Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/16/2010 Minutes - Regular MeetingCITY OF DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION FEBRUARY 16, 2010 STUDY SESSION: M/Herrera called the Study Session to order at 6:00 p.m. in Room CC -8 of the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA. Present: Council Members Ling -Ling Chang, Ron Everett, Jack Tanaka, Mayor Pro Tem Steve Tye and Mayor Carol Herrera. Staff Present: James DeStefano, City Manager; David Doyle, Assistant City Manager; Elizabeth Calciano, Asst. City Attorney; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; David Liu, Public Works Director; Linda Magnuson, Finance Director; Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; Ken Desforges, IS Director; Ryan McLean, Assistant to the City Manager; Patrick Gallegos, Management Analyst; Rick Yee, Sr. Civil Engineer; Marsha Roa, Public Information Manager; Cecilia Arellano, Public Information Coordinator; and, Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk. Also Present: Tim McLarney, President, True North Research. 0- DISCUSSION OF LLAD/FUNDING NEW PARKS MASTER PLAN PWD/Liu introduced Tim McLarney, President of True North Research (TNR), who presented a PowerPoint presentation on the survey that will need to be completed prior to the Council making a decision on how to proceed with Landscape Assessment Districts 38, 39 and 41, Mr. McLarney gave a brief background of his firm and stated that tonight's presentation focuses on three items: 1) Parcel Tax or Benefit Assessment, the two potential funding options available to the City for funding capital improvements as well as, operations and maintenance; 2) what the residential survey needs to accomplish; and 3) an outline of the methodology. M/Herrera asked how the survey would address non-residential property owners. Mr. McLarney stated that the assessor's files will provide mailing addresses for the current property owners and that the survey wil be mailed directly to them. MPT/Tye reiterated Mr. McLarney's statement that he is looking for high propensity voters and high propensity homeowners. In laying out the difference between a parcel tax and a benefit assessment tax record of the voter propensity the result was "yes" from the voter files for a parcel tax and "no" for benefit assessment tax. MPTfTye asked how TNR would do that. FEBRUARY 16, 2010 PAGE 2 CC STUDY SESSION Mr. McLarney responded "experience." In California it is very easy to go to the voter files to understand who will cast ballots in a special tax election. Among property owners there is no such thing. However, the firm he works with has collectively passed more assessment benefit tax in California than all other firms combined and has a lot of experience in terms of what the likely voting patterns are by property class as well as by propensity which TNR maintains a data base on that evidence as well. M/Herrera felt that a 15 -minute phone survey was too long and that she was concerned that individuals might become impatient and hang up before concluding the survey. She wondered if the survey could be done in 10 -minutes. Mr. McLarney stated that it was possible and that one of the things his firm monitors is the drop-off rate for these types of studies. He stated that they have found that the drop-off rate for these types of surveys to be about 3% and that he understood M/Herrera's concern and that the surveyors will be succinct. MPT/Tye reminded Council that once before they tried to tell the survey company what to do with respect to the library which resulted in a survey that in his opinion was not very useful. He felt that if the consultant believes it should be a 15 -minute survey, it should be a 15 -minute survey. He asked if 400 surveys would be returned to the Council regardless of how many calls would have to be made. Mr. McLarney stated that the guarantee is 400 completed surveys so with a potential three percent drop-off, those would not be counted in the 400. He said that TNR is committing to returning 400 completed surveys regardless of the number of calls. MPT/Tye asked how a landscape district would differ from what is described as a benefit assessment. Mr. McLarney stated that D.B.'s districts were established prior to Proposition 218 and therefore the methodology for designing the survey would be different. After Proposition 218, the general rule is that one does not touch existing districts, but that new districts are layered on. Functionally, a parcel tax and a benefit assessment tax are very similar; however, in terms of who votes and how they vote and how the votes are counted constitutes the big difference. Ultimately, engineering balances have to be included with a benefit assessment but not included with a parcel tax. M/Herrera asked if those providing the survey would be multi-lingual. FEBRUARY 16, 2010 PAGE 3 CC STUDY SESSION In response to M/Herrera's question about the surveyors being multi- lingual, Mr. McLarney stated that they would be multi-lingual and that TNR would look at the rate of linguistic