HomeMy WebLinkAboutIn OppositionFrom:Christy Holstege
To:City Clerk
Subject:Fwd: Marilyn issue
Date:Monday, November 27, 2023 4:41:27 PM
Christy Gilbert Holstege, Esq.
Councilmember
District 4
City of Palm Springs
Begin forwarded message:
From: Michael Wollaeger <michaelwollaeger@yahoo.com>
Date: November 27, 2023 at 3:48:03 PM PST
To: Christy Holstege <Christy.Holstege@palmspringsca.gov>
Cc: letters@desertsun.com
Subject: Marilyn issue
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or
open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
Dear Christy:
I'm writing to suggest a solution to the Marilyn issue, which seems to have become unduly
contentious.
By simply moving Marilyn to her own space in the park slightly to the north, or to an even
more prominent location on the corner park across from the Arts Center (currently a
fountain and lots of concrete that no one visits), everyone wins, without having to change
zoning, modify the law or reverse previous decisions.
Modernism Week by far out weighs Marilyn with regard to providing an economic boon to
Palm Springs. So the contention that moving Marilyn will affect tourism in a negative way is
both absurd and wrong-headed. Museum Way was designed to provide a dramatic view of
the Palm Springs Art Museum, an architectural landmark by E. Stewart Williams (one of the
heroes of Palm Springs Modernism). We have objective evidence that people come from all
over the world to experience Palm Springs Modernism, and incidentally to stay in our
hotels, eat in our restaurant and shop in our stores. This is incontrovertible. Everyone
benefits from Modernism Week twice a year (at least).
Marilyn is an attraction, no doubt, but there is no evidence whatsoever that people come to
Palm Springs specifically to see Marilyn. When they are here, many people indeed like to
see her—but they would like to see her just as much if she were in a different location.
Moving her to another prominent site would not depress tourism one iota. And the people
who come to Palm Springs for Modernism would not have Marilyn blocking an iconic view
of the museum.
(Also, no one ever publishes photographs of the BACK of the Marilyn sculpture, which one
12/04/2023
Public Comment
sees when entering or leaving the museum. From this view, all one sees is a giant woman's
butt, which was NEVER something shown in the film from which this image was drawn and
developed into a sculpture. It would be laughable if it weren't in such an important location
ion our city.)
It seems to me that the hotel association is being needlessly intransigent and is willfully
(and dishonestly) blocking any compromise solution that benefits all. Why not agree to a
mutually satisfying solution, a win-win for Palm Springs? This would avoid expensive ballot
initiatives as well as having to twist existing civic rulings to accommodate something that
was never meant to be permanently in that location.
Thank you for considering this when the City Council discusses this on December 2.
Michael Wollaeger
310-613-3282
1815 S La Paloma
Pal Springs, CA 92264
I am the former Executive Editor of Architectural Digest magazine, Editor in Chief of
Western Interiors and Design magazine, Creative Director of Interiors magazine, and Editor
in Chief of DesignLA, a magazine I founded with the Los Angeles Times
12/04/2023
Public Comment
From:Christy Holstege
To:City Clerk
Subject:Fwd: Opposition to Amending the Downtown Specific Plan and Vacating Museum Way - December 4, 2023
Special Meeting
Date:Thursday, November 30, 2023 10:38:45 AM
Christy Gilbert Holstege, Esq.
Councilmember
District 4
City of Palm Springs
Begin forwarded message:
From: mike guerra <attyatlawca@hotmail.com>
Date: November 30, 2023 at 7:39:11 AM PST
To: Grace Garner <Grace.Garner@palmspringsca.gov>,
ron.dehart@palmspringsca.gov, Jeffrey Bernstein
<Jeffrey.Bernstein@palmspringsca.gov>, Christy Holstege
<Christy.Holstege@palmspringsca.gov>, Lisa Middleton
<Lisa.Middleton@palmspringsca.gov>
Subject: Opposition to Amending the Downtown Specific Plan and Vacating
Museum Way - December 4, 2023 Special Meeting
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or
open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
Michael E. Guerra
Attorney at Law
457 W. Arenas Rd.
Palm Springs, CA 92262
November 30, 2023
Mayor Grace Garner, Mayor pro tem Jeffrey Bernstein, and
City Councilmembers Ron deHarte, Christy Holstege, and Lisa
Middleton
3200 South Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Re: December 4, 2023 City Council Special Meeting – The
Marilyn Statue on Museum Way – Opposition to Amending the
12/04/2023
Public Comment
Specific Plan and Vacating Museum Way
Dear Mayor Garner, Mayor pro tem Bernstein, City Councilmembers
DeHarte, Holstege, and Middleton:
I am writing to oppose amending the Downtown Specific Plan,
vacating Museum Way and permanently placing the Marilyn statue
structure on Museum Way. I support moving the statue and placing
it at an appropriate location in Palm Springs. I am writing as a
concerned resident of Palm Springs. I do not represent any person,
party or entity in this matter.
