HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/15/2002 Minutes - Regular MeetingMINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
OCTOBER 15, 2002
CLOSED SESSION: None
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Chang called the meeting to order
at 6:40 p.m. in the Auditorium of the South Coast Air Quality Management
District, 21865 E. Copley Drive, Diamond Bar, CA.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: The Pledge of Allegiance was led by
Council Member Zirbes
INVOCATION: The Invocation was given by Monsignor
James Loughnane, St. Denis Catholic Church.
ROLL CALL: Council Members Herrera, Zirbes, Mayor
Pro Tem O'Connor, Mayor Chang. Council Member Huff arrived at 6:50 p.m.
Also present were: Linda Lowry, City Manager; Mike Jenkins,
City Attorney; James DeStefano, Deputy City Manager; Bob Rose,
Community Services Director, Linda Magnuson, Finance Director and Lynda
Burgess, City Clerk.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: CM/Lowry asked Council to approve the
following Agenda changes: Continue Item 1.4 to a future agenda; move Item
1.5 to the beginning of Special Presentations; move Consent Calendar Item
6.13 to Council Considerations Item 8.3; amend the title of Consent Calendar
Item 6.14 to "Authorize the City Manager to purchase a Parks and Recreation
Reservation System" and continue the recommendation for the Customer
Request Management Software to a future agenda. Council concurred with
the recommendations.
1. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS:
1.1 Presented City Tile to Joe Torrealta, owner, Guiseppe's Italian Deli &
Imported Groceries and Business of the Month video presentation.
1.2 Proclaimed October 14 through 18, 2002 as "Red Ribbon Week" —
accepted by Deputy Rick Wright.
1.3 Proclaimed October 20-26, 2002 as "World Population Awareness
Week."
1.4 Presentation by Jennifer Colamonico, Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin &
Assoc. reporting on the results of the Library Survey.
2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
CC/Burgess presented information on the touch screen voting that would be
implemented for this year's election. A slide presentation was given by
OCTOBER 15, 2042 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL
CSD/Rose regarding recently completed City beautification and street
improvement projects.
CM/Lowry responded to concerns from Council Members regarding Old
Business Items from the October 1, 2002 meeting. Regarding the concern
about bus service to Lorbeer Middle School, a new bus route (#853) has
been established to cover the area. Since implementation, no complaints
have been received. With respect to street sweeping enforcement, staff
continues to monitor the matter to establish the most effective and efficient
route with particular emphasis in and around schools. Staff expects to have
this situation resolved by the end of October. Regarding maintenance issues
at the post office, staff contacted the office and improvements have been
undertaken. This is a work in progress and staff will continue to monitor the
situation.
3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Martha Bruske, speaking on Consent Calendar
Item 6.8, asked if the financial meetings should be public meetings.
Regarding 6.12x, she asked Council to scrutinize additional printing charges.
Are these additional charges for the City's newsletter and if so, does the
additional amount track with the bids?
Clyde Hennessee spoke about the November 51' ballot measures and
candidates. He questioned Consent Calendar Item 6.9 and expressed
concern that approval of Consent Calendar Item 6.8 could result in fiscal
mismanagement it the Council Members delegated too much responsibility
to staff. He vowed to vote against a tax increase to build a larger library.
Marie Buckland asked the Council to place discussion of the use of the City
logo on a future agenda.
4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENT: CM/Lowry offered the
following responses: on the matter of the Consent Calendar, the World
Water Rescue organization called to ask that, to avoid an impropriety, the
matter of a presentation to Ed Beidemnan be made later in the year. Item 6.8
addresses the method of approval for the new approved schedule for
payment of warrants on a weekly basis. Finance Committee meetings
continue to be open to the public. Consent Calendar Item 6.12 includes a
$40,000 recreation brochure. The amount for printing the newsletter has not
yet been contracted. Regarding the Library Survey, the City contracted with
the consultant to perform the survey. Mr. Hennessee's name did not appear
on the random sample listing. With respect to placing the matter of the City's
logo on a future agenda for discussion, there is a policy in place, which was
reviewed by the City Attorney. Therefore, the Council currently stands on
that policy.