isolation as part of the study so that voters would be looked at in the voter universes and the rate of isolation (they speak another language and do not speak English well). CM/DeStefano stated that a couple of years ago a Council Committee had been formed to review this matter. Currently, C/Evereft and C/Tanaka serve on the committee that was started based upon the principal issue of the growing need for the General Fund to support the operation and maintenance of the Lighting and Landscape Assessment Districts. That discussion then morphed into the Parks Master Plan of which the City Council should be reviewing in the next couple of months. The Parks Master Plan contains a multi-million dollar list of projects that the community, consultants, and staff have weighed in on which suggests that the City should seriously be looking over the next couple of decades. There is no funding for the Parks Master Plan; however, one of the ways to achieve its goals is to create some sort of Benefit Assessment District/Parcel Tax in order to fund the projects. One of the committee discussions was whether the two should stay morphed together or whether the lighting districts should continue to be funded by the General Fund and deal with two separate issues. It is an issue that can shape what Mr. McLarney and his group does as well as providing direction to staff. C/Everett felt strongly that the City Council needs to be clear in putting this matter out in order to receive good feedback. He was concerned about what the value would be to get the community interested as it relates to Parks and Recreation. He felt that morphing in the two as being a problem because it could be a potential naysayer of "no-yes"/"black and white." He felt that over time the Council may be able to bring the two issues together in a logical manner. There are 5 parks in District 39 that could be added into the Parks Master Plan and the landscaping is clearly part of trails, another logical connection to the Parks Master Plan. M/Herrera felt that when this is packaged it would have to be packaged attractively with consideration as to what people would be interested in paying for programs and parks as they have over the years. The City has spent a number of years creating the Parks Master Plan and now it needs to work on funding. One of the primary features residents like about D.B. is its parks, programs and activities. She asked how, if parks are emphasized in the Parks Master Plan, would the landscape districts get taken care of. CMIDeStefano stated that the problem began with the funding shortfalls for the Lighting and Landscape Assessment Districts. Because CSD/Rose and PWD/Liu do such a good job maintaining the districts the FEBRUARY 16, 2010 PAGE 4 CC STUDY SESSION public does not see the problem and therefore probably doesn't care that next year the districts will cost $350,000 in General Fund subsidies and, that the subsidy will continue to grow by at least 10%. As a policy matter, the City can continue to fund them through the General Fund. However, from staffs perspective it would be preferable to pass this cost along to the people who directly benefit-, however, this is a City Council decision. With respect to the Parks Master Plan it is a different story because the laundry list is pretty large and the cost is in the 10's of millions of dollars the City does not have to build from a capital standpoint. In addition, the City does not have the money to operate these facilities once they are built. The question is one for the Council to begin to address and provide direction to staff. C/Chang said she would like to wait until the survey is completed. Her personal opinion is that given the economy, people are not going to want to pay for anything additional. MPT/Tye agreed that it would be prudent to move forward with the survey judging from what has happened with past surveys. He wanted to know specifically what the survey was designed to do. Mr. McLarney stated that the questionnaire is designed to do several things. Early on, the survey takes an immediate read on the likelihood of supporting a revenue measure. This is done by presenting a mockup of what the ballot would be and asks how they would react. Before any other information is gathered the survey would determine how the community would react. From that point the survey looks at tax rates to determine the threshold of support given how the dollar amount associated with this price tag might change; the survey then moves on to products and services where the survey begins to educate the property owner about what the measure could fund as well as, its popularity contrast (most favorable/least favorable). The survey also tests pro and con arguments. If Council were to vote to put a measure on the ballot in the future there will be an election cycle of some sort during which there will be proponents who are trying to get their neighbors to support the measure and those opposed to it. That dynamic needs to be stimulated in this type of poll in order to understand not only