church. AUGUST 3, 1999 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA: CM/Belanger recommended that Consent Calendar Item 6.12 be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion and that Consent Calendar Item 6.1.3 be continued to August 17, 1999. 3. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS: 3.1 Proclaimed August 3, 1999 as "NATIONAL NIGHT OUT." 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Martha Bruske thanked the City for placing ars inquiry in the Windmill seeking public input regarding the civic/community center. She said that the people of D.B. should not allow any more buildings without ample and safe parking and that no construction should be allowed on park sites. Clyde Hennessee did not believe the City needs a sports center or performing arts center. He would like to know the cost for Consent Calendar Item 6.9 and what are the financial advantages and disadvantages with respect to Consent Calendar Item 6.12. Dr. Lawrence Rhodes asked the City to do something about solicitors leaving door hangers and to outlaw the use of cellular phones in restaurants and theaters. Stan Granger said that a number of the residents residing in the area of Summitridge Park object to the construction of a civic/community center on that site. Allen Wilson spoke about D.B. school's Stanford 9 test results. He expressed concern about the reading portion of the test, which points out the need for a library facility. Martha Bruske objected to the use of transportation funds for a skateboard park design. She was concerned about the location of such a park. When the park is completed, she recommended that the City curtail skateboarding in parking lots and on public streets. She also commented on Consent Calendar Items 6.7 and 6.12. Sue Sisk felt that a sports complex is a very needed item. She stated that the Lanterman Advisory Committee agreed that the Lanterman weed abatement contract should be brought back to Council for public discussion and asked why it is not on tonight's agenda. Jeff Koontz, D.B. Chamber of Commerce Executive Director, highlighted the Chamber's upcoming events. He thanked the City for supporting the Hazardous Waste Roundup. AUGUST 3, 1999 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL Grace MacBride asked why MPT/O'Connor has recused herself from some Lanterman topics and not from every topic. She asked the City Attorney to explain the situation in writing or at a public meeting. She also asked that the City Attorney explain the complaint brought against the City by Lanterman. She felt that the Lanterman weed abatement contract should be reconsidered. Jennifer Hoey felt that contracting with Lanterman for weed abatement is a conflict of interest. She asked Council to reconsider the contract. Fred Encinas supported reconsideration of the Lanterman weed abatement contract. He highly recommended that the City build a sports center. He asked why the City does not handle parks and recreation in-house. MPT/O'Connor asked the City Attorney to explain why she must recuse herself from discussion of certain Lanterman topics. CA/Jenkins explained that "under the Political Reform Act, which is the State law that governs financial conflicts of interests by city and other public officials, a public official cannot participate in a decision that would have a material financial effect on the official's property or the official's business or a source of income to the official_ That's the basic rule of financial conflicts of interest in this State. The law prohibits, makes it a crime for a public official to participate in the making of a decision that would have a material financial impact on an economic interest of that official. The purpose of the Political Reform Act is to prevent self-dealing, basically, to prevent public officials from participating in matters that might affect their finances. The theory behind the conflict of interest law is that it presumes that a person who is financially interested in a matter may simply not be able to view that matter, to consider that matter, without regard to their financial interest. So, whether that is a reality, or whether that is merely a perception, the State law says, to protect the integrity of the decision-making process, we don't want to allow public officials to participate in matters which will affect their interests whether the decision by that official is affected or is not affected by their financial interests. So, the State has an agency called the Fair Political Practices Commission and that agency promulgates regulations, which define what is meant by a conflict of interest, what is meant by financial interest, what is meant by a material financial impact. And these regulations are contained in the California Code of Regulations and the Fair Political Practices Commission monitors