This wasteful, costly, and unnecessary legal and ethical dilemma the
city finds itself entangled in, was by its own hand. For example, the
advice given to the City Council by BB&K over the city’s ability to
close Museum Way for three years was wrong. (See, Committee to
Relocate Marilyn v. City of Palm Springs (2023) 88 Cal. App.5th
607.) Further, the way forward on this matter for the City Council
appears it may have continued legal uncertainty.
To the extent that the City Council seeks to amend the Specific Plan
and vacate the street the City will run into several CEQA issues. The
already existing CEQA issue in the CReMa lawsuit is that placement
of the statue is not exempt under CEQA. Vacating the street does
nothing to stop that CEQA cause of action from continuing, rather it
strengthens the argument that the exemption does not apply.
Further, standing on its own, amending the Specific Plan, vacating
the street and permanent placement of a private structure and a base
on land at least half owned by the city is a “project” under CEQA
and will require CEQA review. It should be remembered that the
scenic view/vista corridor up Museum Way (at that time named
“Main Street”) to the Art Museum and the mountains was part of the
specific mitigation for the Downtown Specific Plan and EIR. There
are many and numerous references in the Specific Plan, EIR, city
staff reports and during City Council meetings of the importance of
the view corridor along Museum Way (Main St.).
Is this City Council going to amend the Specific Plan to now say that
the view corridor of Museum Way to the historic Art Museum and
the mountains is no longer an EIR mitigation condition as part of the
12/04/2023
Public Comment
existing Specific Plan EIR? Is this City Council going to disregard
the extensive input and study over a long period of time resulting in
the vetted, carefully crafted and adopted Specific Plan and its EIR
and addendums?
My belief is the that underlying concerns in 2017 for the need of a
mitigation view corridor, given that the buildings of the downtown
project were going to block most of the view to the Art Museum and
mountains from Palm Canyon still remains – and a fair and full EIR
review of scenic views/vistas/visual character and quality under
CEQA will determine that a mitigating scenic view corridor was and
is supported, and placement of the large, view blocking statue on a
base would violate those CEQA standards. Moreover, Museum Way
was established to provide direct vehicle access to the Art Museum
and increase and help with traffic circulation for the new downtown
project. (See, EIR Traffic Study.) The project EIR also supported the
creation of Museum Way for those purposes as well as for a
mitigation view corridor.
Finally, part of any complete CEQA EIR for a project is the
necessity to investigate and review “alternatives” to the project
(location, etc.), including a no build/no project alternative and
alternative locations that will avoid the significant environmental
impacts of the “proposed” project at the proposed location.
Evidence to support a CEQA review alternative location
(Downtown Park location) comes from P.S. Resorts. (See, August 3,
2016 City Council Staff Report – “Request From PS Resorts for
Consideration for Re-Installation Of Forever Marilyn Sculpture in
Downtown Park.”) Thereafter, for four years the city’s residents,
without any controversy, believed the statue would be placed in the
Downtown Park. In addition, other evidence to support a CEQA
alternative location review are the November 12, 2020 statements by
Councilmembers Holstege and Middleton and Mayor Garner during the
November 12, 2020 hearing when they stated that they actually preferred
Francis Stevens Park for placement of the statue.
How much more money, time and resources will the city and P.S.
Resorts spend on CEQA, Specific Plan, and street vacation litigation
for the P.S. Resorts project? All based on unsupported arguments
that the (2015-2016) former City Council’s carefully drafted, vetted,
12/04/2023
Public Comment
approved and adopted Downtown Specific Plan and EIR and
addendums are now invalid, and that Museum Way is the only
location in the city for the statue, thus requiring vacating Museum
Way.