5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
OCTOBER 15, 2002 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL
5.1 COMMUNITY FOUNDATION MEETING — October 17, 2002 — 7:00
p.m., Room CC -8, SCAQMD/Govemment Center, 21865 E. Copley
Dr.
5.2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING —October 22, 2002 — 7:00 p.m.,
SCAQMD/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr..
5.3 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION — October 24, 2002 —
7:00 p.m., SCAQMDIGovemment Center Hearing Board Room,
21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.4 HALL OF HORRORS HAUNTED HOUSE — October 30-31, 2002 —
6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., Heritage Park, 2900 S. Brea Canyon Rd.
5.5 FALL FUN FESTIVAL — October 31, 2002 — 4:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.,
Heritage Park, 2900 S. Brea Canyon Rd. Admission $3.00 per child.
5.6 PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE — November 4, 2002 — 7:00 p.m.,
Walnut/Diamond Bar Sheriffs Station, 21695 E. Valley Blvd., Walnut.
5.7 ELECTION DAY — November 5, 2002 — 6:30 p.m.,
SCAQMD/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
5.8 CITY COUNCIL MEETING — November 5, 2002 — 6:30 p.m.,
SCAQMD/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 E. Copley Dr.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR: Moved by C/Herrera, seconded by C/Huff to
approve the Consent Calendar, with the exception of Item 6.11. Motion
carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Herrera, Huff, Zirbes, MPT/O'Connor,
M/Chang
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
6.1 APPROVED CITY COUNCIL MINUTES:
6.1.1 Special Meeting of September 25, 2002 —As submitted.
6.1.2 Regular Meeting of October 1, 2002 — As submitted.
6.2 RECEIVED & FILED PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
MINUTES - Regular Meeting of August 22, 2002.
6.3 RECEIVED AND FILED PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES —
September 10, 2002.
6.4 RECEIVED AND FILED TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION
OCTOBER 15, 2002 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL
COMMISSION MINUTES — August 8, 2002.
6.5 APPROVED WARRANT REGISTERS - dated October 3 and October
10, 2002 in the amount of $580,455.07.
6.6 REVIEWED AND APPROVED TREASURER'S STATEMENTS —
Revised statement for July 31, 2002 and new statement for August
31, 2002.
6.7 REJECTED CLAIM FOR DAMAGES — filed by Veronica Lockhart
October 1, 2002.
6.8 APPROVED CHANGE IN VOUCHER REGISTER APPROVAL
PROCESS BY ELIMINATING WEEKLY FINANCE COMMITTEE
MEETINGS.
6.9 AUTHORIZED CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT
WITH WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT FOR WORK
ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION OF WATER DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEM FOR COMMUNITY/SENIOR CENTER IN AN AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $255,966.50.
6.10 APPROVED NOTICES OF COMPLETION:
6.10.1 SLURRY SEAL PROJECT AREA 4 — PAVEMENT
COATINGS CO.
6.10.2 AREA 4 ASPHALT RUBBER AND AGGREGATE MEMBRANE
(ARAM) PROJECT — MANHOLE ADJUSTING, INC.
6.12 APPROVED EXCEEDING THE CITY MANAGER'S PURCHASING
AUTHORITY:
a) INCREASED THE PURCHASE ORDER FOR SERVICES
PROVIDED BY REINBERGER PRINTWERKS, INC. IN AN
AMOUNT UP TO $46,000 FOR THE 2002/03 FISCAL YEAR.
b) RENEWED MAINTENANCE CONTRACT WITH XEROX
CORP. FOR MAINTENANCE OF PHOTOCOPIERS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2002-03 IN THE AMOUNT OF $18,800.76.
c) INCREASED THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH KOURY ENGINEERING BY $45,000 FOR SPECIAL
INSPECTION SERVICES, FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT NOT -
TO -EXCEED $60,000.
OCTOBER 15, 2002 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL
6.13 MOVED TO CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION.
6.14 AUTHORIZED CITY MANAGER TO PURCHASE PARKS AND
RECREATION RESERVATION SYSTEM SOFTWARE FROM
VERMONT SYSTEMS IN THE AMOUNT OF $43,000.
