Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/21/2005 Minutes - Regular MeetingCIT OF DIAMOND BAR CITY CO NCIL STUDY SESSION JUNE 21, 2005 STUDY SESSION: Mayor Chang called the Study Session to order at 5:05 p.m. in Room CC -8 of the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center, 218 5 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA. Present: Council Members Herrera, Zirbes, Mayor Pro Tem O'Connor and Mayor Chang. Also Present: City Attorney; David Doyle, Assi City Manager; David Liu, Dire Services Director; Linda Ma Information Systems Director; Associate Planner; Kim CrewE Fred Alamolhoda, Senior Engin( and Tommye Cribbins, Executiv ► Community Facilities ► In House Building and ► 2005-06 Budget Recap ► Public Comments on COMMUNITY FACILITIES Linda Lowry, City Manager; Michael Jenkins, ,tant City Manager; James DeStefano, Assistant ctor of Public Works; Bob Rose, Community ]nuson, Finance Director; Ken DesForges, Nancy Fong, Planning Manager; Ann Lungu, Senior Management Analyst; Ryan McLean; er; Sharon Gomez, Senior Management Analyst Asst. ct Issues Discussion Session Items ISSUES: ACM/DeStefano said that toni ht's discussion was about Community Facilities District and whether or not that oncept was an appropriate tool for D.B. to fund a portion of infrastructure costs tc support the Brookfield project development. The development agreement that wi ts approved about a year ago did not include any discussion about CFD's. Since onstruction of Target is not expected to begin on or before July 1 as agreed thE City will begin drawing down on the $2 million letter of credit signed into effec about a year ago since Lewis is unable to meet its commitment to commence t uilding. Lewis wants to change the development agreement in order to relieve them of the responsibility to commence and conclude the project under the terms agreed and prevent the Letter of Credit being cashed. Staff is discussi g the matter with Lewis as well as scheduling a discussion before the Plann ng Commission and City Council regarding Development Agreement changes. One change would be to permit the formation of a CFD to pay for most of the infrastructure costs and fees related to the Brookfield Condominium project. The CFD would result in an assessment of about $2800 per lot per year to pay off bonds sold by the City to fund the improvements. Staff's opinion i that the CFD is not an appropriate tool for this project. CFD and Mello Roos istricts are appropriate tools for larger projects. Lewis asked to talk with the Cit Council and as a result staff has brought Chris MUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 2 CC STUDY SESSION Fischer, MuniFinancial to tonight's me CFD's and present his opinion about Following the MuniFinancial presentatic to the Council about its proposal. Chris Fischer discussed what an CFD CFD Pros and Cons; benefits of a CF! reporting requirements; disclosure administration and who are the member Mello Roos is an alternative method emphasized that the City Council must why they are paying this tax and poir which those taxes are used. Typically project because all of the roll players issuance is spread over a small number saddled with additional administrative he Darren McLevy, Vice President of Deve CFD presentation prepared by DPFG. F is that when bonds are issued, the City c Development Agreement there are f, improvement items that get paid at a m proposal to have those monies funded L A CFD would help pay for librarie maintenance, etc. Lewis proposes a perpetuity that would be paid to the Cit! about $40,500 per year, the equivalent that find it increasingly difficult to attract sales tax revenue see this as an oppori residential units. In addition to the approximately 100 units in the JCC proji He pointed out that the administrative f that this was a project that would set th seeking the City's support in forming a capitalization was widely accepted ar process. Mr. McLevy responded to MPT/O'Coni the Council decided not to move forwa assist his company and the homeowne ig to discuss the pros and cons of applicability to this type of project. representatives with Lewis will speak s and what can be paid for by a CFD; f; CFD formation process and timeline; )y the developer; ongoing district i of the CFD team. Simply put a CFD or )f financing facilities and services. He ,e prepared to explain to the community to the improvements and benefits for bond size issues are larger than this cost money. In this case, the cost of of properties. In addition, staff would be irs and costs. opment for Lewis Homes referred to the e said that one of the benefits of a CFD ets its money up front. Under the current :es paid for parks and other capital .ich later date (2,3 or 4 years). This is a p front when. the CFD bonds are issued. s, parks, senior centers landscaping ,ervices fee that would be ongoing in at the rate of $225 per unit per year or of $400,000 in sales tax. Communities new business in order to generate new unity to place this kind of fee on all new 180 units, Lewis is working toward pct and Site D for another 150 plus units. ;es are included in the CFD and he felt bar high in D.B. Therefore, Lewis was ;FD. In addition, he felt that this form of d certainly full disclosed in the sales • that the development would not stop if with the CFD. However, the CFD would in moving forward. C/Herrera asked why the School District would be a part of the agreement. Mr. McLevy said that it could be. Quite joint agreements that include payment However, the School District would not I 'ten school districts and cities enter into school fees, capital improvements, etc. ve to be included for this project. JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 3 CC STUDY SESSION C/Herrera asked Mr. McLevy to confirm that developers owe school districts so many dollars per square foot of development and either way the school district gets their money. Mr. McLevy stated that C/Herreril was correct. In D.B. developers pay $2.24 per sq. ft. paid at the time permits are pulled. He said that with the CFD, once the bonds were floated the entire am unt of money would be immediately paid. C/Zirbes said he understood Le is had sold the upper Townhome project portion of the land to Brookfield. Mr. IV cLevy responded that the property was under contract with Brookfield with conditions imposed. C/Zirbes asked how it would affect the Lewis/Brookfield contract if Council decided not to move forward with the CFD at this late date. Mr. McLevy responded that it would not affect the agreement either way. C/Zirbes said he was somewhat confused about why Lewis was asking for a CFD at this late date because the conditions were called out in the Development Agreement the City signed a year ago and to him it seemed that the timing was off because tonight the Council had an item on its agenda for approval for the Brookfield project. Mr. McLevy explained that for fig Council with his proposal and Brookfield must take prior to clo: in fact Brookfield was many m property and that the contractual allow a CFD. C/Zirbes said that absent a purchaser. months he had attempted to get in front of the that there were still a number of steps that ng and purchase of the property. He stated that ny months away from actual purchase of the agreement between Lewis and Brookfield would the costs could be passed along to the Mr. McLevy said that most certainly the costs would be passed along to the purchaser. The CFD would allovy the fees that would be paid between 2006 and 2009 to all be paid in 2006 or by the end of 2005 if the district were incorporated and funded. CM/Lowry commented that one f the benefits put forth by the speaker was that the City would get its money earl er rather than waiting for it over time. She said it was an interesting concept becc use with the City not having a Redevelopment Agency to offer incentives toward attracting commercial development and to deal with the high price of D.B. land, art of the way the City substituted for not having redevelopment as a tool was to(live the developer time to pay and not force the developer to make a cash up f ont payment for the infrastructure and permit requests. The City offered this pan as an inducement to bring the developer to the table to work together to form an acceptable development agreement and JUNE 21, 2005 PACE 4 CC STUDY SESSION that particular outcome was not somel cash position is a benefit that can be us sales tax rebate or land write-down. The to receive the money up front becau Developer as a bargaining tool. In fact, he would not have to make the infrasti part of the property owners' burden. C/Zirbes said he heard that with or would remain the same. Mr. McLevy agreed that C/Zirbes' assu be no development impact fees in D.B. I they are paid over time. CA/Jenkins said that he felt Mr. Fische often it is the marketplace that dictates possible that they could sell the homes they could without a tax. In this instance and it would not be neutral and it would when negotiating the Development Agree M/Chang felt that the buyers would be home he would like to pay for the home taxes. As a businessman he wanted to project so that he could figure the returi of the residents he views this propos particular project. When the City was r looked for benefits for the entire commu to the plate and bringing Target to D.B. 1 all of the authority entrusted to the City C worked in good faith with Lewis to form ; he would not feel comfortable to make a that people had already committed. He i irresponsible to transfer such a tax burdE Jack Tanaka wanted to know when type of financing, why was Lewis ab ago and what affect would it have on Mr. McLevy responded that Lewis att ACM/DeStefano and his staff and then i idea to Lewis. If the City Council adopte to be used it would pave the way for n their particular projects. This CFD propos would be dedicated to the City as part o McLevy said he felt a CFD