and supervises how public officials behave and investigates allegations of violations of these laws. Now, in this particular instance, we are dealing with Council Member O'Connor's principal residence, which happens to be located approximately 1,500 feet from the Lanterman Developmental Center. The law says that if an official's property is located within 2,500 feet of a property that is the subject of a decision, it raises the specter of a conflict of interest because it raises the AUGUST 3, 1999 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL possibility that the official's property will be affected in value by virtue of that decision. Now, the State law creates, basically, a radius, a threshold because it recognizes that once you get beyond a certain number of feet, that the property, the official's property, will be affected only in extraordinary circumstances. So what is that threshold? It is 2,500 feet. Beyond 2,500 there have to be exceptional or extraordinary circumstances before the official will be considered to have a conflict. But if it's within 2,500 feet the official must evaluate whether that decision could have an impact of $10,000 or more, up or down, on the value of their property. The decision in this instance was the decision by the City Council to initiate proceedings, both legal proceedings and other proceedings, in the form of lobbying efforts to stop the expansion of the Lanterman facility. That decision could, arguably, have a material financial impact on Council Member O'Connor's property because, many people have argued in this community, that the Lanterman facility, that the proposed expansion of that facility will have an impact, generally, a negative impact, on the value of their property. That argument has been made continually since this matter has arisen. Council Member O'Connor resides within the radius prescribed by the Fair Political Practices Commission, which would create this possible impact on her property. Consequently, when the time came to make a decision, I was asked for an opinion as to whether or not Council Member O'Connor had a conflict of interest under the Political Reform Act and concluded that she did. Just to be certain, we sent a letter to the FPPC asking the FPPC for an opinion on the same subject, since the FPPC is the ultimate arbiter of conflicts of interest and it's their opinion that counts, in the end. The FPPC looked at the facts and wrote an opinion which concurred in the opinion that I had previously written and it concluded that there was a conflict of interest. That conflict of interest extends to all decisions which this City Council makes pertaining to stopping the expansion of the Lanterman facility. And, again, the basis for it is very simple—if the Lanterman facility is expanded, the argument goes 'it will have a deleterious effect on real property in the immediate environments of that facility' which would include Council Member O'Connor's property. If the Lanterman facility expansion is stopped, it would not have such a deleterious effect. That is the reason why Council Member O'Connor is financially interested in that decision and hence, cannot participate in that decision and in any decision relating to attempting to stop the expansion of that facility. Now, does Council Member O'Connor have a conflict of interest relative to a contract for weed and litter abatement, which has been performed by residents of the Lanterman facility for many years in this community? No. Why not? Because, whether or not this City pays $16,000 to Lanterman for weed and litter abatement has absolutely no bearing on Council Member O'Connor's property, any different than any member of this community, any other property owner in this community. That decision doesn't affect her real property in any particular way. Just because Lanterman is involved doesn't mean she has a conflict. The decision has to be evaluated independently on its own merits, in this case, AUGUST 3, 1999 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL the decision whether or not to have a contract for that particular service has a conflict of interest. Likewise, other decisions that involve the community as a whole do not create conflicts. There are, sometimes, decisions that might affect one Council Member's particular street that would require abstention, that would create a conflict, but no general citywide type. decisions." Further, Mr. Jenkins explained "There is an exception in the law that if more than 10% of the property owners are affected in the same way, then you can participate under what's called the "Public, Generally, Exception." We did an analysis of the number of properties located within 2500 feet of the Lanterman facility and concluded that it did not amount to more than 10% of the property owners in the City, and therefore