HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/4/2005 Minutes - Regular MeetingCITY OF DIAMOND BAR
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
OCTOBER 4, 2005
STUDY SESSION: Mayor Chang called the Study Session to order
at 5:30 p.m. in Room CC -8 of the South Coast Air Quality Management
District/Government Center, 21 865 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA.
Present: Council Members Herrera, Tanaka, Zirbes,
Mayor Pro Tem O'Connor and Mayor Chang.
Also Present: Linda Lowry, City Manager; David Doyle,
Assistant City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City Attorney; David Liu, Public Works
Director; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Ken Desforges, IS Director;
Linda Magnuson, Finance Director; Nancy Fong, Planning Manager; Ryan
Wright, Senior Administrative Assistant; Fred Aiamolhoda, Senior Engineer; Kim
Crews, Human Resources Manager; Ryan McLean, Senior Management
Analyst; Dennis Tarango, Building Official and Sgt. Chris Blasnek.
► Pavement Management Program
► Annexation of Rowland Heights Discussion
ON. Public Comments on Study Session Items
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
SEIAlamolhoda reported that cities that adopt pavement technology understand
that a pavement management system is a matter of paying now or paying
considerably more at a later time. In April 2004 Council approved replacing the
five-year program with a seven-year slurry seal program to reduce the General
Fund expenditures and to ensure that the City received maximum return on
street rehabilitation expenditures. Last year the City entered into an agreement
with MACTEC Engineering to develop a seven-year program for the City.
MACTEC's first task was to develop boundaries for the new slurry seal program.
Dr. Kash Hadipour, Ph.D., P.E. with MACTEC defined a Pavement Management
System as a tool that assists the decision -makers to make the proper decision
about upgrading and maintaining its pavement network. A Pavement
Management System (PMS) is mandated by the MTA and must be updated
every three years. The first step for implementing a PMS is to develop and
update an inventory of the roadway network for the City. The next step is to
evaluate the surface condition of the existing roads to identify the current and
future maintenance needs. The next step is to prepare the budget (a seven-year
capital improvement plan and seven areas for slurry seal) and prioritize the
projects for maintenance and rehabilitation based on the City's annual budget.
With about 25 systems available, D.B. chose a Micro -Paver Pavement
OCTOBER 4, 2005 PAGE 2 CC STUDY SESSION
Management System, a public domain system utilized by nine of 10 cities in the
Southern California area.
Dr. Hadipour said that the engineers developed a PCI (Pavement Condition
Index) for every section of D.B. roadway and found that the majority of the City's
roads were in good condition.
Dr. Hadipour responded to MPT/O'Connor that the City's "red" streets comprise
less than 5 percent. Anything close to or over 70 is very good. The average
overall is 70%.
CM/Lowry said it was important to know that the source of funds for residential
street repair would come from the General Fund and arterial street repairs would
be paid with Proposition C and Federal money. Historically the Council has set
aside General Fund money to keep the residential streets in better repair than in
most cities.
Dr. Hadipour said that of all of the cities he has worked with D.B. has the best
roads.
CM/Lowry explained that the MTA requirement allows cities to obtain special
funds and if D.B. did not meet that requirement it would have to finance repairs
from its General Fund.
Dr. Hadipour stated that the Pavement Management System allows the City to
predict future condition of the roadways and based on those predictions the City
can plan its repair activities. The current overall PCI is 75 and if D.B. wanted to
significantly improve that number it could spend another $500,000 for instance
for repair at this time and spend very little each year to maintain the high index.
Based on the needs analysis his firm developed a seven-year capital
improvement plan and a seven-year slurry seal program for the City's roadway
network system.
In response to C/Zirbes, PWD/Liu indicated that this year's budget includes
$600,000 for Area 2 with a proposed $600,000 for Area 3 in FY 2006-07.
However, with rising costs of materials that figure could escalate. The area
numbers were based on need and the City intends to follow the numeric rotation.
Studies indicate that slurry seals have a service life of up to seven years.
C/Herrera asked what would happen if crews discovered additional maintenance
problems over and above those allocated for the slurry seal program.