would not slog ing that D.B. was seeking. The City's d in lieu of having no redevelopment or ;fore, it is not really an incentive to D.B. e that alternative was offered to the CFD is a benefit to the Developer that cture payments at all as it becomes a the CFD the bottom line to Lewis ption was correct and that there would most cities where there are impact fees was correct when he stated that quite the price of the homes. So, it is quite >r the same price saddled with a tax as Lewis would benefit by having the CFD of be something that D.B. bargained for ment. aying for everything, As the buyer of a p front and not be saddled with ongoing ,now the total cost before getting into a on his investment. As a representative as having cons and no pros for this :gotiating with Lewis staff and Council pity. D.B. appreciates Lewis stepping up lith a commitment of $2 million and with :)uncil by the residents Council and staff mutually beneficial agreement. He said decision to again transfer the $2 million ,as adamant that in his view it would be i (CFD) to future generations. is decided to try to use the CFD as a :ing to bring it forward only five months e residential developments in the City. mpted to get this matter in front of front of the City and it was not a new a policy for CFD's and how they were w developments to develop CFD's for :s a 1.85% total tax, a portion of which the services fee paid in perpetuity. Mr. down development and that it would JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 5 CC STUDY SESSION enhance the opportunity for cevelopers to come into D.B. The pieces of developable property in D.B. are very expensive and it is a very desirable community and CFD's could ben 3fit everybody in the process. C/Herrera asked if the City wou C/Herrera agreed with M/Chane City made an agreement a year of the game" because she does her that the developer would rea become burdened with explainin team and have someone availe bond. And while the money corr would not benefit. She felt that place and time to introduce a CF property with 3600 possible unit consideration of a CFD. For thi implementing a CFD at this time. benefit. Mr. McLevy said "absolutely." 's comments. She said it troubled her that the tgo and is now being asked to "change the rules not like doing business that way. It seemed to the majority of the benefits and the City would I the tax to residents, having to hire staff, build a ble to respond to questions for the life of the 3s out of the CFD over the 30 -year life the City r 180 -unit development was not an appropriate D. A large development like the AERA Shell Oil would seem to be much more appropriate for aforementioned reasons she would not favor C/Zirbes appreciated receiving tie are in D.B. the project would Je proposed. One of the reasons D.B. have Mello Roos and CFD's a d inappropriate to be talking abo t considering the Brookfield projec . MPT/O'Connor said she too was Following further discussion, M, quite clear and thanked Lewis H IN-HOUSE BUILDING AND SA ACM/DeStefano presented an e what staff felt the cost would be Division and what revenues wou development with a bottom line what staff believes will occur in tl and sufficient funds to pay for se City personnel and a continuing inspection services. The bottom budget decision and a business services. Staff believes that from money to be utilized for other ser in-house. information but felt that with the way prices successful on its own merits as originally is a strong community is because it does not ;veryone pays the same tax. He felt it was CFD the same night that the Council was in favor of pursuing a CFD. ang said he believed Council's direction was es for their cooperation on this project. DISCUSSION: ugmented report to the Council that included to implement an in-house Building and Safety d be forthcoming as a result of the anticipated net forecast of revenue to the City. Based on to next several years there would be significant rvices outlined that would be met with in-house use of D&J Engineering for plan checking and line is that staff maintains this proposal as a plan for the City's future in building and safety s management and financial standpoint there is vices in the City by bringing building and safety JUNE 21, 2005 PAQE 6 CC STUDY SESSION C/Herrera asked if the proposed turnover in staff was because the City was dissatisfied with the job the staff membe s were doing. ACM/DeStefano responded that D.B. hz on very rare occasions had asked that removed. Generally speaking the turno� his employees or corporate decisions th D.B. In many cases the reasons are employees. C/Herrera asked if the annual charge be revenue fees. ACM/DeStefano explained that in lookir expenditures the result was an expend City receives more revenue than it exp of the contract the City receives 40% service fee charges D.B. 60 percent of loss position regardless of the ebb and C/Herrera said that under this scenario yearand ACM/DeStefano agreed. C/Herrera said she was trying to under Council. She said she views future dE prides itself on being a contract city and was concerned about adding four or fi future development, one of which was a had been waiting for two years. AnothE Towne Center for which the City had concern about the City loading up with n not yet a reality. In addition, the propos be cut in half for D.B. and it too was a f She opined that she did not feel "pru employees to the City's budget when realized. ACM/DeStefano stated that this is one generated by the services that are prov fees that generate several hundred tho millions of dollars per year in revenue. - expenditure of D&J Services. It pays for personnel, etc. By bringing three and continuing to use D&J for plan checkirn could provide extended service because worked with D&J for 11 plus years and D&J staff member assigned to D.B. be r was a result of personal decisions by ugh his administration of the contract in t known because they were not D.B. D&J) of $559,000 was totally covered I at the last seven years of revenues and .ire average of $559,000. Each year the nds for D&J's contract. Under the terms the Building & Safety revenue and the ie revenue. Therefore, D.B. is never in a )w of the development profession. the City has gained $294,000 for each tand why this proposal was before the ,elopment as speculative and the City emaining lean as a result. She said she ,e employees based on speculation of Hotel at the trailer park for which the City was the development of Country Hills een waiting for two years. She had a w employees when future projects were J 3000 AERA homes would more likely ture development that was speculative. ent" about adding the burden of new one of these developments had been )f the few operations where revenue is Jed. Fortunately, D.B. is able to charge isand dollars and in some better years hat revenue is used to not only pay the rent, lights, planners, engineers, finance one-half employees into the City and and inspection, staff believes the City here would be a Building Official for at JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 7 CC STUDY SESSION least 2000 hours at 40 hours Per week as opposed to the current 15 hours per week; that having inspectors on staff and having the continuity and institutional knowledge that is lost when a D J employee changes, etc. would have a positive effect on customer service. On the revenue side, staff believes that the City would generate more revenue for other uses than it is currently generating. Staff was asked to forecast the future and it is somewhat speculative. He said he was confident that with his specific economic development hat on he would see the hotel at the Walnut Valley Trailer Park property regardless of how far out in the future. It took 10 years to get Target. Things take a long time and based on the lean years, staff believes this would be a good move for the City. Looking out five, seven and ten years from now he would hope to see the golf course, Tres Hermanos and some portion of he Aera Energy Project. There were only about 200 Aera homes included in thE forecast even though it may be 2000 or 3000. Staff built in a couple of Tres Hermanos home projects and built in only about $300,000 of retail on the golf course property because it could be 2010 and beyond. He felt the golf course could be more than a million square feet of retail and several hundred condomini ms and he believed that Tres Hermanos could be many things — 700 or 800 ho es, a golf course and so on. The Council asked him to forecast and he did so based upon what he saw the General Plan stating as being easible and what he felt was possible for the future. Bottom line is that staff elieves it is an improved budget package and wanted Council to consider the proposal and direct staff as appropriate. The budget set aside for presentation later this evening includes in-house Building and Safety Services effective Ja uary 1, 2006. C/Herrera stated that the City is down several hundreds of thousands of dollars as a result of lost sales tax do lars and money withheld from the City by the State. This proposal adds employees before these projects materialize and she felt it was not prudent manageME nt and she would not vote for the proposal. C/Zirbes said he shared some of C/Herrera's concerns about adding staff. He felt it might be better to look at other alternatives such as renegotiating the D&J contract or having a better understanding of why the City would need a full time building official on staff. In a pessimistic view what was the worst year D.B. has seen. Orange County's employe retirement system is upside down by $2 billion for example. This City boasts that it is a contract city. If it is in the best interest of the City that is probably the bet conclusion but it seems that this has moved fairly rapidly to the forefront over the past couple of weeks and he would like to have a better feel that this isal would be