concluded that that exception does not apply." MPT/O'Connor stated that "the only other way around my being able to participate would be to have an appraisal done and we did discuss that earlier. The City looked into what an appraisal would cost and it would be up to me as a Council Member to determine whether the appraisal was a fair appraisal. In order to do a fair appraisal, how far do we need to go in order to get that. The City looked into that and it would cost $15,000 and I would have to rely on the judgement of the appraisal as to what should be. included and not included. I personally do not have $15,000 to do an extensive appraisal in order to determine whether I have a true conflict of interest or not. I wish I did. I'm very frustrated from not being able to participate in this Lanterman Forensic program, but I also don't care to be found to be a criminal. With a conflict of interest, I can be fined and I can also go to prison. And I apologize to the residents for me not being able to participate. It's frustrating, and I'm sorry, but that's the way the law reads. Again, if any of you want to call me I'd be happy to talk to you. I can show you the ruling from the FPPC. I am not trying to avoid the issue, I am doing what is legally right and what legally, I need to do." 5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 CONCERTS IN THE PARK - "Sam Morrison Band" (Country Western) - August 4, 1999 - 6:30 - 8:00 p.m., Sycamore Canyon Park, 22930 Golden Springs Dr. 5.2 PLANNING COMMISSION - August 10, 1999 - 7:00 p.m., SCAQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.3 SKATEBOARD PARK COMMUNITY MEETING - August 10, 1999 - 8:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m., Heritage Park Community Center, 2900 S. Brea Canyon Rd. AUGUST 3, 1999 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL 5.4 CONCERTS IN THE PARK - "Instant Replay" (Surfin' USA) - August 11, 1999 - 6:30 - 8:00 p.m., Sycamore Canyon Park, 22930 Golden Springs Drive. Visit with the Quakes Mascot, 'Tremor." 5.5 TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION - August 12, 1999 - 7:00 p.m., SCAQMD Hearing Board Room, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.6 CITY COUNCIL MEETING - August 17, 1999 - 6:30 p.m., SCAQMD Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.7 CONCERTS IN THE PARK - "Future America" (Variety Show) - August 18, 1999 - 6:30 - 8:00 p.m., Sycamore Canyon Park, 22930 Golden Springs Dr. 5.8 SMALL BUSINESS SEMINAR - "Financial Analysis Term Ratios" - August 24, 1999 - 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., Room CC -6, SCAQMD, 21865 E. Copley Dr. 5.9 NIGHT AT THE QUAKES - August 25, 1999 - Bus leaves City Hall at 5:30 p.m., Game Time 7:00 p.m. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Huff moved, C/Ansari seconded, to approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Items 6.6, 6.11 and 6.12. Motion carried by the following Roll vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Herrera, Huff, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None 6.1 APPROVED MINUTES: 6.1.1 Regular Meeting of July 6, 1999 - As amended. 6.1.2 Town Hall Meeting of July 10, 1999 - As submitted. 6.1.3 Study Session of July 20, 1999 - Continued to August 17, 1999. 6.1.4 Regular Meeting of July 20, 1999 - As submitted. 6.2 RECEIVED & FILED PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular Meeting of June 24, 1999. 6.3 RECEIVED & FILED PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular Meeting of June 22, 1999. 6.4 APPROVED VOUCHER REGISTER - dated August 3, 1999 in the amount of $656,137.61. MPT/O'Connor abstained from voting on the AUGUST 3, 1999 PAGE 7 CITY COUNCIL following items which related to the Lanterman Forensic Expansion Project: Check in the amount of $184 to Fred Encinas; Invoice #101656 in the amount of $2,292.05; Invoice #XRS69032 in the amount of $50,000. 6.5 REVIEWED AND APPROVED TREASURER'S STATEMENT - for June, 1999. 6.7 AWARDED CONTRACT FOR ECONOMIC ANALYSIS FOR THE PROPOSED COMMUNITY/CIVIC CENTER - to Economic Research Associates (E.R.A.) for a fixed fee amount of $27,720, plus a contingency of $5,000 for support architectural services, for a total authorization of $32,720. 6.8 AWARDED CONTRACT FOR DESIGN OF PANTERA BALLFIELD LIGHTING - to Hirsch & Assoc., in the amount of $18,890, plus a contingency of $500 for a total not to exceed amount of $19,390. 