PWD/Liu responded that in addition to the Capital Improvement Budget for slurry
seal there are additional General Funds budgeted for maintenance.
Dr. Hadipour explained that the slurry seal program is separate from the routine
maintenance and rehabilitation program. The report contains study information
OCTOBER 4, 2005 PAGE 3 CC STUDY SESSION
about Area 2 which indicates that apart from the slurry seal program there are a
number of sections that require M&R (maintenance and rehabilitation) for 2006
for example. There are two thick binders containing information about the
pavement condition inspection for all City roadways.
In response to CM/Lowry's request Dr. Hadipour explained how the micro -paver
system could be downloaded into the City's GIS System.
CM/Lowry likened the system to layers of lasagna that would allow multiple
facets of information to be integrated thereby completing a user-friendly system
that would allow staff and residents to click on a certain address (ID#) and
retrieve detailed parcel information and current and future repair/upgrade status
and maps.
Paul Akin asked if the $600,000 for slurry seal and $400,000 for maintenance
would be sufficient to maintain the worst areas so that they would not fall into
disrepair?
PWD/Liu responded that every year the City gets a certain amount of gas tax
funds and those funds are primarily allocated for street maintenance and
maintenance includes sweeping the sidewalks on a weekly basis. In addition to
the $400,000 the City concentrates on a specific area each year with a seven-
year cycle for the seven areas. This year the City spent $600,000 for slurry seal
and $400,000 for maintenance, some of which came from the General Fund to
supplement the declining gas tax revenues. As previously indicated, an annual
funding commitment of $1 to 1.5 million would provide for better than adequate
maintenance of the City's roadways.
2. DISCUSSION REGARDING POSSIBLE ANNEXATION OF ROWLAND
HEIGHTS.
C/Herrera stated that about a year ago Rowland Heights residents approached
her because she is a LAFCO Commissioner and indicated that they wanted to
know the process for incorporating. She met with them and explained that first
they needed to form a citizens committee that would raise about $80,000 for
studies to be completed by LAFCO to determine whether Rowland Heights would
be able to support itself as a City. The process takes two to three years and
when the study was completed it would go before the LAFCO Commission for
discussion and vote as to whether the matter should be placed on the ballot. Part
of the process is an analysis of the amount of dollars that follow the exiting of a
city from the County and if the dollar amount is greater than the money spent for
services supporting the entity the balance goes to Los Angeles County —
sometimes referred to as "alimony", the difference in revenues vs. expenditures.
Alimony is usually paid out over a 10 -year agreement and it involves millions of
dollars. The Rowland Heights residents were somewhat discouraged by the
enormity and length of the process. She said that upon learning their
disappointment she told them that there were other options available to them and
OCTOBER 4, 2005 PAGE 4 CC STUDY SESSION
that the City of D.B. could annex them. The process is basically the same as the
incorporation process except that D.B. would be responsible for paying the
$80,000 for the study. Recently she was again approached by the Rowland
Heights citizens who wanted her to attend a meeting in their City to talk with them
about the possibility of D.B. annexing Rowland Heights. She said that there is no
assurance that everyone in Rowland Heights is in favor of being 'annexed into
D.B. and at the same time she is not aware of how the City Council Members feel
about the matter. She said she spoke with a couple of staff members about the
idea and when she spoke with Jim DeStefano about it he was very enthusiastic
about the possibility because there was a lot of revenue in Rowland Heights.
However, she did not know if the revenue would offset the expenses and she did
not know if the maintenance of the area would cost more than the revenues
would offset. If D.B. pursued annexation D.B. would pay the cost of the studies
and LAFCO would conduct the studies. Regardless of the studies done by D.B.,
LAFCO would insist on conducting their studies and it was still a two to three
year process from the time D.B. might initiate the annexation process. Because
Rowland Heights is completely occupied it would require a vote of the Rowland
Heights citizens to approve or disapprove annexation by D.B. and it would also
require a vote by the citizens of D.B. C/Herrera said that there are many
considerations such as boundaries and whether there were protests from any
neighborhoods within the Rowland Heights areas because LAFCO would take
that into consideration and delete those areas from the proposed annexed area
of Rowland Heights. The name would also be under consideration and would
also most likely be a ballot consideration. Her understanding was that D.B. was a
General Law City and could not have more than five Council Members. If
Rowland Heights were to annex to D.B. the residents would most likely want their
own Council Members which would require D.B. to vote to become a Charter City
and add more Council Members opening up even more considerations about the
makeup of the City Council Members.