6.15 APPROVED AMENDMENT TO A CONSULTING SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH GARY L. NEELY FOR GOVERNMENTAL
AFFAIRS CONSULTING SERVICES.
MATTERS WITHDRAWN FROM CONSENT CALENDAR:
6.11 AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT WITH BONTERRA CONSULTING IN AN AMOUNT
NOT TO EXCEED $7,370 TO PREPARE CEQA DOCUMENTATION
FOR A LIBRARY BUILDING AT THE SUMMITRIDGE PARK
COMMUNITY/SENIOR CENTER PROJECT SITE, AND REQUEST
TO APPROPRIATE $7,370 FROM GENERAL FUND RESERVES.
MPT/O'Connor felt that it might be premature to prepare a CEQA
document prior to Council's consideration of whether or not to proceed
with a new library.
CM/Lowry explained that this item is a byproduct of the process
toward completion of an application for bond funds that Council had
previously approved.
C/Herrera moved, C/Zirbes seconded to approve Amendment No. 3
to a Professional Services Agreement with Bonterra Consulting in an
amount not to exceed $7,370 to prepare CEQA documentation for a
library building at the Summitridge Park Community/Senior Center
project site, and an appropriation of $7,370 from General Fund
reserves. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Herrera, Huff, Zirbes, M/Chang
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - MPT/O'Connor
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None
8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
8.1 AWARD DESIGN SERVICES CONTRACT TO DEWAN-LUNDIN AND
ASSOCIATES FOR GRAND AVENUE BETTERMENT/
MPROVEMENT PROJECT IN THE AMOUNT OF $167,482 ($147,482
AND A $20,000 CONTINGENCY INCLUDING AN ALLOCATION OF
$67,482 FROM UNAPPROPRIATED GAS TAX FUNDS).
OCTOBER 15, 2002 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL
Clyde Hennessee did not believe the City should take on the
additional expense of maintaining acquired property in order to
accommodate cut -through traffic. History shows that if you build a
wider road, more traffic will make use of it. D.B. should not try to
compete with cities that have a much greater financial base.
Martha Bruske is convinced that the goals of the City and the City
Council are not the goals of the residents. There are pressing issues
that should be resolved before considering the "fancying up of D.B.
streets." When it comes to improving slopes, D.B. Blvd. needs more
improvement than does Grand Ave. What happened to the City of
Industry's EIR statement that assured widening of Grand Ave? Is this
proposal presented to satisfy the City of Industry? If it is not, take
care of more pressing needs of the City.
Marie Buckland asked why the City of D.B. is proposing this project for
the sake of the Industry East project? Grand Ave. cannot handle the
current capacity. If Grand is expected to accommodate a hundred or
more trucks per day, who will fix the streets? Industry is giving D.B.
nothing but trouble and headaches.
DCM/DeStefano explained that the City of Industry approved an EIR
about two years ago for an almost 7,000,000 sq. ft. industrial project
currently under construction between Brea Canyon Road, SR 60 and
Grand Ave. Within the EIR, traffic Impacts were identified. Among the
streets impacted was Grand Ave. west of the City's limits. Industry's
traffic reports incorporated within the EIR showed what Industry felt
were improvements necessary to D. B. Blvd. east of the SR 60. Some
of those impacts were shown to show acquisition of significant
properties and loss of some commercial businesses to allow capacity
through D.B. D.B. objected to Industry preparing an EIR that
described mitigation measures that had the effect of ruining property
values along Grand Ave. as well as, affecting the City's commercial
base. Even though Industry adopted the EIR, it does not mean that
D.B. is obligated to implement measures Industry deemed
appropriate. Only the City of D.B. has the right to determine what
occurs within its boundaries, including Grand Ave. and the D.B. City
Council will make a final determination with respect to this matter.
Moved by C/Herrera, seconded by C2irbes, to award a design
services contract to Dewan-Lundin and Associates for Grand Ave.
betterment/improvement project in the amount of $167,482. Motion
carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Herrera, Huff, Zirbes, MPT/
O'Connor, M/Chang
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
OCTOBER 15, 2002 -PAGE 7 CITY COUNCIL
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
8.2 APPOINTMENT OF JODY ROBERTO TO THE DIAMOND BAR
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS — (Council
appointee).