6.9 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 99-64: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE AND LEMON AVENUE STREET REHABILITATION AND MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT - and authorized and directed the City Clerk to advertise to receive bids. 6.10 BREA CANYON SIGNAL - a) AWARDED CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AT THE INTERSECTIONS OF BREA CANYON ROAD/DIAMOND CREST LANE, BREA CANYON ROAD/GLENBROOK DRIVE/DIAMOND CREST LANE, BREA CANYON ROAD/GLENBROOK DRIVE, AND BREA CANYON ROAD/GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE - to L.A. Signal for the Traffic Signal Improvement Project at the intersections of Brea Canyon Rd./Diamond Crest Ln., Brea Canyon Rd./Glenbrook Dr., and Brea Canyon Rd./Golden Springs Dr. in an amount not to exceed $227,605. Further, authorized a contingency amount of $15,000 for project change orders, to be approved by the City Manager, for a total authorization amount of $242,605. (b) AWARDED CONTRACT FOR THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT AT THE INTERSECTIONS OF BREA CANYON ROAD/DIAMOND CREST LANE, BREA CANYON ROAD/GLENBROOK DRIVE, AND BREA CANYON ROAD/GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE PROFESSIONAL INSPECTION SERVICES - to Warren Siecke for Professional Inspection AUGUST 3, 1999 PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL Services for the Traffic Signal Improvement Project at the Intersections of Brea Canyon Rd./Diamond Crest Ln., Brea Canyon Rd./Glenbrook Dr., and Brea Canyon Rd./Golden Springs Dr., in an amount not to exceed $25,824. Further, authorized a contingency amount of $5,00 for project change orders to be approved by the City Manager, for a total authorization of $30,824. 6.13 SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 10(1999): AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR AMENDING CHAPTER 18.108 OF TITLE 18 OF THE DIAMOND BAR MUNICIPAL CODE ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO UPDATE THE MINIMUM NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM REQUIREMENT FOR FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT - approved Second Reading by title only, waived full reading and adopted Ordinance No. 10(1999) to update the Minimum National Flood Insurance Program Requirements for Floodplain Management. MATTERS WITHDRAWN FROM CONSENT CALENDAR: 6.6 AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR SKATEBOARD PARK DESIGN - -- Council appropriated $200,000 from the sale of Proposition A (Transportation) funds in the 99/2000 FY Budget for design and construction of a skateboard park. Staff released an R.F.P. and received one responsive proposal, from Purkiss Rose - RSI. Purkiss-Rose successfully designed over 50 skateboard parks throughout the nation, including local ones in Claremont, Rancho Cucamonga and San Dimas. Staff recommends that the contract for the design of the Skateboard Park be awarded to Purkiss Rose - RSI. In response to C/Herrera, CM/Belanger stated that no location had been determined. Grace MacBride supported the concept of the skateboard park construction to provide a safe location for youth. Sue Sisk said the Sheriffs Department is responsible for enforcement of helmet law for bicyclists. She encouraged Council to strictly enforce helmet laws for skateboarders. Fred Encinas supported construction of a skateboard park. He asked Council to consider the type of skateboard park that is located in Northern California - one large park with small portable satellites. He objected to the use of Brea employees to operate the facility and encouraged the City to establish its own parks & recreation department and hire D.B. residents for the part-time jobs. AUGUST 3, 1999 PAGE 9 CITY COUNCIL Clyde Hennessee supported a skateboard park. C/Herrera moved, C/Huff seconded, to award a contract for the design of a skateboard park (s) to Purkiss Rose -RSI in an amount not to exceed $20,500, plus a contingency of $2,000 for reimbursables and potential additional services that may be necessary included topographic survey and geotechnical study. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Herrera, Huff, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None 6.11 AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE GEOTECHNICAL WORK NECESSARY TO REPAIR TWO LANDSLIDES IN SYCAMORE CANYON PARK - Two landslides in the natural area of Sycamore Canyon Park are in need of repair. A geotechnical consultant is necessary to do the testing and design work required to develop plans and specifications for this repair. Council appropriated $30,000 in the 99/2000 FY Budget to complete the testing, - design and repair work. Staff released an R.F.P. to obtain a consultant and there were 5 responses. Staff has completed a thorough review of each proposal and has determined that Converse Consultants is the best firm to complete the services requested in the R.F.P. Martha Bruske asked for a public education program on drainage. C/Ansari moved, C/Herrera seconded, to award a contract to Converse Consultants in the amount of $25,300 plus a contingency of $2,500 for a total not -to -exceed amount of $27,800. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Herrera, Huff, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None 6.12 CONSIDERATION OF ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION AND BY-LAWS FOR THE PROPOSED DIAMOND BAR COMMUNITY FOUNDATION - The Parks Master Plan, adopted by Council in March, 1998, recommended establishment of a 501(c)(3) non-profit foundation to assist in raising funds - to implement the goals stated in the Plan. The City Attorney developed Articles of Incorporation and By-laws with prior input from the Parks & Recreation Commission. Council reviewed the draft documents and provided input at its Study Session on July 6, 1999. The City Attorney has amended these documents. AUGUST 3, 1999 CM/Belanger confirmed Foundation throughout Community Foundation.' PAGE 10 CITY COUNCIL to MPT/O'Connor that the name of the the document will be "The Diamond Bar MPT/O'Connor requested that on Page 2 of the Bylaws, the following language be added to (d) Dissolution.: "...within the City of Diamond Bar." The Council concurred. MPT/O'Connor suggested that a standard form be developed similar to the form used for the WCCA for review of potential board members. CA/Jenkins recommended that Paragraph (c) (ii) c.. Notice Contents. on Page 9 be revised to read as follows: "The notice shall state the time of the meeting, and the place if the place is other than the principal office of the Corporation, and the business to be conducted." and that "It need not specify the purpose of the meeting." be deleted. Following discussion, MPT/O'Connor moved, C/Ansari seconded, to approve the Articles of Incorporation and By-laws, as amended, direct the City Attorney to file the appropriate documents to establish the Diamond Bar Community Foundation, and announce openings for Board of Director appointments for said Foundation. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Herrera, Huff, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 23382, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 92-1 AND OAK TREE PERMIT NO. 95-2 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE 3000 BLOCK OF STEEPLECHASE LANE (DOLEZAL) — DCM/DeStefano reported that Mr. Warren Dolezal is the owner of a 2.55 acre site located in the 3000 block of Steeplechase Lane. In June, 1995, the City approved Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382, Conditional Use Permit No. 92-1, and Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2 for purposes of retaining the existing oak tree subdividing the property into four lots. In September 1998, Council denied a request to extend land use approvals and remove the oak tree. Mr. Dolezal filed an action in Superior Court to overturn the City denial. The City and Mr. Dolezal agreed to settle the dispute in April 1999. Mr. Dolezal has filed for an extension of time, reducing the project parcel map from four to three lots, and preserving the existing oak tree. On July 27, 1999, the Planning Commission recommended AUGUST 3, 1999 PAGE 11 CITY COUNCIL approval of the requested extension of time, lots reduction and tree preservation. C/Herrera asked what access was originally proposed for the project. DCM/DeStefano responded that the original project approval of four lots included access from Steeplechase Lane from the private side of the project. The access issue has been resolved through "The Country Estates" Homeowners Association and with the current three lot proposal, access remains from Steeplechase Lane through 'The Country Estates." No access is permitted via Hawkwood Rd. The JCC Project at the terminus of Hawkwood Rd will create an emergency -only gate. In response to C/Huff, DCM/DeStefano stated that the project contains lots that are less than the one -acre minimums required by 'The Country Estates." However, the project is not technically a part of "The Country Estates." In response to C/Ansari, DCM/DeStefano indicated that project approval contains a series of conditions and mitigation measures that call out extensive observation by appropriately certified persons to monitor preservation of the oak tree. M/Chang declared the Public Hearing open. Warren Dolezal, property owner, stated that through extensive planning and work with staff, the proper conclusions have been reached, as requested by Council, to reduce the project to three lots and save the oak tree which is special to him, also. He asked for Council's approval subject to the same Resolution No. 99-18 approved by the Planning Commission and recommended to Council. Martha Bruske complained about removal of oak trees by other developers.. Dr. Lawrence Rhodes said that oak trees will not survive if leaves are raked from beneath them. It is absolutely essential that the leaves recompose because of the way the tree works. He believed that this was a good project for the City. C/Ansari moved, C/Herrera seconded, to direct staff to prepare a resolution of approval for Tentative Parcel Map No. 23382, Conditional Use Permit No. 92-1 and Oak Tree Permit No. 95-2 for property located in the 3000 block of Steeplechase Lane (Dolezal). Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Herrera, Huff, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None AUGUST 3, 1999 PAGE 12 CITY COUNCIL 8. OLD BUSINESS: 8.1 DISCUSSION OF STATUS OF LANTERMAN: MPT/O'Connor recused herself and left the dais. a) Final Report on Lanterman Developmental Task Force presented by Chairperson Sue Sisk. Fred Encinas read from a July 24, 1999 Tribune article. He believed that Governor Davis has ignored the citizens' efforts to stop the expansion project. He invited Council Members to attend the Advisory Committee Car Rally at 10:00 a.m. on Saturday, August 14. He thanked the City for obtaining opposition support from 40 surrounding cities. Dr. Lawrence Rhodes said he would have no problem with Lanterman expanding its current population; however, he would be opposed to change in the facility from a severe mentally disabled facility to a prison. Martha Bruske said she thought that the task force had to be chaired by a Council Member and wondered how much support the City gave toward helping Sue Sisk prepare the report. She felt that the report should have included a list of expenses. She expressed concern that the task force has now been changed to an advisory committee and that there has been no change in the charge of the group. She will be glad when this matter is concluded because she believed it is a win/lose situation and the City should have tried harder for a win/win situation. Jack Gutowski respected the work of the Task Force. He pointed out that the project was acted upon during the tenure of Governor Wilson. He believed more people would be opposed to the project if the matter did not seem to be so anti one particular political group. Sue Sisk stated that the task force was not attempting to pose a danger to any other communities by way of its recommendations. The recommendations for the San Gabriel Valley included honor ranches that have already been established and were closed down due to the lack of funding. Three members of the task force prepared the report. She thanked staff and Council Members Herrera and Huff for their support of the task force. b) Status of Legal and Legislative Activities regarding the Lanterman Development Center Forensic Expansion Project. AUGUST 3, 1999 PAGE 13 CITY COUNCIL Report by C/Herrera, M/Chang and CM/Belanger. Darla Farrell urged the Council not to forget about the severe behavioral patients, which is a greater concern to residents than the forensic patients. In response to C/Herrera, CA/Jenkins stated that the discrimination charge against D.B. is based upon the imposition of two conditions by Council on the proposed contract for weed and litter abatement with Lanterman concerning the wearing of uniforms and the exclusion of forensic and severe behavioral patients from that program. The charges are that those conditions violate state and federal laws, which prohibit discrimination against the disabled. MPT/O'Connor returned to the dais. 8.2 FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 09(1999): AN ORDINANCE RESTRICTING PARKING WITHIN DIAMOND BAR PREFERENTIAL PARKING DISTRICT NO. 2 AND AMENDING THE DIAMOND BAR MUNICIPAL CODE ACCORDINGLY - Council reviewed the parking situation on Fallow Field Dr. and Pasco Ct. At the July 6, 1999 meeting, Council amended Preferential Parking District No. 2 Ordinance creating "No Parking Any Time, Except by Permit" from 3200 Fallow Field Dr. to Malad Ct. including all of Pasco Ct., for residential parking. In addition, Council created 10 employee -parking permits for First Mortgage Corporation (FMC); on the east and west side of Fallow Field Dr., adjacent to the FMC building. However, after review of the Ordinance, the "No Parking Any Time, Except by Permit" would create a burden on the residents when there is not a problem on weekends and weeknights. The creation of "No Parking Any Time" would mandate that the residents obtain permits for any parking on the streets. Therefore, the First Reading of Ordinance No. 9(1999) is being amended to read "No Parking 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday Through Saturday." Martha Bruske said the Council should have a philosophy of no commercial parking on residential streets. M/Chang moved, C/Huff seconded, to add signs in front of First Mortgage Corporation on both sides of Fallow Field Dr. indicating "No Parking 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday Through Saturday," and the rest of the signs shall read: "No Parking 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday Through Friday," --- introduce first reading, waive full reading of Ordinance No. 09(1999) restricting parking within D.B. Preferential Parking District No. 2 and amending the D.B. Municipal Code accordingly. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AUGUST 3, 1999 PAGE 14 CITY COUNCIL AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Herrera, Huff, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - MPT/O'Connor ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None MPT/O'Connor stated her reason for voting "No" on this matter is a result of her objection to allow commercial business parking on residential streets. 8.3 CONSIDERATION OF STREET TREE PROGRAM a) Median Tree Planting - to plant 543 trees on landscaped medians on D.B. Blvd. and Grand Ave. at a cost of $95,025. Funds are available in L.L.M.D. #38. b) Species Replacement Program - to replace Canary Island Pines, Brisbane Box and Jacaranda trees along the major arterials because of the damage these trees do to the hardscape. Canary Island Pines will be removed and replaced during a 15 -year phased program. A variety of flowering trees will be used as replacements. Brisbane Box will be replaced through attrition and Tristania Laurina and Jacaranda trees will be replaced through attrition with Chinese Fringe. Trees that will be planted will all be sized as 24" box. Average annual cost for the phased 15 -year plan will be approximately $10,000. First year cost will include removal of raised tree well covers, removal of up to 30 hazardous trees and planting replacement trees. Total first year cost is expected to be $20,325. C/Huff moved, C/Herrera seconded, to continue the matter until the minutes from the Study Session are more complete to determine whether all Council questions have been addressed. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Herrera, Huff, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None 8.2 CONSIDERATION OF VERTICAL HOLIDAY BANNERS - Council considered installation of holiday banners to create a festive atmosphere for the community during the holiday season. Options being considered include: 1) Posting banners adjacent to shopping centers with financial support from the shopping centers - 308 banners; 2) Posting banners along the full length of D.B. Blvd. - 366 banners; 3) Posting banners adjacent to shopping centers and along the full length of D.B. Blvd. - 500 banners. The City is working with the Chamber of Commerce to determine the interest AUGUST 3, 1999 PAGE 15 CITY COUNCIL of shopping centers to participate in this program. Cost of each banner is approximately $220 for material, printing, posting hardware and brackets, posting, removal, storage and cleaning of banners. Clyde Hennessee suggested that either 15 or 20 banners be placed strategically throughout the City. He did not believe that an excessive number of banners would be necessary. C/Herrera moved, MPT/O'Connor seconded, to post up to 308 holiday banners adjacent to the shopping centers with the cost for purchasing and posting the banners evenly split between the City and the adjacent shopping center, with banners posted only where shopping centers agree to provide such financial support. Further, authorized the use of up to $33,900 in funds from the General Fund, or, if found to be eligible, Redevelopment Agency. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Herrera, Huff, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None 8.4 CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED MILLENNIUM EVE CELEBRATION - The coming of the new millenium has sparked an interest in the community for a City -sponsored celebration on December 31, 1999. Staff has developed a concept of having an event at the intersection of Grand Ave. and D.B. Blvd. Included in the event will be fireworks, entertainment, food, attractions, and the markings for a general good time. Involvement from the local shopping centers and businesses at the intersection will be sought and residents in areas that may be disrupted will be notified. The total cost for this event will not exceed $106,500 and these funds could be made available by selling $150,000 of Proposition A Transportation reserves. Many residents will be seeking close -to -home opportunities to celebrate the new millenium and the chance for the City to conduct this event is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. C/Ansari suggested corporate co-sponsorship of the event. She said she received positive feedback from community members. MPT/O'Connor said that she also received positive comments from residents. C/Herrera supported the idea of honoring this special event. In response to C/Huff, CSD/Rose stated that the report is based upon commitment of funds to support the event. Staff has made no effort to get sponsorship to this point. It is intended as part of the process. However, AUGUST 3, 1999 PAGE 16 CITY COUNCIL until staff gets out into the marketplace, no