M/Chang said that several years ago a number of people from Rowland Heights
approached D.B. and after discussing the matter he felt that it was a question of
whether Rowland Heights wanted to annex to D.B. so it would be premature for
D.B. to start the process.
C/Herrera said that was what she told Rowland Heights — that the ball was in
their court and whatever way they chose to go Rowland Heights would have to
initiate the process.
M/Chang said he would support the annexation of Rowland Heights into D.B. but
at the same time he would not want to impose a mandate on Rowland Heights. if
Rowland Heights wanted to annex into D.B. then the Council would have to
launch a full-scale investigation of how the process would be managed and it
would be difficult for D.B. to make a yes or no decision at this time. In his opinion,
Rowland Heights residents should petition for annexation or incorporation before
seeking D.B.'s participation.
OCTOBER 4, 2005 PAGE 5 CC STUDY SESSION
C/Zirbes said he was not interested in trying to annex Rowland Heights to D.B.
He agreed with M/Chang that Rowland Heights needed to step up and decide
whether they wanted to incorporate and do what D.B. did because D.B. twice
attempted incorporation before it was successful. Hacienda Heights tried to
incorporate and failed to do so. Although there are a lot of similarities in the two
communities Rowland Heights has commercial areas and infrastructure
considerations that are non-existent in D.B. In addition, D.B. has a lot of
challenges on its plate such as major economic development considerations. He
felt that people moved to D.B. for its unique character and before he would want
to take a position he would rather have the matter placed on a ballot issue.
Judging from phone calls he has received since this item appeared on the
agenda the local response would be a resounding "No." C/Zirbes felt it would be
more feasible to look at D.B.'s sphere of influence areas for possible annexation.
Annexation has been a topic of discussion for many years and it has not yet
come to fruition and he felt it would be huge burden for D.B. to annex in another
city.
C/Tanaka agreed that he would like to have Rowland Heights pursue the matter
rather than to have D.B. appear to be grabbing their land. He felt that there were
areas within D.B. that should be given primary consideration and that those
areas would be compromised were the City to annex another city.
MPT/O'Connor felt D.B. should concentrate on the open areas within its sphere
of influence in order to have a hand in planning future development. She might
be in favor of considering a smaller portion of the Fairway area as was previously
discussed because it would incorporate blocks of homes that were seeking
annexation to D.B.
C/Herrera thanked her colleagues for their input.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Jerry Hamilton was opposed to annexing Rowland Heights because of all of the
unforeseen problems that might result and he believed that the majority of D.B.
residents were also opposed to the annexation.
ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to come before the City
Council, M/Chang adjourned the Study Session at 6:30 p.m.
L' da C. Lowry, City CI r
OCTOBER 4, 2005 PAGE 6 CC STUDY SESSION
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 1st day of November ,
2005.
WEN CHANG, Mayor
MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR
OCTOBER 4, 2005
STUDY SESSION: 5:30 p.m., Room CC -8
> Pavement Traffic Management Program
> Annexation of Rowland Heights
> Public Comments
M/Chang adjourned the Study Session at 6:30 p.m. to Closed Session
CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Chang called the regular City Council
meeting to order at 6:45 p.m. in The Government Center/SCAQMD Auditorium,
21865 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA.
Mayor Chang reported that the City Council began its evening with the Study
Session during which Council received reports on the Pavement Management
Program and the possible annexation of Rowland Heights. Council felt that with the
limited information available it was inappropriate to move forward with annexation of
Rowland Heights at this time.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Council Member Herrera led the Pledge of
Allegiance.
INVOCATION: MonsignorJames Loughnane, St. Denis Catholic
Church gave the Invocation.