MPT/O'Connor moved, C/Zlrbes seconded, to approve appointment
of Jody Roberto to the D.B. Community Foundation Board of
Directors. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Herrera, Huff, Zirbes,
MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
8.3 AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
COMMUNITY/SENIOR CENTER IN THE AMOUNT OF $9,861,190;
AUTHORIZE A 7% CONTINGENCY IN THE AMOUNT OF $691,683
AND APPROPRIATE $1,000,000 FROM GENERAL FUND
RESERVES.
C/Huff stated that last week Foothill Transit held its open house for the
$21,000,000 Irwindale maintenance facility. KPRS built that facility.
When he asked for a truthful recommendation, he received glowing
reports. If Council rejects the proposal and goes out to bid again, it
risks losing this contractor.
C/Zirbes said that when he joined the City Council last December, he
learned that the City's budget was $12.6 million for this project. He
understood that the majority of the cost increase resulted from
improvement to the site. Now the budget is $13.6 million and he
wanted to know if the new amount included contingencies.
DCM/Doyle responded that the $13.6 million includes contingencies.
That figure represents a total turnkey project budget including
architect and engineering fees, design services, geotechnical, civil
engineering, etc.
C/Zirbes asked FD/Magnuson what the reserve fund balance would
be if the City approved the project as presented.
FD/Magnuson estimated that if the Community/Senior Center budget
was increased by $1,000,000, the fund reserve balance would be
reduced to about $13,000,000.
C/Zirbes asked DCM/Doyle to expand on his recommendation to reject
this bid and go back out to bid for the project.
OCTOBER 15, 2002 PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL
DCM/Doyle said it was a difficult recommendation because it is a
gamble either way. If Council decides to go back out to bid, revise the
scope of the project and significantly change the scope of the project,
D.B. runs the risk of getting a contractor who is not as good as what
we know this contractor to be. D.B. also runs the risk of the bids
coming back in and not realizing anticipated savings. One certainty
is that If the Council goes out to bid once again, the project would be
delayed anywhere from three to four months. If Council awards the
contract and pursued change order options to reduce the costs, there
is a risk in not realizing the full value of those items and/or having to
pay for those items in future years. As a staff member, he made a
conservative recommendation. If dollars are an issue and timing is
not an issue and the contractor is not an issue, going out to bid would
be a viable option. Even so, there is no assurance the City would
save $1,000,000. If Council decided to go forward
with the current contractor and incorporate change orders, there is no
assurance that the savings would amount to $1,000,000.
Responding to C/Herrera, DCM/Doyle said that staff prepared 30 bid
packages. About 15-20 general contractors attended the mandatory
pre-bid meeting and the City ultimately received seven bid packages.
This project is fairly small when compared to projects that are in the
range of $50-100,000,000 and there are a limited number of
contractors that would consider this project.
C/Herrera believed timing was everything. As C/Huff stated, the low
bidder on this project is a quality company. She felt it was important
to D.B. because if Council went back out to bid and redesigned the
project and/or downsized the scope, there was no assurance that D.B.
would receive quality bids. In addition, four months would be lost and
additional money would be spent in the pursuit of additional bids. She
asked if there was a possibility that the current contractor could
recommend areas of cost savings.
DCM/Doyle responded that if Council decided to move forward,
discussions regarding areas of cost savings could take place with the
contractor. He reassured Council that staff would work closely with
the architect to make certain that the quality of the items put forward
by the contractor would not significantly reduce the quality of the
project.
C/Huff added that Foothill Transit indicated that there were a number
of change orders for their project. Many were initiated by the
architects failure to adequately plan. This contractor was very flexible
in working with Foothill Transit and staff was very happy with the
negotiations and outcome.
OCTOBER 15, 2002 PAGE 9 CITY COUNCIL
Martha Bruske commented that $1,000,000 is a shock. She wondered
if Council had been psychologically prepared by staff to receive this
news. Fortunately, this is not an election year because all of the
Council Members used this building as a campaign promise. She
suggested that Council proceed with the project and build it as
originally intended in order to keep their promise to the residents and
in particular, the senior citizens.