commitments can be made. C/Huff suggested that if corporate sponsorships reach a certain benchmark, the event will proceed and if the benchmark is not reached, the event will not take place. He asked how the City will handle the question of alcohol. CSD/Rose stated that no alcoholic beverage is contemplated to be sold or served within the fenced area. Martha Bruske expressed opposition to the event and the expenditure of City funds. She shared C/Huffs concerns about drinking. Clyde Hennessee supported the idea. Jack Gutowski opposed the idea. Spending $106,000 of taxpayer money in this manner is irresponsible. C/Herrera moved, C/Ansari seconded, to approve the proposed community millenium eve celebration in an amount not to exceed $106,500 and direct staff to offer for sale to the highest bidder, $150,000 of Proposition A Transportation reserves to fund the event and establish a subcommittee to plan, obtain financial support for, obtain sponsorships for and conduct the event. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Ansari, Herrera, MPT/O'Connor NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Huff, M/Chang ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None C/Herrera moved, MPT/O'Connor seconded, to appoint MPT/O'Connor and C/Ansari to serve as members of the Millenium Eve Celebration subcommittee. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES NOES: ABSENT 9. NEW BUSINESS: COUNCIL MEMBERS - COUNCIL MEMBERS — COUNCIL MEMBERS - None Ansari, Herrera, Huff, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang None None RECESS TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING: M/Chang recessed the City Council Meeting to the Redevelopment Agency at 11:17 p.m. AUGUST 3, 1999 RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING: Council meeting at 11:24 p.m. PAGE 17 CITY COUNCIL M/Chang reconvened the City 10. COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS AND MEMBER COMMENTS: C/Huff asked staff to clarify the policy for placing items on the agenda. He. was disappointed that the Lanterman contract was not placed on tonight's agenda as a result of his request. He asked for an update on the status of the City's website. He spoke about attending an Arciero project homeowners meeting. The Four Corners Commission is receiving data on options and variables and it appears that the SR57/60 interchange is key to the area. The Commission would like to hold a study session and invite Parsons- Brinckerhoff to make a presentation regarding this matter. C/Ansari asked the Council to reconsider bringing the Parks & Recreation program in-house. She recommended a subcommittee be formed to consider water issues and communicate with the water board. Allstate is hiring at this time in Brea. And stated that they would hold a job fair and try to hire people from D.B. She would like the City to talk with Allstate regarding this issue. She congratulated Diamond Bar High School for obtaining a digital grant for $850,000. C/Herrera stated that the Lanterman Advisory Committee will next meet at 7:00 p.m. on September 20. She stated that the Council studied the issue of bringing the Parks & Recreation program in-house and concluded that if D.B. conducted the program, it would cost more because additional personnel would have to be hired and equipment would need to be purchased and that it was more cost effective to continue with the Brea contract. She congratulated Captain Arthur Herrera on his promotion to Commander of the Detective Division. MPT/O'Connor believed it was the intent of VolunTeen and other recreation programs to hire D.B. residents first. Different subcommittee meetings she attended during the past two weeks included the 11th Anniversary Celebration Committee, Finance Committee, and Code Enforcement Subcommittee. All Council Members attended a meeting the previous evening with Supervisor Don Knabe during which issues of mutual interest were discussed. She asked that any residents who placed bulky items in front of their house by the mandatory 6:30 a.m. deadline that were not picked up to please call her at City Hall. M/Chang said that in addition to subcommittee meetings previously mentioned, he and ACM/Fritzal attended a JPIA Board meeting. A letter was sent to Supervisor Knabe asking for his help in getting permission for D.B. to use the D.B. Golf Course parking lot and clubhouse for a possible community/civic center site. AUGUST 3, 1999 PAGE 18 CITY COUNCIL He announced that one of his rental properties burned and that his tenant lost most of her personal goods. He reminded people to be sure that they have their real and personal property adequately insured. 11. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to conduct, M/Chang adjourned the meeting at 11:45 p.m. ATTEST: Mayor <-*'-toL� �a�'gA� LYNDA BURGESS, City Clerk