ROLL CALL: Council Members Herrera, Tanaka, Zirbes,
Mayor Pro Tem O'Connor and Mayor Chang.
Staff Present: Linda Lowry, City Manager; David Doyle,
Assistant City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City Attorney; David Liu, Director of Public
Works; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Ken Desforges, IS Director and
Nancy Fong, Interim Planning Director.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA: CM/Lowry asked that Item 3.2 be moved to Item
1.5
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS:
1.1 Council Member Zirbes presented Certificate of Recognition to Marco
Avila for his heroic assistance in rescuing a survivor of a recent plane
crash at Cal Poly Pomona.
1.2 Mayor Chang presented Certificates of Recognition to the Diamond
Bar Senior Citizens Club and the Senior Needlework Class who have
been making gifts for the U.S. Servicemen and Servicewomen fighting
in Iraq.
OCTOBER 4, 2005 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL
1.3 Mayor Pro Tem O'Connor proclaimed "Lawsuit Abuse Awareness
Week" -October 3-7, 2005.
1.4 Council Member Herrera proclaimed "Fire Prevention Month - October
2005."
1.5 Marsha Hawkins announced "Read Together Diamond Bar" events.
Mayor Chang proclaimed October 2005 "Literacy Month."
1.6 Irene Wang, Librarian, D.B. Library, introduced Mary Yogi, new
Reference Librarian.
BUSINESS OF THE MONTH:
1.7 Council Member Tanaka presented a City Tile to Bob Welch, owner of
Bob Welch's Custom Shoe Repair as Business of the Month for
October 2005; and displayed a Business of the Month slide show.
CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: None Offered.
2. PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Lydia Plunk, Editor, The Windmill, stated that November's publication focuses
on Gratitude and contains features on community veterans past and present.
She hoped that everyone would participate.
Jerry Hamilton said that as a citizen of D.B. he appreciated CSD/Rose and
his commitment to the community. He asked that the Council consider
naming the Trailhead after Mr. Rose and at the very least provide a
recognition plaque.
Clyde Hennessee said that at the last meeting he asked to have the City
Council agenda mailed to his home at a cost of 37 cents and pointed out that
the City was spending thousands of dollars to find out whether the residents
wanted a new library. He felt that a petition would have served the purpose
and it would not have cost the City anything. In his opinion it was not fiscally
responsible or logical.
4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered.
SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS:
5.1 DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATES FORUM — October 5,
2005 — 6:00 — 8:00 p.m., Auditorium, AQMD/Government Center,
21825 Copley Dr.
OCTOBER 4, 2005 PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL
5.2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING—October 11, 2005-7:00 p.m.,
Auditorium, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
5.3 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MEETING —
October 13, 2005 — 7:00 p.m., Hearing Board Room,
AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
5.4 CITY COUNCIL MEETING — October 18, 2005 — 6:30 p.m.,
Auditorium, AQMD/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr.
6. CONSENT CALENDAR: C/Zirbes moved, C/Herrera seconded to approve
the Consent Calendar as presented with the exception of Items 6.6 and 6.8.
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
6.1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
6.1.1 Study Session — September 20, 2005 — Approved as
submitted.
6.1.2 Regular Meeting — September 20, 2005 — Approved as
submitted.
6.2 RECEIVED AND FILED PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION
MINUTES — Regular Meeting of August 25, 2005, 2005.
6.3 RATIFIED CHECK REGISTER dated October 4, 2005 in the amount
of $788,473.75.
6.4 REVIEWED AND APPROVED TREASURER'S STATEMENT— month
of August 2005.
6.5 (a) AWARDED CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT SIDEWALK PROJECT IN THE
AMOUNT OF $191,000 WITH A CONTINGENCY AMOUNT OF
$28,650.
(b) AMENDED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES
CONTRACT FOR THE CDBG SIDEWALK INSTALLATION PROJECT
WITH DEWAN, LUNDIN & ASSOCIATES (DL&A) FOR A ONE YEAR
EXTENSION.
OCTOBER 4, 2005 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL
6.7 AUTHORIZED CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONSULTING
SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH MUNICIPAL ENGINEERING
RESOURCES (M.E.R.) IN A NOT -TO -EXCEED AMOUNT OF
$40,000 FOR "AS NEEDED" ENGINEERING SERVICES.