self-sustaining three, five and ten years down the road. In his opinion it was easier to cut back the contractor than it was to cut back on staff. ACM/DeStefano said that the Cit 's leanest year was 1997/1998 based upon the past seven years and the revenu for that year was about $550,000. Over the 16 years staff has taken over more End more responsibility for business plans based on customer service needs, finan ial decisions and so forth. In 1990 D.B. took on JUNE 21, 2005 PAPE 8 CC STUDY SESSION City planning from LA County and from and so on and so forth so the City has grown. Staff believes that it has constri lean years and like any department it accordingly. C2irbes asked if there was a happy m staff. ACM/DeStefano explained that the City and the institutional knowledge that cor basis. In short, D.B. needs a 40 -hour p, the other development departments. D development effort and has not built a s is going to be building a couple, rebuildii work on the horizon and the City need, the daily administration as well as to v forth, and to provide a level of expertis( specifically but to do so for at least 40 more evident now that it did in the past. MPT/O'Connor felt that based on v customer service issue than a money working hard to improve customer ser still come to the City and the profit mz been some complaints and issues req, ACM/DeStefano explained that from sta both customer service and money. Coml you don't get complaints you may want i volume and type of complaint. From st issue because staff believes that it can going in-house. M/Chang said that with all due respec turnover has affected the service to some business decision. He spoke with ACM/E future expansion projects, bringing the d and one-half new employees the City c CSD/Rose brought the recreation progi decision. He anticipates more projects cc He reminded the Council that The Coun generate revenue new homes were built demolished and rebuilt and if the City co on the table. He understood that D.B. is out certain items but if it would improve tl would be a small matter to add three and a contractor recreation and engineering nade these types of decisions as it has cted a plan that protects the City in the those lean years decisions are made um in all of this short of having to add seeded the competency of a stable staff as from someone serving on a full time week Building Official that can service 3. has several years of very extensive opping center in 25 years. And the City 3 a couple and so forth. There is a lot of a full time Building Official to deal with )rk with other staff, developers and so that the City has had with BO/Tarango lours per week. And staff sees that as she was hearing it was more of a ie and this Council and staff had been and public service. The revenue would would cover the overhead. There had ig customer service. I's perspective it was a combination of laints are not necessarily a bad thing. If > question why. Rather, it is a matter of ff's perspective this is also a financial generate more revenue to the City by to Dennis Tarango and his staff the extent and he felt that this was purely a ,Stefano and learned that even without apartment in-house and providing three Auld still net $100,000. Similarly, when am in-house it was a good business ning to D.B. when Target is completed. ry Estate properties would continue to and as older homes were purchased, ild net more money today why leave it a contract city and would still contract e service and net revenue of the City it )ne-half employees. JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 9 CC STUDY SESSION MPT/O'Connor asked BO/Tara0go if he would be able to dedicate more time than the 15 hours mentioned. BO/Tarango said he believed he had proven his availability and willingness to devote additional time during the startup of the Target project. C/Zirbes said that this proposalas a revenue generator for the City and if the numbers hold true there would b a benefit to bringing this in-house. ACM/DeStefano said that the duties currently performed by BO/Tarango would fall to the new Building Official. At a bare minimum it was at least an additional $105,000 over what the City was currently taking in and it would grow depending on the amount of work generated by the development community that the City would not have to pay someone else to provide. C/Herrera asked why the effective date was proposed to be January 1, 2006. ACM/DeStefano said that if Cou cil wanted to move forward the City would need about six months to hire peop a and get the system in place to make the transition. C/Herrera said she was still uncomfortable about burdening the City with additional expense before some of the projects materialized. It seemed to her that development was going more slowly than what the City had originally anticipated so why not consider this to be effective July 1, 2006 to give some of the projects time to materialize. ACM/DeStefano said it was up to Council to make those considerations. M/Chang agreed that July 1, 2000 was a good date to consider. MPT/O'Connor stated that once the City decided to bring the recreation program in-house it took a couple of years to accomplish. M/Chang felt it was a win-win s for the City. C/Zirbes felt the proposal was v staff based upon future potentia what could be done to work with better contract with D&J to I ACM/DeStefano. If these are dei needs to bring Building and development is forthcoming or the pointed out by MPT/O'Connor is strives to provide the best possib also be resolved with D&J. From on because D&J would still be a contractor lid. However, his hesitation was about adding revenue. He stated that he would like to see ie contractor to see if the City could arrive at a 'ovide the hours and services desired by points that cannot be made, perhaps the City safety in-house and run the risk that the City at least breaks even. Customer service as an issue for Council and staff and the City service. Perhaps the issue of continuity could aff's perspective perhaps there was a way to JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 10 CC STUDY SESSION renegotiate the current contract and b contracted service and if not, move fore+ CM/Lowry stated that the budget does does not account for additional personn FM/Magnuson pointed out that $50,00( and Safety vehicles. C/Zirbes recommended bringing this it, Council Members concurred. 2005-06 BUDGET RECAP: MPT/O'Connor felt this item should included in the Consent Calendar. CM/Lowry said she would move the C/Herrera asked for and received an E additional items that were included re listed. MPT/O'Connor said she did not should be removed. able to keep Building and Safety as a rd with the proposal. recognize an additional $100,000 and was allocated in the budget for Building back to the Council in three months. a separate discussion item and not to Council Consideration. nation of the $314,480 on Page 2 for ing decision packages that were not of the Gary Neely budget item and felt it FM/Magnuson indicated to C/Zirbes hat the $675,000 would be used for economic development and capital improvements because the City was going into its reserves for a little over $1 millio . Public Comments on Study Session ADJOURNMENT: With no fu Council, M/Chang adjourned the Study The foregoing minutes are hereby ap 2005. HANG, Mayor None Offered. ier business to come before the City �ession at 6:50 p.m. da C. Lowry, City Ci this 5tj-, day of Tul,, , MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETIN OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR UNE 21, 2005 STUDY SESSION: Mayor Chang called the City Council Study Session to order at 5:05 p.m. in oom CC -8 of the SCAQMD/Government Center Building, 21825 Copley Drive, Di mond Bar, CA 91765 ► Community Facilities Dist ► In -House Building and Sa ► 2005-06 Budget Recap ► Public Comments on Stut M/Chang adjourned the Study S Regular City Council meeting. CALL TO ORDER: meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. in 21865 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: INVOCATION: Canyon Christian Church gave ROLL CALL: O'Connor and Mayor Chang. Staff Present: Attorney; David Doyle, Assistan Manager; David Liu, Director of Magnuson, Finance Director; Nat Management Analyst; and Tomr APPROVAL OF AGENDA: under Item 6.12 be changed Municipal Election date from three items that should be m( (Item 8.4). Issues Discussion Session Items ion to the Regular Meeting at 6:50 p.m. to the Mayor Chang called the regular City Council The Government Center/SCAQMD Auditorium, CA. Jack Tanaka led the Pledge of Allegiance. Darlene Jones, Outreach Pastor, Diamond ie Invocation. Council Members Herrera, Zirbes, Mayor Pro Tern Linda Lowry, City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City City Manager; James DeStefano, Assistant City 3ublic Works; Ken DesForges, IS Director; Linda cy Fong, Planning Manager; Ryan McLean, Senior tye Cribbins, Executive Asst. CM/Lowry asked that the date of the contract 12005 to 2006; Item 6.24, correct the November amber 1 to November 8, 2005; Item 6.25 included from Consent Calendar to Council Consideration JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL POST ELECTION PROCEDURE: ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2005-30: F ELECTION HELD ON JUNE 7, 2005 AN OTHER MATTERS AS PROVIDED BY CM/Lowry reported that the resolution s last week placing Jack Tanaka as the it vacated by former Council Member Bob adopt the resolution and proceed to the MPT/O'Connor moved, C/Zirbes second carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: CITING THE FACT OF THE SPECIAL DECLARING THE RESULT AND SUCH AW. forth the numbers that the City certified )ming Council Member to fill the position uff. It would be appropriate for Council to nearing in ceremony. to adopt Resolution No. 2005-30. Motion Herrera, Zirbes, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang None None ADMINISTRATION OF THE OATH OF OFFICE: Honorable Sam Ohta, Judge of the Los Angeles County Superior Court administered the Oath of Office to Coun it Member Jack Tanaka. RECESS: M/Chang recessed the City Council meeting at 7:15 p.m. RECONVENE: M/Chang reconvened the City Council meeting at 7:40 p.m. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS: None 2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: None Offered. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Commerce, congratulated C/Tan expressed appreciation to all of th the business community in D.B a working with all of the Council Mi Steve Tye congratulated Jack T personal conduct during the cam Mayor Chang's and Eileen Ansar Marie Buckland congratulated supported Mayor Chang. Delilah Knox -Rios, D.B. Chamber of ka and welcomed him to the Council. She Council Members for their assistance with id said that the Chamber looks forward to mbers in the future. �naka on a successful campaign and his )aign. He addressed his negative view of 's participation in the campaign anaka on his successful campaign and Joseph Piper, Vice President, D.P. Senior Club, expressed support of fair play and his disregard for earlier comments. JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL 4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC OMMENTS: M/Chang said he supported Mr. Tanaka in the election but Mr. Tye was a good candidate. He reiterated his campaign contributions to Mr. T naka's campaign, past and current, and affirmed his role representing the entire community. 5. SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: CM/Lowry added Item 5.6 the July 4th Blast from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p m. at Sycamore Canyon Park to the Schedule of Future Events. 5.1 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION —June 23, 2005 — 7:00 p.m., Hearing Board Room, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr. 5.2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING — June 28, 2005 -- 7:00 p.m., Auditorium, AQMD Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr. 5.3 CONCERTS IN THE PARK Soundbytes (60's-90's)—June 29,2005— 6:30 — 8:00 p.m., Sycamore Canyon Park, 22930 Golden Spgs. Dr. 5.4 CITY COUNCIL MEETING -- July 5, 2005 — 6:30 p.m., Auditorium, AQMD/Governme t Center, 21865 Copley Dr. 5.5 INDUSTRY BUSINESS CENTER TOWN HALL MEETING — July 7, 2005 -- 6:30 PM — Neil Armstrong Elementary School, 22750 Beaverhead Dr. 6. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Tanaka moved, C/Zirbes seconded to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL EMBERS: Herrera, Tanaka, Zirbes, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL EMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL EMBERS: None 6.1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6.1.1 Study Session of June 7, 2005 — As Submitted. 6.1.2 Regular Me ting of June 7, 2005 — As Submitted. 6.2 RATIFIED CHECK REGISTER DATED JUNE 16, 2005 in the amount of $502,400.37. 6.3 REJECTED CLAIM FOR DAMAGES: 6.3.1 Filed by Thomas S. Craver on April 8, 2005 6.3.2 Filed by Gabrielle L. Sorer on April 26, 2005 JUNE 21, 2005 PACE 4 CITY COUNCIL 6.4 TRANSMITTED AUDIT REPORT OF AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT FUND (AB2766) FOR FY 002103. 6.5 APPROVED AMENDMEN NO. 3 TO CONTRACT WITH VALLEY CREST LANDSCAPE MA NTENANCE AT FIVE LOCATIONS FOR FY 2005/06 IN THE AMOUNT OF $217,680 WHICH INCLUDED A 3.2% C.P.I INCREASE f ILUS A CONTINGENCY AMOUNT OF $50,000 FOR AS-NEEDEP WORK. 6.6 APPROVED EXTENSION OF CITYWIDE GRAFFITI REMOVAL CONTRACT WITH GRAFFITI CONTROL SYSTEMS FOR FY 2005/06 IN THE AMOUNT OF $45,000. 6.7 APPROVED EXTENSIO OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH LDM rOR HOME IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $23,800. 6.8 APPROVED EXTENSION OF CONTRACT WITH DIVERSIFIED PARATRANSIT, INC. FOR FY 2005-06 DIAMOND RIDE (DIAL -A - CAB) SERVICE WITH A .20 RATE INCREASE FOR THE FLAG DROP AND A $.20 RATE NCREASE FOR THE PER MILE METER RATE. 6.9 APPROVED EXTENSION OF VENDOR SERVICES CONTRACT WITH D.H. MAINTENANC SERVICES TO PROVIDE JANITORIAL AND BUILDING MAINTEN NCE SERVICES ATTHE DIAMOND BAR CENTER, HERITAGE PARK COMMUNITY CENTER AND PANTERA PARK ACTIVITY ROOM IN THE AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $175,194 FOR FY 2005-06. 6.10 APPROVED PLANS AN SPECIFICATIONS AND AWARDED A CONTRACT FOR THE AR A 1 SLURRY SEAL PROJECT TO DOUG MARTIN CONTRACTING O., INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $524,529; AND AUTHORIZED A C NTINGENCY AMOUNT OF $23,000 FOR PROJECT CHANGE O DERS TO BE APPROVED BY THE CITY MANAGER, FOR A TOTA AUTHORIZATION AMOUNT OF $547,529. 6.11 ADOPTED RESOLUTI N NO. 2005-31: AUTHORIZING, APPROPRIATING AND APPROVING THE SALE OF $500,000 OF PROP A FUNDS (LOCAL RETURN TRANSIT FUNDS) TO THE CITY OF COMMERCE IN EXCHANGE FOR GENERAL FUNDS. 6.12 AWARDED CONTRACT TO INLAND ROUNDBALL OFFICIALS TO OFFICIATE THE DIAMON D BAR BASKETBALL PROGRAM FROM JULY 1, 2005 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2006 FOR AN AMOUNT NOTTO EXCEED $30,000. JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL 6.13 AWARDED CONS CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENTS PICNIC SHELTER; CONTINGENCY AUTHORIZATION APPROPRIATION LLAD #38 FUNDS, GENERAL FUND . FUNDING OF THI `RUCTION CONTRACT TO ENVIRONMENTAL INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION OF qT VARIOUS MEDIANS AND PANTERA PARK i IN THE AMOUNT OF $688,552.20 PLUS AN 8% AMOUNT OF $55,082.80 FOR TOTAL OF $743,635; PLUS APPROVED OF $28,000 OF PROP 12 FUNDS, $47,600 OF $33,160 OF LLAD#41 FUNDS AND $15,000 OF 'REE PLANTING FUNDS TO COMPLETE PROJECT. 6.14 AUTHORIZED D J MUNICIPAL SERVICES TO PERFORM INSPECTION AND PLAN CHECK SERVICES FOR VARIOUS MEDIANS AND PA NTERA PARK PICNIC SHELTERS PROJECT IN THE NOT -TO -EXCEED AMOUNT OF $15,125. 6.15 APPROVED TR GREEN LANDCARE TO COMPLETE AN ADDITIONAL $15, 00 OF AS -NEEDED WORK IN 2004-05 FY AND $40,000 OF AS -NEEDED WORK IN 2005-06 FY AS AUTHORIZED BY CITY STAFF TO COMPLETE WORK NECESSARY FOR THE CITYWIDE LANDS CAPE MAINTENANCE CONTRACT. 6.16 AWARDED CONTRACT IN THE AMOUNT OF $437,622.55 PLUS 4.8% CONTINGE CY AMOUNT OF $21,006 FOR TOTAL AUTHORIZATION OF $458,628.55 TO CS LEGACY CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS AT SYCAMORE CANYON PARK TRAIL AND TRAILHEAD, PLUS APPROVED APPROPRIATION OF $50,000 OF PROP 40 FUNDS AND $120,261 OF POP A "SAFE PARKS ACT' FUNDS TO FULLY FUND THE PROJECT. 6.17 SECOND READIN 3 OF ORDINANCE 07(2005): AMENDING TITLE 15 OF THE DIAMOND BAR CODE ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THE CALIFORNIAELECTRICAL CODE 2004 EDITION AND APPENDICES TOGETHER WITH CERTAIN AMENDMENTS, ADDITIONS, DELETIONS AND EXEMPTIONS INCLUDING FEES AND PENALTIES. 6.18 APPROVED AME DMENT NO. 3 TO THE CONTRACT WITH EXCEL LANDSCAPE FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE SERVICES AT NINE LOCATI NS IN LLAD #38 FOR FY 2005/06 IN THE AMOUNT OF $29,371.08; PLUS A CONTINGENCY AMOUNT OF $5,000 FOR AS -NEEDED WORK. 6.19 AUTHORIZED D J MUNICIPAL SERVICES TO PERFORM INSPECTION AND LAN CHECK SERVICES FOR THE SYCAMORE CANYON PARK TF IAIL AND TRAILHEAD PROJECT IN THE NOT - TO -EXCEED AMO JNT OF $12,350. JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL 6.20 APROVED AMENDMENT 0.2 TO THE CONTRACT WITH HIRSCH AND ASSOCIATES FOR ARCHITECT SERVICES TO EXTEND THE TERM OF AGREEMENT TO DECEMBER 31, 2006. 6.21 AWARDED CONTRACT F( PROJECT IN THE AMOUI INC., AND AUTHORIZED, FOR CONTRACT CHANG CITY MANAGER, FOR A $219,655. 3 ILLUMINATED STREET NAME SIGNS T OF $199,655 TO POUK & STEINLE, CONTINGENCY AMOUNT OF $20,000 ORDERS TO BE APPROVED BY THE 'OTAL AUTHORIZATION AMOUNT OF 6.22 AUTHORIZED TRANSFE OF FUNDS FROM THE FY 2004-05 PUBLIC WORKS OPERATING BUDGET TO THE VEHICLE EQUIPMENT REPLACE ENT FUND FOR PURCHASE OF A PUBLIC WORKS TRUCK I THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. 6.23 APPROVED CONTRACT WITH COMPUCOM FOR MICROSOFT ENTERPRISE LICENSE AGREEMENT ($56,645.82). 6.24 (a) ADOPTED RESOLI GIVING NOTICE OF A GE HELD ON TUESDAY, NOV CERTAIN OFFICERS (3 Cl THE PROVISIONS OF THI RELATING TO GENERAL (b) ADOPTED RESOLUI BOARD OF SUPERVISOF TO CONSOLIDATE A GE HELD ON NOVEMBER 8, TO BE HELD ON THE DA THE ELECTIONS CODE. (c) ADOPTED RESO REGULATIONS FOR CA PERTAINING TO CANDIC THE VOTERS AT AN EL NOVEMBER 8, 2005. 6.25 MOVED TO COUNCIL TION NO. 2005-32: CALLING AND JERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE :MBER 8, 2005, FOR THE ELECTION OF Y COUNCIL SEATS) AS REQUIRED BY LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA _AW CITIES. ON NO. 2005-33: REQUESTING THE 3 OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES JERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE '.005 WITH THE SCHOOL ELECTIONS E PURSUANT TO SECTION 10403 OF JTION NO, 2005-34: ADOPTING DIDATES FOR ELECTIVE OFFICE TES STATEMENTS SUBMITTED TO TION TO BE HELD ON TUESDAY, DERATION ITEM 8.4. 6.26. (a) ADOPTED RESOL TION NO. 2005-35: ESTABLISHING SALARY RANGES FOR ALL CLASSES OF EMPLOYMENT EFFECTIVE THE PAY PERIOD COMMENCING JULY 1, 2005; RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2005-19 IN ITS ENTIRETY. JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 7 CITY COUNCIL 7. (b) ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-36: SETTING FORTH PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 2004-29 IN ITS ENTIRETY. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 7.1 ADOPT RESOLUT ON NO. 2005-37: ESTABLISHING A FEE FOR BUSINESS REGISTRATION AND BUSINESS REGISTRATION RENEWAL ANDA ENDING THE EXISTING FEE SCHEDULE TO INCLUDE BUSINESS REGISTRATION FEES AND REDUCE THE ZONE LEARANC FEE FOR A BUSINESS CONCURRENTLY REGISTERING AND OBTAINING A ZONE CLEARANCE. (CONTINUED FROM MAY 3, 2005): ACM/DeStefano reported that on May 3 the City Council adopted an ordinance establishing a Business Registrati n Program that takes effect on July 1, 2005. Also on May 3 the Council discussed whether or not a registration fee should be added. Before Council tonight is a recommendation from staff establishing a Registration Fee of $10 (initial fee) and a $10 annual renewal fee or all business conducted in the City of D.B. Since May 3 staff learned that home based businesses that are required to receive a separate zoning clearance permit from the City might be double -feed through this process. Therefore, within the resolution, staff is recommends ig that the current /$30 one-time only home based business zoning clE arance fee be reduced to $20 to make up for the $10 business regisi ration fee. M/Chang opened the Public Hearing. Steve Tye was opp sed to charging a registration fee and wanted to know what the indi idual business owner would get in exchange for paying a fee. With no further test mony being offered, M/Chang closed the Public Hearing. MPT/O'Connor explained that this was not a tax it was a fee. The City had public safety problems with some of the businesses in D.B. and she felt it was certa my worth $10 to make certain the neighborhoods were safe. She felt a charge of $10 for every business was fair. C/Zirbes agreed w th MPT/O'Connor that the City wanted to make certain that the businesses were operating within the code. The reality was that whether bi isinesses were charged zero dollars, $10 or $100 dollars those that o erate in an unsafe manner would not exist in the system. Most busin sses would register and he would prefer to have no fee for home-based businesses. However, he would like to impose a very stiff penalty for those who do not voluntarily register because the City is trying to generate the types of businesses that are in the JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL community that the City c business registration pro chemicals, avoid auto rep, in residential neighborhoo based businesses and h resolution contained a tou i market. He felt it was right to have a im in order to prevent the storage of shops and body shops and paint booths . He felt it was wrong to charge home - would want to make certain that the penalty for those who failed to register. C/Tanaka said his main co cern was for public safety. He felt that a nominal fee of $10 would riot make or break a business but would allow the residents to feelsafer and more confident that there was not a car repair or paint shop operation in their neighborhood. For that reason he favored the reso ution. C/Herrera said that when important to the Council th also talked about sales ta; making it even more impo with C/Zirbes that there she evade their responsibilities ie Council discussed this matter it was t businesses be registered. The Council leakage of which the City was unaware :ant to register businesses. She agreed rld be penalties for those who continue to CM/Lowry said that if dis overed, those individuals who failed to register would be guilty of an infraction and susceptible to a $100 citation. M/Chang felt that all of the R be business registration f nominal charge, people ha the City needs to register tl fee should be charged to and $10 is a reasonable fe staff to move forward to pr Members want to change believe a $10 fee would pr( their businesses. He said decision and Council Mem and forth again. ity Council members agreed there should r safety purposes. With respect to the e a tendency to forget. So, from day one e business and charge for registration. A aver a portion of the administration cost . Council Members all agreed and asked pare a resolution and now some Council the premise again. He said he did not vent individuals from coming to D.B. with he Council should stay with its original vers should not change their minds back MPT/O'Connor moved, C anaka seconded to adopt Resolution No. 2005-37. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES NOES: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS COUNCIL =BERS: COUNCIL BERS: Herrera, Tanaka, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang Zirbes None JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 9 CITY COUNCIL 7.2 ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2005-38: APPROVING TTM 062482, DEVELOPMENT R VIEW NO. 2005-05 AND TREE PERMIT 2005-03 FOR THE CONST UCTION OF 180 CONDOMINIUMS ON 14.3 ACRES OF LAND It I THE SPECIFIC PLAN SUB-PA2 AND 3 ZONES; TO REMOVE UP T 20 OAK TREES; AND TO RETAIN 25.5 ACRES OF VACANT LAND IN SPECIFIC PLAN SUB -PA 4 ZONE AS OPEN SPACE. THE PRO ECT SITE IS LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF GRAND AVENUE OUTH OF GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE — APN: 8293-045-04 AND 05. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT INCLUDING THE 13EMOVAL OF TREES IS CONSISTENT WITH AND IS AN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DIAMOND BAR SPECIFIC PLAN APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON JUNE 29, 2004. PM/Fong gave a p sentation stating that last June the City Council approved a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, the Diamond Bar Village Specific Plan and Development Agreement. The approval Included a development concept that consisted of 135,000 sq. ft. of commercial use, a Master Plan for the Calvary Chapel expansion, 200 residential units and the retention of 25 acres of Open Space. Two weeks ago the Planning Commission approved the Target project, the commercial component of the Specific Plan. Brookfield Homes is the residential component of the Specific Plan and proposes 180, 20 less than the original approved concept comprised of 110 Townhouses and 70 Single Family Residences. PM/Fong reported that during the May 24 Planning Commission Hearing several Montefino residents raised concerns about the stability of the slope and about the remo al of trees and staff responded to those concerns. In addition, she an Brookfield representatives met with residents to satisfactorily answer their questions. She said that the Planning Commission reco nmended City Council approval and that MPT/O'Connor poited out to her that on Page 11 of the Resolution the tree replaceme t ratio should read 3:1 rather than 1:3. In response to MF proposed location residences. PM/Fong confirmec He asked for the toi said the project met also confirmed tha entry and one exit. 10 cars along both /O'Connor PM/Fong used the map to show the f the 110 Townhomes and the 70 single-family to C/Zirbes that each unit has a two -car garage. iI number of visitor parking spaces and PM/Fong he City's standard of 120 guest spaces. PM/Fong the project would have a gated entry with one 'his is a long private drive that could stack about ides of the drive. M/Chang opened tl�e Public Hearing. JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 10 CITY COUNCIL John Rowe, 1229 Porte Grande, Board Member of Montefino Townhomes, said he attended the Planning Commission hearing and asked several questions about the slopes, trees and construction. He thanked Brookfield HOMES, John O'Brien, Paul McDonald and PM/Fong for meeting with tie homeowners on June 9 to answer their concerns. In addition the same group attended a homeowner association meeting and were able to respond to questions posed. He appreciated the number of rees scheduled for removal was less than originally planned and wa pleased to learn that they were being removed from the base of he slope and not the top of the slope. John O'Brien, Brookfield Homes, thanked ACM/DeStefano and PM/Fong for their cooperation in moving forward with the Diamond Bar Village residential community and implementation of the previously approved Specific Plan. He thanked the members of the Montefino Association for their concerns and said that Brookfield wanted to be good neighbors and that they were excited to be in the City of D.B. and look forward to offering homeownership opportunities. C/Zirbes said the products were impressive looking and asked when Brookfield intended to cornmence construction if the project was approved. Mr. O'Brien responded that Brookfield had submitted rough grading and storm drain plans to plan check and were hoping to start construction in August. The target phase release is in the first quarter of 2006 with move -ins occ irring April/May 2006 for the single family detached and June/July fo the Townhomes. The land development will occur in one large ph se with a phased implementation of the single family detached f om 10-15 homes per phase and the Townhomes will occur eve month during the delivery period. MPT/O'Connor asked if Br okfield had built the Plan 2AA-4 model and was the layout acceptable because she found the powder room somewhat inaccessible. Mr. O'Brien indicated thai Brookfield had not previously built that specific floor plan. Howeve , there had been similar floor plans built in other communities. Part o what drives the floor plan is circulation. One goal in placing the entry toward the middle of the home was to provide options upon entry without having to expend valuable flooring space on circulation patterns. There is also treatment to the architecture that lends itself to having a home entry directly into the center of the home that is a nice treatment Brookfield believes will be successful. MPT/O'Connor asked if Brookfield had previously built the other floor plans. JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 11 CITY COUNCIL E:: Mr. O'Brien explain ad that all of the other floor plans were previously built by Brookfield and that the Townhome product was a modified reuse of a community that was currently under construction in the City of Long Beach. The D.B. Townhome was larger in square footage and still very similar to ong Beach in terms of the layout. Mr. O'Brien respon family homes woulc and processing roue and technical in nat the two product ty products should fl( building that range M/Chang congrat commendation frc neighbor. Mr. O'Brien thanke said that Brookfield Target as well, led to C/Herrera that construction of the single - most likely commence first due to the permitting ne. Townhome construction is more complicated re causing a 30 to 45 day lag between the start of es. However, from that point forward the two N consistently. There are 10 Townhomes per -om about 1200 to over 2000 square feet. ated Mr. O'Brien and staff for receiving a the Montefino Association for being a good Lewis Homes for bringing D.B. to this level and lomes looks forward to being a good neighbor to M/Chang closed the Public Hearing. C/Zirbes moved, C anaka seconded to adopt Resolution No. 2005- 38. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Herrera, Tanaka, Zirbes MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None MPT/O'Connor wel omed Brookfield Homes, COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: 8.1 CONSIDER FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 08(2005): AMENDING RULES FOR PUBLICLY OWNED OR PUBLICLY OPERATED SKATEBOARD FACILITIES. CSD/Rose reportec that the Parks and Recreation Commission received a request to allow non -motorized scooters at the skateboard facility at Peterson Park. The current skate park rules disallow the use of scooters. The Commission extensively reviewed this request and on April 28 voted to recommend to the City Council that the skate park rules be revised to allow non -motorized scooters to use the park. CSD/Rose indicated that staff had determined that scooters cause no more damage to co trete than skateboards and in checking with the JUNE 21, 2005 PACE 12 CITY COUNCIL JPIA and other cities that claims had been filed as a parks. However, there wou allowing the scooters in th data, there is no way to det the City might incur. CSD/f the Consumer Product Saf( injuries suffered by indivi injuries suffered by indivi statistic revealed that over, occurred due to collisions scooter on steep hills. He City Manager was that scc exemption that prevents la` in a city operated skate par City enjoys from potential Ii to construct the skate park Parks and Recreation Con City Manager's office recor be approved due to the Cit, further study be done on tl operate skate parks, staff found that no esult of the use of scooters in those skate J be some additional liability to the City by skate park, but due to lack of available ermine the extent of additional liability that ose further reported that upon contacting ly Commission staff found that nationwide, luals riding scooters was equivalent to ivals riding skateboards. An additional 0 percent of fatalities to riders of scooters lith cars and from attempting to ride their :ated that the most important issue to the )ters do not fall under the SB994 liability suits from skateboarders who are injured :. Additionally, the statutory protection the igation was a factor in the City's decision We years ago. CSD/Rose stated that the mission recommended approval and the mended that the proposed ordinance not 's increased exposure to liability and that s issue. C/Zirbes agreed that it wa3 unlikely that Razors would cause any more damage than the ska eboard and there are most likely Razors and bicycles in the park now. However, the liability issue seems to be an issue the City cannot get around. He asked if the City purchase additional insurance to cover potential liability claims. CSD/Rose said hewas of aware of insurance the City could purchase. He indicated to /Zirbes that even though there may have been injuries no one had fil d a claim. C/Zirbes asked how many claims the City has had for skateboard injuries in its skate park. CSD/Rose said there had n CA/Jenkins explained that insurance and the Califomi would be in their view ai dangerous mix of uses. In City has would be more that that might occur. Therefor( increase the amount of cov JPIA policy. C/Zirbes said he did not u coverage. been any claims filed. the City has a substantial amount of JPIA has not advised the City that this "uninsurable" event or an inherently is opinion, the amount of insurance the adequate to address the type of injuries there would likely not be a reason to :rage and the City is covered under the erstand the liability issue when there is JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 13 CITY COUNCIL CSD/Rose explained that the liability issue is that D.B. is exempt from liability by State Law for skateboarders in a skate park and the City is not exempt by State Law for injuries due to bicycles and scooters. CA/Jenkins further incidents of reporter in the form of higl condition that was cost the City in hig' mixing the scooters was whether it perc or whether the Coui different devices wi MPT/O'Connor felt to add scooters. He legislation might b circumstances she the skate park ar channels to get the than assuming the explained that cities in the JPIA that have higher I and/or paid claims ultimately suffer consequence ier premiums. Therefore, if the City created a ikely to generate more claims it could ultimately ier premiums if there were injuries as a result of with skateboards. The question before the Council jived that it was an inappropriate mix of activities icil felt comfortable about young people operating hin the same facility at the same time. would be prudent to ask for a revision of SB994 ever, it would be next year at the earliest before passed to give the City immunity. Under the Auld be very nervous about allowing scooters in she would prefer to proceed through legal gislation changed to include the scooters rather )tential liability at the City level. Rick Illig, 23568 Prospect Valley Drive, stated that as CSD/Rose reported, the majority of scooter accidents involve motor vehicles. If the kids are not allowed in a park they ride on the street or in parking lots and it puts them in danger. The reason that the SB994 does not cover scooters was because it was put into effect in 1997. The D.B. skate park was not built until 2000 and scooters were not popular until the summer of 2000. JPIA does not revisit the issue until 2006. The kids need a place other than the streets to ride their scooters. Lora Illig said it was very important for the young people to keep busy doing something positive and they have found something they enjoy in scootering. She felt it was very important that the kids have a safe place to practice and enjoy their sport. Eric Loree showed t e Council his scooter. Eric is 14 years of age and is in the 7th grade. He said that probably 75 percent of his life is scootering — it's what he does best and he loves doing it. Peterson Skate Park is one ol the best parks he has ever been to and he has been to a lot of skate parks in California. He would be very disappointed if head his friends were not allowed to use the skate park after attending six months of meetings and all of the work they had done to get sc otering accepted. He hoped the Council would make the right decision. Anita Loree thankeCouncil for letting the group speak to them this evening. Parents arelooking for a safe place for their kids to scooter. JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 14 CITY COUNCIL Tonight the Council has t� in the community and tha better way to involve thea have waited patiently for six months to a year it is, ii mentioned on several occ be very fair and adequate outcome the matter could ked about how it will increase the housing will put more kids on the street and what i than in a safe environment. These kids x months and if they have to wait another her opinion, unfair to them. As CSD/Rose sions a six-month probation period would nd if the Council was not satisfied with the )e revisited and re-evaluated. M/Chang felt it would be good for the kids to have a safe place to enjoy their sport. He asked if the skate park facility was large enough to allow both skateboardft and scooters. CSD/Rose said that the concerned about how the signs on three different o the possibility that the skateboarders. In speaki Corona actively allows sc skate park and many citiE their skate parks. In a information that both cam M/Chang asked if the City the insurer it was allowing CA/Jenkins said that the received no information ba Problem. He felt it would C about the change of policy park and if the City receivE staff would report back to tf would not recommend not 'arks and Recreation Commission was :ooters might be received so staff posted asions and received only one call about :ooters would get in the way of the with representatives from other cities, ters and skateboarders to use the same ignore the fact that scooters are used in ition, the City has not received any use the same space competitively. lose its insurance if it failed to notify irs. ity made the inquiry to the JPIA and suggesting there would be a coverage prudent for the City to advise the JPIA ,ere the Council to allow scooters in the any adverse information from the JPIA Council accordingly. CA/Jenkins said he Ivising the JPIA. M/Chang said he would lik to create a facility to accommodate the youth and their activities. F owever, because there was no clear cut policy in effect the Council hould ask the JPIA and if the word back was that there was no pro lem with the insurance policy bring the matter back to the Council or a decision. C/Tanaka asked if the policy included use of safety equipment. CSD/Rose responded that scooters would be required to use the same safety equipment as skateboarders. C/Herrera recommended that the City continue the prohibition of scooters in the skate park until the City was satisfied that it has received all of the pertinent information to make an informed decision JUNE 21, 2005 in two weeks. PAGE 15 CITY COUNCIL CM/Lowry said she did not believe the JPIA would deny coverage if the policy were changed. it was more likely that the JPIA would say that it had not eXCIL ded the coverage from the City's policy. The issue was that if a claim were brought against the City the JPIA would cover the City and the C ty would pay or negotiate the claim because the claim would not be exempt the City would pay. This exposes the City to a new risk