The original place in the Downtown Park or Francis Stevens Park are
more appropriate locations without having any negative
environmental impacts on the scenic view corridor, other aesthetics
and traffic access to the Art Museum and effective downtown
development traffic circulation, and these two locations are true to
and in conformity with the adopted Specific Plan and EIR.
The statements by Councilmembers Holstege and Middleton and
Mayor Garner during the November 12, 2020 hearing that they
actually preferred Francis Stevens Park for placement of the statue
are important. It is not a credible argument that the middle of the
street on Museum Way is the only location…given that for years the
city’s and P.S. Resorts’ preferred location was at the eastern end of
the Downtown Park and given the 2020 statements by Mayor Garner
and Councilmembers Holstege and Middleton.
Thank you for your time in considering my arguments, opinions and
analysis.
Again, I urge the City Council to simply move the statue to an
appropriate place in the city.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael E. Guerra
12/04/2023
Public Comment
Dec. 3, 2023
RE: Special meeting on Monday, December 4, 2023
Dear Mayor and City Council,
It appears the Council is in a rush to place the vote on either the March or November
ballots to approve vacating Museum Drive allowing the Marilyn statue to remain. This
issue is fraught with inconsistencies. First, the City allowed the statue to be placed in
Museum Drive for a TEMPORARY 3-year period.
Then, pressure from Palm Springs Tourism to vacate the street is avoiding the legalities
of this case. Conflict of interest cases, CEQA, and even merely devoting time and effort
to finding a more appropriate location have all been ignored.
I urge you to seek a site that does not block a road specified in the Downtown plan and
that limits access to the museum and Museum Drive for visitors, locals, and emergency
vehicles.
Thank you for your attention,
Sidney Williams
Palm Springs
12/04/2023
Public Comment
From:tim@obayley.net
To:City Clerk
Cc:Scott Stiles; Grace Garner; Lisa Middleton; Christy Holstege; Jeffrey Bernstein; Ron deHarte
Subject:Special Council meeting on Dec. 4 - Forever Marilyn
Date:Friday, December 1, 2023 11:45:16 AM
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments
unless you are sure the content is safe.
Greetings City Clerk, City Manager Stiles, Mayor Garner, and members of the Council.
I have reviewed the Staff Report for your special meeting on December 4, and I am dismayed
by the omission of another possible option for you to consider.
It appears that you will only be considering putting the issue on a future ballot OR amending
the Downtown Specific Plan without voter input.
The other possible option that I believe you should consider is moving the statue to another
location. The simplest solution might be to relocate the statue to the downtown park where it
was initially intended to be placed.
On the City website, (
https://www.palmspringsca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/71906/637159073527000000)
in a document identified as a project history of the downtown park, it is stated:
March 5, 2015, with the City Council Subcommittee, City staff, and MSA Consulting,
to review the first initial conceptual plan identifying a location for the Aluminaire
House adjacent at the southwest corner of the Downtown Park adjacent to the Palm
Springs Art Museum, (hereafter the “Museum”), and a location for the Forever Marilyn
statue at the southeast corner of the Downtown Park adjacent to Belardo Road.
It is undeniable that the statue is a popular attraction downtown and is good for business and
tourism. I, like many others, have no issue with the piece itself, only with its current location.
Many of us spent many hours over several years providing input on the downtown Specific
Plan and on the Downtown Park. We also enthusiastically supported Measure J because,
among other things, it would provide funds to purchase from Wessman Development the
existing parking structure(s) and land to create new streets as part of the Downtown
Revitalization Plan. This new/restored grid of streets downtown (City owned and made
possible because of Measure J) has always been a key part of the Downtown plan from as
early as 2004.
I hope that your discussion on Dec. 4 can also include the potential merits of moving the
statue.
Cheers,
Tim O'Bayley
C.E.O. & Creative Director
12/04/2023
Public Comment
O'Bayley Communications
Mobile: 760-799-3845
Office: 760-464-0182
1111 N. Palm Canyon Drive, Suite D, Palm Springs, CA 92262
12/04/2023
Public Comment
Main Office Phone:
310-798-2400
Direct Dial:
310-798-2409
Carstens, Black & Minteer LLP
2200 Pacific Coast Highway, Suite 318 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254 www.cbcearthlaw.com
Amy C. Minteer
Email Address:
acm@cbcearthlaw.com
December 1, 2023
Via Email (Grace.Garner@palmspringsca.gov, Jeffrey.Bernstein@palmspringsca.gov,
Ron.deHarte@palmspringsca.gov, Christy.Holstege@palmspringsca.gov,
Lisa.Middleton@palmspringsca.gov, cityclerk@palmspringsca.gov)
Honorable Mayor and Council Members
Council Chamber, City Hall
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, CA 92262
Re: Initiative to Amend Downtown Palm Springs Specific Plan; Agenda Item 4
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:
On behalf of Committee to Relocate Marilyn (CReMa), we write to address issues related
to the City Council’s consideration of the ballot initiative proposed by PS Resorts to amend the
Downtown Palm Springs Specific Plan and future proceedings regarding use of Museum Way.