6.9 APPROVED AN AMENDMENT TO THE 2005-2006 FISCAL YEAR
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) PROGRAM
TO INCLUDE $15,000 OF CARRYOVER FUNDS TO INSTALL
AMERICAN DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) COMPLIANT CITY HALL
ENTRY DOORS AND ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-55.
ITEMS WITHDRAWN FROM CONSENT CALENDAR:
6.6 AMEND CONTRACT WITH SUNGARD PENTAMATION TO
PURCHASE FALSE ALARM TRACKING SOFTWARE ($16,000) FOR
A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $41,000.
At the request of C/Zirbes, CM/Lowry explained that during a 12 -
month period businesses and residences are allowed two public
safety false alarm responses and beginning with the third false alarm
response the City has a right to recover the costs of that and future
false alarm responses during the same 12 -month period. This
software tracking system offers the City an opportunity to recover
those costs via a billing system.
ISD/Desforges stated that the fees are $100 for the first offense, $200
for the second offense and $500 for the third and subsequent
offenses.
C/Zirbes moved, C/Herrera seconded, to approve an amendment to
the contract with Sungard Pentamation to purchase False Alarm
Tracking Software ($16,000) for a total contract amount of $41,000.
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
6.8 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2005-54: APPROVING CITY
COUNCIL "STANDARDS OF OPERATION AND CODE OF ETHICS"
TO CLARIFY THE PROCESS WHEREBY COUNCIL MEMBERS
PLACE ITEMS ON THE COUNCIL AGENDA.
MPT/O'Connor said she would not approve adoption of Resolution No.
2005-54 because she found it ironic that it was more and more difficult
for Council Members to place an item on the agenda while there were
no "full content disclosure" restrictions on the use of personalized City
OCTOBER 4, 2005 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL
stationery by City Council Members.
C/Herrera wanted the public to know that the entire Code of Ethics was
compiled and edited over a period of about 18 months with a lot of the
documentation being gathered from current City Hall manuals and documents
as well as documents used and provided by neighboring cities. The document
was reviewed by CA/Jenkins and returned to the committee for an intensive
and thorough process. She felt the amendment was good.
C/Tanaka felt that the proposed Code of Ethics addressed the proper use
of personalized City stationery.
M/Chang felt that Council Members were responsible enough to use their
personalized City stationery in a proper way.
C/Herrera moved, C/Tanaka seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 2005-54.
Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None
8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION:
Herrera, Tanaka, Zirbes,
M/Chang
MPT/O'Connor
None
8.1 ADOPT THE MANUAUGUIDELINES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (NTMP) AND APPROVE FIVE
RECOMMENDED NTMP PROJECTS EACH WITH AN
APPROXIMATE AND BUDGETED VALUE OF $25,000.
PWD/Liu reported that because the most persistent and emotional
complaints received by the City were for speeding and traffic volumes
on residential streets, the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
(NTMP) offered a new approach to managing traffic within residential
neighborhoods.
Joe Faulter, consultant and SMA/Gomez presented the details of the
NTMP. Mr. Faulter explained that traffic -calming devices slow vehicles
down on streets and reduce the negative effects of speeding and
excessive volume thereby enhancing the quality of life, and increasing
safety for residents, motorists and pedestrians. The four E's are based
on a toolbox of strategies: Engineering, Enforcement, Education and
Enhancement. Staff and the consultant recommended that the NTMP
be considered as a pilot program and be implemented as such with
signs and press releases informing the residents about the nature of
the program, encouraging residents to review the program, comment
OCTOBER 4, 2005 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL
on the program and become a part of the program. And if successful,
the program could be expanded based on residents' input and future
Council's decisions.
SMA/Gomez detailed the program for each district:
Area 1 — northern portion of the City and particularly Sunset Crossing
Road and Prospectors Road — install centerline striping and parking
lanes. On the east side of Diamond Bar Boulevard to Golden Springs
Drive, place signs at street entrances to let motorists know they are
entering a residential area; install parking lanes, striping and speed
cushions where grades permit. These devices are expected to narrow
the street, slow traffic and limit truck traffic.