where people are today but where they are likely to be once they are exposed to that kind of dialogue. By taking a reading on support as the survey progresses, he is able to come back to Council to explain where the community is today with respect to priorities that could be funded; the tax thresholds; how they react when they hear positive things about the measure and how they react when they hear negative things about the measure. In some cases the measure remains fairly flat over the survey and in some cases as the public learns more about a measure support increases and in other cases, where support decreases. TRN interprets the numbers and will tell Council whether it believes such a measure is feasible and if so, how the ballot FEBRUARY 16, 2010 PAGE 5 CC STUDY SESSION measure would be optimally structured. If TNR does not believe the measure is feasible it will tell the Council that as well. M/Herrera asked how much the survey would cost. Mr. McLarney stated that the cost is under SCI's contract. CM/DeStefano said he thought that this part of the contract was about $20,000 and the total contract was about $50,000 which has already been approved by Council. Mr. McLarney said the survey would focus on Parks and Recreation improvements, programs, operations and maintenance. A strategic decision was made not to focus on the landscape and lighting because it would likely confuse and hurt the measure rather than help. M/Herrera concluded that the survey should move forward. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to come before the City Council, M/Herrera adjourned the Study Session at 6:33 p.m. TOMMYI� CRIBBINS, CityCt'erk The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 2nd day of march 2010. 341044/ft-- CAROL HERRERA, Mayor MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR FEBRUARY 16, 2010 CLOSED SESSION: 5:33 p.m., Room CC -8 Public Comments on Closed Session Agenda — None ► Government Code Section 54956.8 Property Address: 21810 Copley Drive Diamond Bar, CA 91765 Agency Negotiator: City Manager Negotiating Party: Behringer Harvard Western (Portfolio) P.O. Box 190700 San Francisco, CA 94119-00700 Under Negotiation: Price and Terms of Payment Closed Session Adjourned at 6:00 p.m. to the Study Session STUDY SESSION: 6:00 p.m., Room CC -8 Public Comments on Study Session Agenda - None ► Discussion of LLAD/Funding New Parks Master Plan Study Session Adjourned at 6:33 p.m. to the Regular Meeting CALL TO ORDER: Mayor Herrera called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 6:40 p.m. in The Government Center/SCAQMD Auditorium, 21865 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA. ACA/Calciano reported that the Closed Session was called to order at 5:33 p.m. There were no public comments and no reportable action taken on the item. CM/DeStefano reported that during tonight's Study Session, Council discussed the LLAD's and potential funding sources for those districts and potential funding for a number of projects that will be coming forward to the City Council with the Parks Master Plan. The City Council approved the consultant moving forward with a community survey, the results of which will be available in April. Following tonight's Regular Meeting the City Council will resume tonight's Closed Session. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE: Mayor Herrera led the Pledge of Allegiance. FEBRUARY 16, 2010 PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL INVOCATION: Church, gave the invocation. Pastor Bob Stebe, Northminster Presbyterian ROLL CALL: Council Members Ling -Ling Chang, Ron Everett, Jack Tanaka, Mayor Pro Tem Steve Tye and Mayor Carol Herrera. Staff Present: James DeStefano, City Manager; David Doyle, Assistant City Manager; Elizabeth Calciano, Assistant City Attorney; Ken Desforges, IS Director; David Liu, Public Works Director; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Linda Magnuson, Finance Director, Greg Gubman, Community Development Director; Rick Yee, Senior Civil Engineer; Patrick Gallegos, Management Analyst; Marsha Roa, Public Information Manager; Christian Malpico-Perez, Associate Engineer (traffic), and Tommye Cribbins, City Clerk. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: As Presented. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATES, PROCLAMATIONS - None 2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: CM/DeStefano reported that on January 19 the City Council adopted new entertainment regulations for the community. At the conclusion of the presentation and discussion, Council directed City staff to begin looking at possible changes to the new ordinance. Staff has put together a memorandum to the City Council that begins the discussion of potential changes to the ordinance. There was some discussion during deliberation about potentially allowing for a broader range of entertainment types than those proposed and approved within the ordinance. Staff recommends that the City Council use its memorandum to prepare for discussion during a study session on March 2. The memorandum