First, we note that the City Council Staff Report is inconsistent in its provision of
recommendations to the Council. In the “Recommendation” section of the Staff Report, Council
is provided only three options: two different election dates or the adoption of the initiative
measure. Thus, the “Recommendations” section fails to identify Option (d), preparation of
informational reports regarding the ballot initiative, as an option that must be provided to the
Council pursuant to Elections Code §9212. While the “Staff Analysis” section does discuss
identify this option, we seek to make sure the City Council is aware that it can require the
preparation of reports detailing impacts associated with initiative.
Moreover, CReMa urges the Council to approve Option (d) and require preparation of
reports regarding the impacts associated with the amendments of the Downtown Palm Springs
Specific Plan pursuant to Elections Code §9212. Necessary reports include an assessment of the
fiscal impact of the initiative. (Elec. Code §9212, subd. (a)(1).) When the City Council
approved the provisional closure of Museum Way and installation of the Forever Marilyn statue
in this public street for a limited time, the public was promised that an economic study would be
prepared to assess the fiscal impacts of that project. More than three years later, that economic
study has yet to be prepared. The ballot initiative claims the financial benefits to the City of
12/04/2023
Public Comment
December 1, 2023
Page 2
closing Museum Way and installing the statue in that specific location, but there is no evidentiary
support for such claim. The Council must require that analysis be prepared to allow for the
voters to make a fully informed decision.
The Council should also require analysis of the traffic impacts associated with closing
Museum Way and the land use and other impacts on the development of Blocks D and F adjacent
to this roadway. (Elec. Code §9212, subds. (a)(4), (6) and (7).) It is only after the preparation of
these studies that the City Council should set an election date for this initiative.
Additionally, CReMa seeks to ensure the Council is aware that any future street vacation
proceedings, as contemplated by the initiative, would be a discretionary determination by the
City. As such, the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) apply and
environmental review must be prepared. (Pub. Resources Code, §21065.) This analysis would
provide necessary information regarding the impacts of closing Museum Way as well as the
impacts of installing a massive statue in this roadway, particularly on the National Register-listed
Palm Springs Art Museum. The CEQA review process also requires public input on these
impacts.
Finally, it is our understanding that Councilmembers who received contributions from the
chair of PS Resorts, and previously had to recuse themselves from discussions related to the
initiative and the Forever Marilyn statue, since it is owned by PS Resorts, have returned that
funding. While the return of those contributions may bring Councilmembers into technical
compliance with recently adopted Senate Bill 1439, it does not eliminate the appearance of bias.
As the Court of Appeal found in Nasha v. City of Los Angeles (2004) 125 Cal.App.4th 470, the
“unacceptable probability of actual bias” is all that is needed to demonstrate impartiality of a
decisionmaker. (Id. at 484, emphasis added.) In Nasha, the Court found that a planning
commissioner who had written an article opposing a project had exhibited unacceptable
probability of actual bias, requiring reversal of a decision he had voted on. Similarly, here, the
opinion piece co-authored by Councilmember Bernstein demonstrates the probability of bias
regarding matters relating to the closure of Museum Way and installation of the Forever Marilyn
statue at this location. (See https://www.desertsun.com/story/opinion/contributors/valley-
voice/2020/12/07/valley-voice-forever-marilyn-good-palm-springs/3850496001/) Additionally,
the ownership of property or operation of a business in close proximity to the portion of Museum
Way PS Resorts seeks to permanently close for public vehicular use could also demonstrate a
probability of bias. These issues must be given careful consideration before a vote is taken by
the Council regarding the initiative or for any future proceedings related to this project.