from which it is not exempt and the insurance coverage is a financing mechanism for the City. The City would be covered, but the City would ultimately pay the costs of the damages. The difference was that the skate hoarder could not file a claim for damages because the state law prohi its it and the scooter could file a claim for damages because the state oes not prohibit it. CA/Jenkins said the primary concern was whether the risk of exposure was unreasonable and whether the City would be creating a dangerous conditioi to any of the kids using the park. The City does not automatically incur City only incurs liability liability just because someone is injured, the if the park was in a dangerous condition would only incur liability and if there were something wrong with the park that caused the damage or if the park as a result of incompatibility of uses was dangerous. The Council ultimately determines whether the activities are compatible or incompatible based on the Council's personal experience, testimony and observations of how kids function in the park using the scooters and the skateboards. In fact, both types of equipment have the potential to cause injury. In fact, kids are supposed to be we ring protective gear and equipment designed to protect against injury. Keep in mind also that the State's immunity is very limited even for skateboarders because it only applies to kids of a certain age. Even Mere the statute is imperfect and has not been changed for reason he does not understand to be more protective of local agencies. Also keep in mind that the low incident of claims (no claims) is not uncommon and there are many stories about kids who suffer injuries in these parks who do not file claims for the reason that many kids and parents understand that the kids are engaged in activities that could result in a broken arm or some other type of injury and do not feel that t would be someone else's fault. The City bears no liability for kids who injure one another and whether the kids or the parents incur liability depends on the kid's behavior and whether their behavior is wrongful or malicious. C2irbes asked if thE City would have created a greater potential for incurring liability if the City allowed scooters and a kid on a scooter hit a kid on a skateboar . CA/Jenkins said that was the question of the moment, a question he could not answer beause that question depended on whether the JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 16 CITY COUNCIL Council Members belie incompatible. Council ME choices that involve condi hazardous. One possibility three months to see if the recreation staff observed whether there was an incoi 'e the activities were compatible or mbers are often asked to make policy :ions or property that may or may not be would be to implement a pilot program for e was a problem and make sure that the the situation and reported back about npatibility or greater risk than exists today. MPT/O'Connor asked if the scooters wore proper safety equipment and she acknowledged th t the kids were nodding affirmatively. C/Herrera felt it was imprtant to have kids involved in positive activities and she liked CAI enkins' suggestion about a pilot program. C/Herrera moved, MPT/O' onnor seconded to approve Ordinance No. 08(2005) for first reading to expire December 1, 2005 and work with legislators to attempt to amend SB994 to include Razor scooters in skate parks and evaluat the matter immediately thereafter. CA/Jenkins recommended adding Section II to read: 'This ordinance shall automatically expire s x months from the effective date." C/Herrera and MPT/O'Connor concurred. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Herrera, Tanaka, Zirbes, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL M MBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL M MBERS: None 8.2 ADOPT RESOLUTION N( MASTER PLAN. CSD/Ra development process begE meeting of the 21-memt tremendous effort was undE through research and work Youth Master Plan before 1 Recreation Commission coi between November 18, 200 the Commission voted un adoption of the Youth MastE Parks and Recreation Comi Plan were distributed to City school board members. St Council during its June 7 stt 1. 2005-39: APPROVING THE YOUTH �e stated that the Youth Master Plan n on September 12, 2003 with the first .r steering committee. Since then a rtaken to collect information and material 'hops culminating in the creation of the ie Council this evening. The Parks and ducted an exhaustive review of the plan I and April 13, 2005 and on April 13, 2005 inimously to recommend City Council r Plan. Since its recommendation by the nission copies of the draft Youth Master ,ouncil Members and PUSD and WUSD iff presented the draft plan to the City dy session. George Fullerton, Vice Prin ipal, Diamond Ranch High School and Allison Myers, Youth Master Plan consultant explained the JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 17 CITY COUNCIL development and content of the plan using a Power Point presentation. The concept of the Youth Master Plan involves a cultural shift. The plan is a basic document to help guide the community through a collab rative with the school districts and other organizations inclu ing the youth to share the vision and to integrate strategies to enhai ce the lives of the youth. The plan ' speaks to various models anc many if not all models may be combined to help establish the goals. Once the collaborative is established it will determine a youth d 3velopment model that is designed to connect the youth programs anc services throughout the community. The goal is to share informatior and resources including applying for grants and other types of funding thereby avoiding duplication of programs and facilities. Alison Meyers said that the next key strategy was to engage the community and expand the capacity in resources, a strategy that would allow the collaborative to engage the youth and provide insight to them about what was available for them and for their families throughout the City The second strategy was to add to the current shared facilities and resources; and the third strategy was to eliminate barriers that include financial barriers, cultural differences, geographic locations, transport tion, service inventory and so forth. This plan was designed to ensure that the youth are happy, healthy, productive and involved and that the programs are built based on a youth development mode to provide outcome based programming with everyone working t gether. CSD/Rose explained that staff proposed to make a presentation to the Walnut Valley Unified School District for consideration by July 20 and to go before the Pomona Unified School District by July 26 to get the collaborative together in order to beginning meeting in September and to form a youth a tion team by January 2006. The Parks and Recreation Commis ion and staff recommend City Council adoption of the Youth Master PI n. There was no one p*ent who wished to speak on this item. MPT/O'Connor mov d, C/Zirbes seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 200537: Approving the Youth Master Plan. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUN IL MEMBERS: Herrera, Tanaka, Zirbes, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang NOES: COUN IL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUN IL MEMBERS: None JUNE 21, 2005 PACE 18 CITY COUNCIL 8.3 NOMINATE A DIAMOND BAR RESIDENT TO FILL A VACANCY ON THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. CM/Lowry stated that recently the Council received a letter of resignation from Mr. Marvin wherein he resigned fro the Public Safety Committee. Staff advertised the position and received four letters of interest from D.B. residents. In addition staff a igaged in dialogue with the Captain of the D.B./Walnut Sheriff's Statio i about the process of seating individuals on the Public Safety Committee and realized that staff was mistaken about the manner in which ppointments were made in the past. Staff could propose that the Council forward to the Captain the four names that were submitted and ceem it appropriate for him to make the selection or the Council cou d wait until further discussions discern the formulation of the committee and how it works. Out of respect for those who placed their names for consideration staff wanted to provide Council the opport nity to move the names forward to the Captain for review. C/Herrera pointed out that Captain's committee and Therefore, the resignation rather than being presen believed that in the past it v termination of that comm formed with the Captain authority, C/Herrera moved to pro, consideration and for him MPT/O'Connor agreed with names on to the Captain. SI Committee was about and v in any fashion. C/Herrera said she ac amendment to her motion motion. aft's report acknowledged that it was the That he was the appointing authority. hould have gone directly to the Captain d to the Council. C/Herrera said she s a different type of committee and upon ee a different type of committee was =coming the appointing and governing the Captain with the four names for report back to the Council. 