talks about how the new ordinance differs from the previous ordinance and provides an overview of how other cities regulate entertainment uses. The memorandum also begins to ask questions of the City Council leading to policy choices that should be discussed in March such as, does the City Council wish to have any changes made to the ordinance that it adopted in January; and, does the City Council wish to change the list of entertainment uses and if so, by what size and type, for example. It is difficult for staff to be forthcoming with suggested changes prior to engaging in this type of discussion with the City Council. Staff's last direction was to move forward with the interim ordinance and from that ordinance attempt to come up with new measures that would eliminate the kinds of difficulties the City had with entertainment uses that were established in the community. CA/Jenkins will join the Council to impart his experience with other client cities as well FEBRUARY 16, 2010 PAGE 3 3. 4. CITY COUNCIL as, issues in D.B. including enactment of permits that allowed the uses and the types of code enforcement issues the City experienced with those entities. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Jesse Lantz, Diamond Bar Library, spoke about recent and upcoming events at the library. 4. RESPONSE TO PUBLIC COMMENTS: None Offered. 5 L SCHEDULE OF FUTURE EVENTS: 5.1 Joint Mayor's Prayer Breakfast (D.B./Walnut) - February 19, 2010 — 7:15 a.m., Diamond Bar Golf Course, 22751 Golden Springs Dr., sponsored by the Regional Chamber of Commerce (909) 869-0701. 5.2 Household Hazardous Waste Roundup — February 20, 2010 — 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., Gateway Corporate Center, 1300 Block of Bridge Gate Dr, sponsored by Clean LA, 1888-CLEANLA or at www.888cleanla.com 5.3 Planning Commission Meeting — February 23, 2010 — 7:00 p.m., AQMD/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Dr. 5.4 Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting — February 25, 2010 — 7:00 p.m., AQMD/Government Center Hearing Board Room, 21865 Copley Dr. 5.5 City Council Meeting — March 2, 2010 — 6:30 p.m., AQMD/Government Center Auditorium, 21865 Copley Dr. 5.6 State of the City — March 4, 2010 — 6:00 to 7:30 p.m., Diamond Bar Center Ballroom, 1600 Grand Ave. CONSENT CALENDAR: MPT/Tye moved, C/Tanaka seconded, to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. Motion carried by the following Roll Call: AYES:0OUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Everett, Tanaka, MPT/Tye, M/Herrera NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None FEBRUARY 16, 2010 PAGE 4 CITY COUNCIL 6.1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES - Regular Meeting of February 2, 2010 — Approved as submitted. 6.2 RECEIVED AND FILED PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES: (a) Regular Meeting of November 10, 2009 (b) Regular Meeting of December 8, 2009 (c) Regular Meeting of January 12, 2010 6.3 RECEIVED AND FILED TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION MINUTES - Regular Meeting of October 8, 2009. 6.4 RATIFIED CHECK REGISTER - Dated January 28, 2010 through February 10, 2010 totaling $1,482,794.60. 6.5 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2010-03: APPROVING INSTALLATION OF A STOP SIGN ON CHARMINGDALE ROAD AT GOLDRUSH DRIVE. 6.6 (a) APPROVED CONTRACT AMENDMENT AMOUNT OF $16,200 WITH FS CONSTRUCTION FOR THE 2009-10 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) CURB RAMP INSTALLATION PROJECT FOR A TOTAL AUTHORIZATION OF $44,585. (b) APPROVED CONTRACT AMENDMENT AMOUNT OF $35,800 WITH FS CONSTRUCTION FOR THE 2009-10 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT -RECOVERY (CDBG-R) CURB RAMP INSTALLATION PROJECT FOR A TOTAL AUTHORIZATION OF $102,310. 6.7 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2010-04: A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES; THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT NO. 21 OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY; THE CITY COUNCILS OF THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR, CITY OF INDUSTRY, AND CITY OF WALNUT; THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE GREATER LOS ANGELES COUNTY VECTOR CONTROL DISTRICT; THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE THREE VALLEYS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT; THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE WALNUT VALLEY WATER DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT NO. 5 APPROVING AND ACCEPTING THE EXCHANGE OF PROPERTY TAX REVENUES RESULTING FROM ANNEXATION OF PARCEL MAP NO. 8024 (WALNUT POOLS, 21450 GOLDEN SPRINGS DRIVE) AND PARCEL MAP FEBRUARY 16, 2010 PAGE 5 CITY COUNCIL NO. 11313 (DIAMOND BAR AUTO SERVICE, 2161 BREA CANYON ROAD). 