Sincerely,
Amy Minteer
12/04/2023
Public Comment
From:charliepsca
To:City Clerk
Subject:MOVE MARILYN
Date:Thursday, November 30, 2023 5:38:44 PM
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open
attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
I would like to be on record as a resident of Palm Springs that I am against the Cities attempts to smoke screen the
efforts to do the right thing. We voted on a proposition years ago to have an open street to the museum from Palm
Canyon. But as to be expected with this city council and the councils before it they are beholden not to its residents
but to the tourist industry. This is nothing more than a Aftab Dadda vanity statue.
No one has asked for its removal but only for its relocation to the original site it was intended to stand on. What
amazes me is that a council of so called “liberals” is about as Trumpian as you can get with their behind the door
meeting and attempts and circumventing the publics voice.
I am unable to attend the “secret” meeting and would like my comments read aloud.
Sincerely,
Charlie Ciali
12/04/2023
Public Comment
From:Brenda Pree
To:Cassandra Edney; Brent Rasi; Evelyn Beltran
Subject:FW: Marilyn
Date:Thursday, November 30, 2023 5:33:34 PM
Attachments:image002.png
From: Sarah Barnes <sbarnes1551@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 5:31 PM
To: CityManager <CityManager@palmspringsca.gov>; Brenda Pree
<Brenda.Pree@palmspringsca.gov>; Alyssa Chavez <Alyssa.Chavez@palmspringsca.gov>
Subject: Marilyn
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments
unless you are sure the content is safe.
Although I understand the importance of Marilyn to the tourist economy that certainty helps the Palm
Springs budget and therefore taxpayers in general, I strongly hope that you will consider moving
Marilyn to a venue that is equally accessible to tourists (and residents) yet does not block or force the
closing on Museum Way.
I feel that "she" plays an important role to both the Palm Springs economy and tourist draw, but that
could be done in other locations without compromising the integrity of the museum's beauty and
importance. At this time she overwhelms the museum vista and I find that disruptive. If she had her
own place in Palm Springs that didn't conflict or distract from the museum, she might even have
the power to draw tourists to other areas of beautiful Palm Springs, giving other areas tourist
visibility, including, but not limited to the Welcome Center.
Please consider this move as a win/win for Palms Springs rather than a loss for either side of
the dilemma. She certainly has a place in PSP and its future but shouldn't be at the expense of a road
closure or a wonderful museum.
Thank you,
Sarah Barnes
12/04/2023
Public Comment
From:Mark Coleman
To:Grace Garner; Jeffrey Bernstein; Ron deHarte; Christy Holstege; Lisa Middleton; City Clerk
Subject:Initiative to Amend Downtown Palm Springs Specific Plan; Agenda Item 4
Date:Sunday, December 3, 2023 5:17:20 PM
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments
unless you are sure the content is safe.
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:
I’m writing to urge you to vote for option D on Monday, authorizing the preparation
of additional reports regarding the impacts associated with amendments to the
Downtown Palm Springs Specific Plan. When the City Council approved the
provisional closure of Museum Way to install PS Resorts's Marilyn Monroe statue,
the public was promised that economic studies would be prepared to assess the
financial impacts of the statue. I have asked my district representative on many
occasions to share the data supporting claims that the Marilyn Monroe statue is a
significant driver of tourism revenue. On October 27 my district representative said
they would ask Aftab Dada’s office to share their data on the statue’s impact. I have
not received any information from the City, PS Resorts or Mr. Dada’s office despite
multiple requests to see the data that substantiates their claims.
The lack of transparency and appearance of bias surrounding the Marilyn Monroe
statue, the Palm Springs City Council and PS Resorts is unsettling. Council
members who received contributions from the chair of PS Resorts had to recuse
themselves from recent discussions related to the Forever Marilyn statue. PS
Resorts has taken down the website featuring the organization’s officers, their
programming priorities and the contact information for each member organization.
The PS Resorts website has been replaced with Forever Marilyn Palm Springs, a
site entirely focused on promoting the Marilyn Monroe statue.
I encourage the Palm Springs City Council to leave city planning decisions in the
hands of city planners, not hotel operators and real estate developers. Please make
decisions based on verifiable data rather than biased and unverified claims from
private interests. Please consider that CReMa supporters are seeking relocation of
the statue to a site that does not require illegal street closure or amendments to the
long-approved Downtown Plan. In an exchange with a council member a fews years
ago, they noted their preference for Frances Stevens Park as a location for the
statue. I endorse and agree with that reasoned point-of-view. I urge the city council
to preserve the approved Downtown Plan and select a safe, appropriate and legal
location for the Marilyn Monroe statue.