Area 2 — Fountain Springs to Diamond Bar Boulevard — to mitigate cut
through and speeding traffic from Brea Canyon Road, install speed
cushions and narrow the roadway with striping and Texas dots. Near
Castle Rock Elementary School install centerline striping with speed
cushions and Texas dots to prevent erratic driving behavior and U -
Turns.
Area 3 — Diamond Bar Boulevard and Grand Avenue — focus on
Rancheria Avenue just east of Golden Springs Drive — install mini -
circles with Texas dots and striping at the intersections. Golden
Prados east of Golden Springs — extend the median with centerline
striping and Texas dots to narrow the road and prevent speeding. Add
speed cushions to slow traffic moving down the hili on Golden Prados
toward Bridle.
Area 4 — Middle of the City on Maple Hill Road near Maple Hill
Elementary School — install speed cushions and raised/textured
crosswalk, add red curbing along crosswalk and driveway areas to
provide more protection for students/pedestrians and for the
ingress/egress to the school parking lot. On Cliffbranch Drive add
speed cushions where the grade permits to reduce cut -through traffic.
Area 5 — Westerly portion of the City; Lycoming and Glenwick near
Walnut Elementary School, businesses and residential area collector
road with truck traffic pass through from Brea Canyon Road to
Diamond Bar Boulevard - install speed cushions, a raised textured
crosswalk, Texas dots near Glenwick and add a median for additional
protection for the residents/pedestrians.
SMA/Gomez explained that the next step in the process was to obtain
Council's approval of the pilot project under the current FY 2005-2006
budget allocating $125,000 for improvements. In addition, staff was
seeking Council's approval of the NTMP manual. The installed pilot
projects will be used as a reference for future requests for traffic
OCTOBER 4, 2005 PAGE 7 CITY COUNCIL
mitigation and all future NTMP requests will have a formal process in
accordance with the provisions of the NTMP manual.
M/Chang asked for public comment.
Jerry Hamilton felt his area of Quail Summit in front of the school
should be considered for mitigation.
M/Chang explained that the five areas were pilot projects and that
other areas would be considered for mitigation based on the success
of the program and feedback from the residents. He said that Mr.
Hamilton's comments would be taken into consideration for any
possible future development.
M/Chang closed public comments.
C/Zirbes said that staff and the consultant had worked on this program
for about a year and that Council had hoped for greater participation
by the residents. The pilot programs were considered based on a
ranking and the NTMP was being initiated to provide greater safety in
the residential areas. He felt that the program would prove itself
successful and thanked staff, the Traffic and Transportation
Commission and residents who attended the neighborhood meetings.
C/Zirbes moved, MPT/O'Connor seconded, to adopt the
Manual/Guidelines for the Neighborhood Traffic Management
Program (NTMP) and approve five recommended NTMP projects
each with an approximate and budgeted cost/value of $25,000. 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
9. COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS:
C/Zirbes said he was back at work and feeling better and stronger every day
and that he had been in touch with residents and staff. He and M/Chang plan
to reconvene the Economic Committee and the Neighborhood Improvement
Committee to discuss important financial issues. Earlier this evening a
speaker mentioned that the Council was paying "hundreds of thousands of
dollars" for a survey to see if residents wanted a new library. He reminded
the speaker that at the last City Council meeting he made a motion to
approve slightly more than $20,000 for the survey. A new library is a multi-
million dollar decision and the Council needs to decide whether it is worth
spending $20,000 to determine the community's pulse. He believed that if the
community decided it did not want a library tax, it would not be approved as
OCTOBER 4, 2005 PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL
a ballot measure. In essence, the City would save hundreds of thousands
and in fact, millions of dollars by making that initial determination. Perhaps
there was false information being presented during this election season. He
asked residents to please contact one of the Council Members or staff for
clarification when they hear information that does not sound correct. He
again thanked the community for continuing to support him during his
recovery and said that it was his honor to serve the people as a City Council
Member.