6.8 LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS: (a) ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2010-05: ORDERING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE AND FILE A REPORT RELATED TO MAINTENANCE OF PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 38 AND ANY ASSESSMENT THEREON FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010-11. (b) ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO, 2010-06: ORDERING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE AND FILE A REPORT RELATED TO MAINTENANCE OF OPEN SPACE IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 39 AND ANY ASSESSMENT THEREON FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010-11. (c) ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2010-07: ORDERING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PREPARE AND FILE A REPORT RELATED TO MAINTENANCE OF OPEN SPACE IN THE CITY OF DIAMOND BAR LANDSCAPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 41 AND ANY ASSESSMENT THEREON FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010-11. 6.9 ADOPTED RESOLUTION NO. 2010-08: AMENDING THE FY2009-10 MUNICIPAL BUDGET. 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None 8. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: 8.1 CONSIDERATION OF DESIGN OF WASHINGTON STREET MINI PARK. CSD/Rose reported that the City purchased a 15,000 square foot vacant parcel at the corners of Washington Street and Lincoln for the purpose of constructing a neighborhood park. Staff conducted two neighborhood meetings on October 17 and December 17 to receive input from residents living near the park regarding potential park amenities. The City's consultant, David Volz Design, developed three concepts that incorporated workable ideas presented by the residents_ The consensus among the residents FEBRUARY 16, 2010 PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL attending the December 17 meeting was that option 3, the most passive option, was the most appropriate for the location. On — January 28 the Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the three options and unanimously concurred to recommend Option 3 to the City Council for approval and offered an addendum to the motion that recommended that tile built by children be built into a rock seat as an art element for the park as well as, placing children's handprints in the concrete. Tonight's meeting was noticed to residence living in the Washington Street Mini Park area and the notice included a copy of concept 3. In addition, a sign was posted at the park location advertising tonight's meeting. Eric Sterling, David Volz Design, explained the details of Concept 3, a gathering place with lots of seating and lots of shade in addition to the standard park features including play equipment. Many residents commented that they wished for the City to replace the tree that for health reasons had been removed when the City purchased the property. Concept 3 recommends replacing the tree with a larger boxed tree that is appropriate for the park. Concept 3 incorporates a green park concept that will be aesthetically pleasing and cut down on future maintenance costs. Also included are bio swales, reduction of turf and climate appropriate plants. The residents were most interested in the climbing deck structure and rubberized surface and a sand play area rather than the traditional deck structure. The plan also incorporates a climbing boulder. Materials include decomposed granite, some concrete paving under the picnic area, gazebo (main gathering area), flowering trees and proposed amenities include chess tables, stone seat walls, seating for individuals in and around the play area, park monument sign, rock garden walls, barbecues in and around the picnic area, a three -rail fence along the north side, security lighting, drinking fountain and benches. Mr. Sterling displayed and explained character photos and talked about the elements in each designated area of the park. M/Herrera asked for the total number of trees that will be planted and the height of the climbing rock. Mr. Sterlingsaid the concept proposes 20 to 24 trees. The climbing rock is determined by the play equipment manufacturer and that the one displayed is five to six feet in height. Climbing boulders range from three feet to about seven feet in height. FEBRUARY 16, 2010 PAGE 7 CITY COUNCIL C/Tanaka thanked the architects for taking time to meet with the residents and the comments were that the residents wanted a passive gathering place, barbecue equipment and an overall quiet place for people to gather. One small child suggested that the park be named "The Presidents Park" because it would be located at the intersection of Washington and Lincoln. He thanked CSD/Rose and staff for the community meetings that helped the architects to bring forth an outstanding project. C/Everett thanked everyone who participated in the collaboration. He asked Mr. Volz if he was involved in the cost of $599,000 included in the report. Mr. Volz said he was involved. C/Everett asked if there was an annual percentage or dollar maintenance cost. CSD/Rose responded that it is included in the financial report and proposes to be about $18,000 per year. C/Tanaka moved, MPT/Tye seconded, to approve Concept 3 as recommended by the Recreation Commission and City staff. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Everett, Tanaka, MPT/Tye M/Herrera NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None CM/DeStefano stated that the next step in the process will be for the consultant to begin preparing construction documents. This project will most likely be included in the FY 2010-11 budget cycle for purposes of funding the project. Staff has also been working with Congressman Miller's office and tomorrow is the deadline for a variety of applications for appropriations and this is one of the five applications that the City is submitting to the Congressman and he and his staff have assisted the City in creating an attractive title for the project in order to generate interest from the decision -makers. Staff is hoping to receive about half of the cost of the project in a Congressional allocation. If not, staff will continue searching for resources to build the park because this is a neighborhood that is without a public park and upon its completion the park will greatly improve the neighborhood. FEBRUARY 16, 2010 PAGE 8 CITY COUNCIL 8.2 CITY COUNCIL APPOINTMENT OF 2010 PARKS AND RECREATION, PLANNING COMMISSION AND TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONS: 8.2.1 PLANNING COMMISSION 8.2.2 PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION 8.2.3 TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION M/Herrera asked if Council Members were offering any changes to the current status of sitting Commissioners. Council Members unanimously concurred that the appointments were without change. C/Tanaka moved, C/Chang seconded, to approve the Commissioners as presented under Items 8.2.1, 8.2.2 and 8.2.3. Motion carried by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chang, Everett, Tanaka, MPT/Tye M/Herrera NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None 9. COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS: C/Everett said he was delighted to welcome back to the Public Safety team Operations Lieutenant, Chris Blasnek. He also stated that he attended a Walnut Unified School District event where he presented a Classified Employee of the Year Award to the School Office Manager at Castle Rock Elementary along with 11 other employees of the month. C/Tanaka attended the ribbon cutting ceremony for Diamond Bar Floral at the comer of Diamond Bar Blvd. and Grand Ave. and the PUSD Board Meeting. He and his wife also attended a funeral for Mike Spence, the former D.B. Swim Coach and asked that tonight's meeting be adjourned in his memory. C/Chang said she also attended the ribbon cutting ceremony for Diamond Bar Floral with her colleagues C/Tanaka, C/Everett and MPT/Tye. She and M/Herrera attended the U.S. Zhejiang Commerce and Cultural Association where she presented certificates. Today she met LAPD Chief Beck and heard him speak at the Rotary Club. She thanked MPT/Tye for inviting her. She too is very sad about the passing of Coach Spence. FEBRUARY 16, 2010 PAGE 9 CITY COUNCIL MPT/Tye congratulated Patrick Gallegos for being recognized by his peers as the "Employee of the Quarter". Last week he attended the Greater Los Angeles County Vector Control District as the City's trustee. He hoped that residents would drop by the new location of Basically Books, a much inviting location. Every dollar spent goes to the Diamond Bar Library. M/Herrera reported that this morning she enjoyed breakfast with Congressman Gary Miller, CM/DeStefano and PWD/Liu and Tim Spohn and talked with Congressman Miller about Federal dollars for the Lemon Avenue Freeway on/off ramp project as well as the SR57/60 Confluence project. D.B. also made a pitch for the City's "President's Park," Chino Hills Parkway Beautification and several other projects. The City hopes to be successful in obtaining the requested funding. Last Friday she was in a day -long study session with Foothill Transit. Foothill Transit gets transportation dollars from the State and lately the State legislature has begun to take those transportation dollars to make up for the state's deficit. Already in this current fiscal year monies have not arrived at Foothill Transit and there is a $6 million shortfall. It is anticipated that there will be another $6 million shortfall for next year as well. So the day was spent identifying $12 million in cuts for Foothill Transit and unfortunately, those cuts translate to bus lines being cut. There will be announcements of public hearings regarding bus lines that run in cities throughout the region. $2.5 million was identified in administrative expenses and $10 million will be in cuts and services. Foothill Transit is one of many agencies suffering budget cuts. RECESS: M/Herrera recessed the regular meeting back to Closed Session at 7:35 p.m. ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to conduct, M/Herrera adjourned the Regular City Council meeting at 8:40 p.m. in memory of DBHS Swimming Coach, Mike Spence. 4) TOMMY CRIBBtNS, Cl TY CLERK The foregoing minutes are hereby approved this 2nd day of march , 2010. - r.W 4kv"s �_A CAROL HERRERA, MAYOR