Clyde Hennesee said, "don't spend the money." The City keeps taking
on more and more projects and depleting General Fund monies.
When will it end.
Steve Tye wanted Council to build the Community/Senior Center
and do it right. The first cost estimate he heard was $5,000,000.
Today its twice that amount. After the contract is signed, concessions
will not be forthcoming. A few months delay to save $1,000,000 is a
good exchange. Put the project out to bid again and the City might
save a million or more dollars. Please make a good and prudent
business decision.
MPT/O'Connor pointed out that only about $500,000 could be
attributed to cost reductions. The other $400,000 in reductions were
due to deferring certain aspects of the project.
C/Huff reported that over the past several years, Council has
anticipated this project. The City has saved and been prudent with
the community's resources, have exacted funds from developers and
anticipated the day the City would build an amenity for its residents.
If Council moves forward with this project as outlined and
appropriates another $1,000,000, the City would stili have
approximately $4,000,000 more in its general fund than it had when
he and C/Herrera came to the Council in 1995196. The City has
saved for a rainy day and this is the rainy day. The City has gone
through the tedious bid process and has a very qualified low bidder.
Everyone is suffering from sticker shock. However, this project cost
was always a best —guess estimate. The task force conducted
lengthy deliberations about what types of amenities it would like to
have included in the project. Although it is a large and costly project,
it should be done right. This type of project should include higher
quality materials because of its extensive use. We have the money
saved and we have a comfortable cushion left in the general fund. If
the project was compromised at this point, it would lack continuity. It
is not the City's fault that taxes have doubled since it incorporated.
He believed it was prudent to move forward at this time for all of the
reasons previously outlined.
OCTOBER 15, 2002 PAGE 10 CITY COUNCIL
C/Herrera said that the cost of the project increased when additional
mitigation became necessary to shore up the slopes.
C/Zirbes said he had thought a lot about this project and about the
community's expectation. He asked that everyone temper their
emotions and not make a decision based upon a timeline. He felt it
might not be the most opportune time to begin negotiations after the
contract has been awarded. Perhaps the deferred costs could be
borne by a future library or some other tenant or perhaps a $30,000
building management system could replace a $130,000 building
management system. He cautioned Council about entering into an
agreement with the builder with
the hope of deferring cost items or going in with change orders,
hoping to receive a fair value. He did not believe it was possible. He
believed the decision the Council should consider was whether to
come in at a budget amount agreed upon by the Council. If so,
Council should direct staff to deny the bid, re -scope the project and
again go out to bid. If this is the building the community and the
Council have the vision for, it should move forward to bid out the
original design.
WChang said he had asked himself many questions. As a Council,
have they tried their best and done everything possible to insure the
best interest for the residents of D.B. Since there is some question
about the actual cost of the project, he wanted to go back out to bid.
In the beginning, he committed to building this quality project on time
and on budget. Now it appears that Council is juggling two decisions.
If the project is to be built on time, Council should proceed. If Council
wants to keep the project within budget, it is not possible at this
juncture. With these discrepancies, he would rather delay three more
months, go back out to bid and attempt to save the money and keep
the project within budget. He felt it was more important to save
$1,000,000 than to save three or four months. This project has been
on the drawing board since he joined the Council almost five years
ago. He believed everyone should be willing to wait for three or four
months if the City could save $1,000,000. At the very least, Council
should give the community the benefit of the doubt and try one more
time to attempt to get a better bid. Even if the bid comes back the
same, at least Council has exhausted all opportunities and provided
a best effort for the community. He would like to have the project go
back out to bid without downgrading the quality of the project.
C/Herrera said she had confidence that DCWDoyle would be able to
reduce the cost of this project. The City Is entitled to 25% of the
project amount in change orders that could result in cost reductions
of up to $2.4 million. Her decision was not emotion based. She was
very thoughtful in her deliberations and she cautiously thought through
OCTOBER 15, 2002 PAGE 11 CITY COUNCIL_
the matter.