C/Herrera reported that she had the pleasure of testifying before the Board of
Supervisors on one of their agenda items. A few years ago voters passed
Measure B, a measure that takes tax dollars from each household for trauma
centers and hospital emergency rooms. She is president of the San Gabriel
Council of Governments and about a year ago the Council created a task
force made up of residents of the various San Gabriel Valley cities to
determine whether one of the area hospitals would consider creating a
trauma center. The closest hospital to D.B. is Huntington Memorial in
Pasadena. There are no trauma centers within the San Gabriel Valley, a
cause of great concern to the 31 cities. The households within the Valley,
contribute $36 million a year toward the venture. A couple of Pomona
hospitals were approached and because it costs millions of dollars to convert
facilities to qualify for a trauma center and because hospitals must dedicate
operating rooms for trauma and provide doctors and nurses on a 24/7 basis it
was determined that none of the Pomona hospitals were able to afford the
conversion of their facilities to provide trauma centers. The task force
approached the Board of Supervisors and the three supervisors that
represent the cities in the San Gabriel Valley. Mike Antonovich, Gloria
Molina and Don Knabe became dissatisfied that the San Gabriel Valley was
not getting its fair share. C/Herrera testified on behalf of a "yes" vote at the
Board of Supervisors meeting to spend $450,000 a year from Measure B
taxes for a helicopter that would be housed in the City of Industry and would
be on-call in the event of a critical accident with a victim needing to be
airlifted to a trauma center. The helicopter would transport the victim(s) to the
Los Angeles County USC Medical Center. She is proud that the Board was
able to provide the helicopter for the San Gabriel Valley residents. C/Herrera
apologized for causing undue alarm amongst residents regarding her request
to discuss the feasibility of annexing Rowland Heights with her fellow Council
Members because it was merely a question that was posed to her and she
needed to discuss the matter with her colleagues to determine whether they
were interested in pursuing the matter further. Any discourse among Council
Members must be done in the public eye so as not to violate the Brown Act.
Her request did not mean that this City Council was in favor of pursuing
annexation because if residents did not want this City Council to pursue
annexation of Rowland Heights the City Council most certainly would not.
City Council Members are elected by the people to represent the people, and
to make decisions based upon the people's desires. Annexation is a two or
three year process that entails public meetings and a vote. She reiterated
that this request was a desire to determine the feelings of her fellow Council
OCTOBER 4, 2005 PAGE 9 CITY COUNCIL
Members so that she could appropriately and adequately communicate their
feelings to the residents of Rowland Heights.
C/Tanaka said he attended the California Contract Cities Association
meeting, the Chamber of Commerce networking breakfast, the Parents
Coordinating Council's fourth annual silent auction and dinner at Lanterman
Developmental Center, Pomona Mayor Eddie Cortez's funeral along with
C/Herrera and MPT/O'Connor, the Parks and Recreation Commission
meeting, the Diamond Bar Day at the County Fair along with M/Chang and
MPT/O'Connor, the first fundraiser for the district Leo Club along with
M/Chang and the Public Safety Meetings with the D.B. Walnut Sheriff's
Station.
MPT/O'Connor, in addition to the events mentioned by C/Tanaka attended
the D.B. Chamber of Commerce Board meeting and the Walnut Valley
Kiwanis installation dinner on Saturday night. She wished her husband a
happy 25tr, wedding anniversary.
M/Chang said he was pleased that C/Zirbes was enjoying a speedy recovery
and that he was anxious to get back to work. He cautioned C/Zirbes that the
most important thing was for him to take time to fully recover. M/Chang
reported that he accepted an invitation from the World Trade Center in Los
Angeles and the Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation to join a
large group (130 plus) to visit China and speak about business opportunities
and to promote Los Angeles and America. The United States ranks No.1 in
attracting capital investment. He said that he paid for his trip and did not
spend any taxpayer dollars. He thanked the residents for their participation in
tonight's meeting and wished them a good evening.
10. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Chang adjourned
the meeting at 8:30 p.m.
�LADA LMVRY, CI CLERK
The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this lR+.nday of
2005.
WEN CHANG, MAYOR