'Herrera that it was prudent to pass the wanted to know what the Public Safety .ther or not the City should be involved ed MPT/O'Connor's request as an MPT/O'Connor seconded the amended C/Zirbes thanked the four people who submitted applications and Bob Marvin for his service to the committee. He agreed that the Captain should interview and select he candidate that would best serve the needs of the City and the department and in turn the Council could approve the Captain's recommendation. M/Chang thanked the applic nts and appreciated their willingness to work for the safety of the Ci of D.B. In addition, he agreed with his colleagues that the City n eded to determine due process for appointing committee memb rs. JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 19 CITY COUNCIL AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Herrera, Tanaka, Zirbes, NOES: COUNCIL MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 8.4 (a) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2006-40: APPROVING AND ADOPTING A BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JULY 1, 2005 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2006 INCLUDING MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS, SPECIAL FUNDS AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR ACCOUNTS, DEPARTMENT, DIVISIONS, OBJECTS AND PURPOSES THEREIN SET FORTH. ACM/Doyle reported that staff was requesting Council to approve three separate resc lutions calling for adoption of the operating budget, Fiscal Year appropriations limit and Investment Policy. He said that the City is once again in sound financial shape. The General Fund budget calls for estimated revenues of $17.6 million with appropriations for ongoing every day operations of $16.9 million leaving the City ith an excess of about $678,000. Staff is recommending that the $678,000 be re -invested into the City's Capital Improvement Plan Also included in the budget is a $546,000 allocation out of reserves that has been identified for economic development purp es. The proposed budget includes a 4% Cost of Living increase for staff and a $25 benefit allotment increase for cafeteria benefits. There are minor personnel changes including two positions that are promotions only for current staff members. C/Herrera said she was proud that staff was prudent about the management of the City's money and that the budget was balanced without budget cuts. She thanked staff and the City Council for keeping a tight fist on the City's dollars. MPT/O'Connor informed the audience that the Council had held several study sessions to discuss the budget. Many questions were asked and staff was responsive. She agreed with C/Herrera that it was nice to be in a City where funds were available to provide the services expected and demanded by the residents. M/Chang echoed the sentiments of his colleagues. C/Herrera moved, M Chang seconded to Adopt Resolution No. 2005- 40. Motion carried b the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Herrera, Tanaka, Zirbes, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang NOES: COUN IL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUN IL MEMBERS: None JUNE 21, 2005 91 PAGE 20 CITY COUNCIL (b) ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2005-41: SETTING THE PROP 4 (GANN) APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FY 2005-06 FOR THE CITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH HE PROVISIONS OF DIVISION 9 OF TITLE 1 OF THE GOVERN ENT CODE. MPT/O'Connor moved, C/F 2005-41. Motion carried by AYES: COUNCIL M ra seconded, to Adopt Resolution No. following Rall Call vote: S NOES: COUNCIL ME BERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL ME BERS: Herrera, Tanaka, Zirbes, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang None None (c) ADOPT RESOLUTI N NO. 2005-42: ADOPTING THE STATEMENT OF INVEST ENT (INVESTMENT POLICY). MPT/O'Connor moved, C/H rrera seconded to Adopt Resolution No. 2005-42. Motion carried by he following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL ME BERS: Herrera, Tanaka, Zirbes, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL ME BERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL ME BERS: None CM/Lowry requested that Consent Calendar Item 6.23 be corrected to reflect a contract approval with CompuCom for Microsoft License Agreement in the amount of $56,645.82 and that the Council approve the item as corrected. C/Zirbes moved, C/Herrera secnded, to approve the contract with CompuCom for Microsoft Enterp ise License Agreement ($56,645.82). Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBER NOES: COUNCIL MEM ABSENT: COUNCIL MEM COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE REPO C/Tanaka said he was very happy Council and said he would do the; C/Herrera congratulated C/Tanak candidates who did not win. It was only 84 votes. It was a passionate hard for their candidates. Because tl wounded feelings within the City. Of for another candidate. She felt it wa Herrera, Tanaka, Zirbes, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang None None NCIL MEMBER COMMENTS: excited to join his colleagues on the job he could do for D.B. on his win and congratulated the close election with Steve Tye losing by lection with many people working very e election was so close there are a lot of he ballots cast almost half of them were time to reach out into the community JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 21 CITY COUNCIL and heal the wounds sot at this Council and the residents could focus on the business at hand and be the great team that she knows the five Council Members can be. She offered her assistance to C/Tanaka. On tonight's agenda was approval of construction at Sycamore Canyon Park for a trails project. She thanked Gary Neely, the City's Consultant who monitors organizations, one of which is the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy because at Mr. Neely's urging the Conservancy was approached and did provide a grant to the City of D.B. in the amount of $124,000. She thanked Mr. Neely for his effort and acknowledged that he had once again encouraged the City to E pply for another grant. She serves as a Board Member on the T.H. Penc ergast Parole Museum. On June 30 the museum will sponsor an exhibit in acramento celebrating 100 years of service. She thanked Assemblyman Bob Huff and his outstanding staff and especially his Chief of Staff Jenay Gardr er Logan for facilitating and obtaining approval for establishing an exhibit in the State Capitol. During the five years she has served on the Board the P role Museum has attempted to get approval from the Governor's office fora ri exhibit in Sacramento. When Mr. Huff took over there were no records of work that had been done toward getting the exhibit established. Assemblyman Huff recreated the work product and after obtaining the necessary documents from the Parole Board was successful in getting the matter concluc ed. The exhibit was designed by Patrick Merrill, Director of the Keith and JE net Kellogg University Gallery at CalPoly Pomona and Arnold Holland, Professor of Graphic Design at the California State University at Fullerton. The unveiling is on the first floor of the Capitol building directly ac oss from the Governor's office. The ceremony will be at 12:00 noon and �;,eHuff. encouraged everyone to attend. She again thanked Assemblyman B C/Zirbes welcomed C/Tan ka. The election is over and it was a close race. All of the candidates sh wed the residents that they care about the community of D.B. It is unfortunate that there was a lot of painting of the Council that it is split 2-2 bE cause if people look at the Council's voting record it is easy to see that the Council works together on approving issues that are important to D.B. and its citizens. The Council Members bring independent experiences to the Council. All three of the candidates should be commended for the job they did in running for Council. He disagreed that the community needed to come togethert heal because each Council Member represents the core value of this corn unity and each Council Member has an eye to the future of this City. He than ed tonight's participants. MPT/O'Connor attended the Chamber's very successful economic conference. She thanked he Chamber for a wonderful program,and she thanked the City Manager End Assistant City Manager for their contributions. She commended C/Herre a for her service as President of COG. The organization celebrated 10 years of service and recognized five community members who were influential in the San Gabriel Valley in honor of Jack Phillips who was a City of Industry Council Member who passed away. She understood it was C/Herren 's idea to hold a memorial in honor of Jack JUNE 21, 2005 PAGE 22 CITY COUNCIL 10 Phillips. MPT/O'Connor commen+ Last week MPT/O'Connor flew Assemblyman Huff's AJR#7 deal! not have to speak because the bil senate floor without further input. ) and C/Zirbes met with the City discuss the Industry Business Cer on the west side of the SR 57. Indy and retail area. A Town Forum i Armstrong School,and the City of She hoped that the affected residE been very cooperative with D.B. d that they will cooperate with the c drivers should please watch out fo She encouraged residents to atb wonderful and safe event. She wel the first Japanese -American to se M/Chang welcomed C/Tanaka an the community. He joined MPT/0 July 4th show and the Concerts !i attended the D.B.H.S. graduation graduates and wished them the bE their lives. He spoke about the el would come together to work togE ADJOURNMENT: With nofu the meeting at 10:20 p.m. led C/Herrera for her thoughtful gesture. to Sacramento to speak on behalf of ig with the zip code issue in D.B. she did passed unanimously and was sent to the esterday she, CM/Lowry, ACM/DeStefano ►f Industry staff, Directors and Mayor to ter proposed for the 500 acre "buffer zone" stry is proposing an industrial, commercial > scheduled for Thursday, July 7 at Neil ndustry agreed to participate in the forum. nts would attend. The City of Industry has .firing other projects, and D.B., anticipates 'ity during this project. School is out and the kids who are out on the City's streets. end the City's July 4th celebration. It is a ;omed C/Tanaka and believed that he was rve on the D.B. Council. I thanked him for his willingness to serve ,onnor in inviting everyone to attend the the Park series beginning June 29. He ceremonies and congratulated all of the -t of luck in the next level and challenge of ction process and hoped the community her to keep D.B. moving forward. r business to conduct, M/Chang adjourned The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 2nd day of August , 2005. GtJr-u-� WEN CHANG, MAYO