Following discussion, C/Herrera moved, C/Huff seconded, to award
a contract to KPRS Construction Services, Inc. in the amount of
$9,861,190; authorize a 70/a contingency in the amount of $691,683
and appropriate $1,000,000 from General Fund Reserves. Motion
carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES:COUNCIL MEMBERS - Herrera, Huff, MPT/O'Connor
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Zirbes, M/Chang
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None
9. COUNCIL SUB -COMMITTEE REPORTS/ COUNCIL MEMBER
COMMENTS: C/Herrera felt it had been an exciting evening and looked
forward to a Council Study Session to review and discuss the results of the
Library survey as well as consideration of the next step in the process.
Although the Council split its vote on the Community/Senior Center project
tonight, all Council Members are committed to moving forward with the
project. The split vote was merely an indicator of "how we get there." She
had confidence in City staffs ability to negotiate with a quality builder and felt
that tonight's decision was the right decision.
C/Zirbes wants the City to build a Community Center and to be as certain as
possible that the City is going about it in the right manner. He had difficulty
with the concept of negotiating "after the fact." This is a magnificent project
that will make the City proud. He would prefer change orders be kept to a
minimum in order to insure the best possible finished product. This morning,
the Neighborhood Improvement Committee met and will soon be submitting
a draft home improvement program for Council consideration. He thanked
M/Chang for his commitment to the project. He also thanked Jody Roberto
for volunteering to serve on the D.B. Community Foundation.
C/Herrera reported that staff wrote a resolution to support a unique zip code
for D.B. for presentation before the League of California Cities. At the first
go -round, the League took no action, a polite way of rejecting the issue
because the League has a policy of not getting involved in local or regional
issues. D.B. modified its resolution by including an advisement that property
taxes, franchise fees, economic development assessments, waste collection,
etc. are allocated by zip code. Thanks to C/Herrera's and CM/Lowry's
testimony, D.B. was successful in obtaining adoption of its proposed
resolution. The next step is to communicate with all 477 cities in California
to see which ones are having a similar problem, assemble a packet including
the adopted resolution and submit it to the U.S. Postal Service for possible
adoption.
MPT/O'Connor stated that the League of Cities Conference was well attended
by cities throughout California. One of the many interesting seminars was
the Code of Ethics seminar. As a board member on the Wildlife Corridor
OCTOBER 15, 2002
10.
PAGE 12
CITY COUNCIL
Conservation Authority (WCCA), she has had difficulty with the way in which
the organization conducts meetings and she would be suggesting that the
WCCA Board establish a code of ethics. She asked staff to look into drafting
a Code of Ethics for D.B. Last Sunday, she and her daughter's Girl Scout
troup visited the Museum of Tolerance. They were unable to view the entire
museum in the four hours they spent at the site. She highly recommended
a visit to the museum. She felt that the City's attempt to beautify Sycamore
Canyon Park was a dismal failure. She asked for a report from staff outlining
mitigation plans for Sycamore Canyon and when the fence would be taken
down so that residents could visit the site. She asked who was responsible
for maintaining the cul-de-sac at the end of Sunset Crossing Rd. near the
YMCA. She wished everyone a safe Halloween and asked residents to be
watchful of young people as they make their way around the City, especially
with the fall back time change and early sunset taking place just prior to the
festivities.
M/Chan9 attended grand opening and ribbon cutting ceremonies for two new
businesses in D.B. He praised the Sheriff's Department and staff for
securing the safety of everyone in the City in light of the bomb threats on
opening day of one of the businesses. Council and staff are aggressively
pursuing an economic development program for the City to maintain a good
quality of life and infrastructure for the residents and the community. He
spoke about the Neighborhood Improvement Committee's proposal to
provide financial assistance and low cost loans to homeowners for property
improvement. He thanked staff and C/Zirbes for their creative thinking and
dedication to this matter. He felt the primary concern regarding the
construction of the Community/Senior Center should be to serve the
community in the best way possible including being fiscally responsible.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to conduct, M/Chang
adjourned the meeting at 10:25 p.m.
ATTEST:
t��tWEN 13HANG, Mayor
L DA BURGESS, City Clerk
n
n