Mark Coleman
12/04/2023
Public Comment
From:mike guerra
To:Grace Garner; Jeffrey Bernstein; Ron deHarte; Christy Holstege; Lisa Middleton
Cc:City Clerk; Jeff Ballinger-C
Subject:December 4, 2023 City Council Special Meeting - Ballot Initiative - Marilyn Statue
Date:Sunday, December 3, 2023 5:44:15 PM
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments
unless you are sure the content is safe.
December 3, 2023
Re: December 4, 2023 City Council Special Meeting: The Marilyn Statue -
The Proposed Changes to the Specific Plan are Flawed - I Support Option
(d) in the Staff Report
Dear Mayor Garner, Mayor pro tem Bernstein, City Councilmembers DeHarte,
Holstege, and Middleton:
I support Option (d) in the Staff Report which would require various reports
related to the impacts of the initiative. I am not representing any person, party
or entity in this matter. I am writing as a concerned resident of Palm Springs.
The proposed amended Specific Plan is flawed in several ways. First, the
proposed amended plan for the initiative attempts to make Museum Way
between Museum Drive and Belardo Rd. disappear for any of its original
purposes (mitigation view corridor, traffic circulation and direct access from
downtown to the Art Museum). However, in the “CEQA Compliance” section
on page 51 of Item 4 of the proposed plan it states: “Implementation of the
Final Specific Plan includes all mitigation measures described in the EIR…”
The plan goes on to incorporate and adopt all EIR addendums.
The statement in the proposed plan of implementation of all mitigation
measures would not be a true statement if the amended plan is adopted as the
view corridor and street for traffic circulation (Museum Way from Indian
Canyon to Museum Drive) would not be implemented by the amendments. The
changed language in the proposed amended plan is not supported by the
underlying EIR and addendums, but rather conflicts with the EIR and
addendums. Accordingly, the statement about implementation of all EIR
mitigation measures should be read to conflict with and/or supersede the textual
changes to language as those mitigation measures are incorporated by
reference and still part of the proposed Amended Specific Plan.
12/04/2023
Public Comment
Next, although Museum Way at the location of the statue in the charts and
maps as part of the amended plan have the street “grayed” out so it no longer
appears to be a street, other than a vague description that the location will be a
“pedestrian way” the location is not defined as to ownership. During one of my
2020 phone conversations with City Attorney Ballinger about the placement of
the statue and vacating Museum Way, City Attorney Ballinger noted that when
the street is vacated the two adjacent landowners own to the middle of the
vacated street. Although noting that the purpose of the initiative is to facilitate
vacation of Museum Way and permanent placement of the statue there, this
issue of ownership after vacating the street is not part of the Staff Report nor
part of the amended plan.
Further, the initiative can be best described as a litigation move or tactic by P.S.
Resorts to try and avoid having to move the statue, by seeking to facilitate
vacating Museum Way and by attempting to remove the Specific Plan “view
corridor” and traffic circulation CEQA arguments in the underlying lawsuit.
However, when the city moves to vacate the street and permanently place the
statue there, notwithstanding an amended Specific Plan or its interpretation, the
underlying EIR and addendums related to the Museum Way view corridor and
for traffic circulation (which remain unchanged and unamended) and the lay
opinions of residents as to aesthetics (the statue blocking scenic and historical
vistas) and traffic circulation will be more than sufficient evidence to establish
a good faith argument that the placement of the statue may have significant
environment impacts requiring an Environmental Impact Report.
Finally, given the recent recusals pursuant to Government Code section 84308
(SB 1439) I want to bring to the Council’s attention case law relating to
recusals. If it is determined that a decisionmaker should have recused
themselves, but did not, case law is clear any decisions made may be
challenged and reversed if the court finds the decisionmaker should have
recused themselves. (see, Petrovich Development Company, LLC, et al. v. City
of Sacramento, et al. (2020) 48 Cal.App.5th 963 (review denied August 12,
2020) [granting of CUP by Planning Commission appealed to City Council
which reversed and denied the CUP – court found unacceptable probability of
bias by city councilmember who advocated behind the scenes for denial of the
CUP and which demonstrated the councilmember had prejudged the matter and
that he was committed to an outcome – city council decision denying CUP
overturned]); Woody’s Group Inc. v. City of Newport (2015) 233
Cal.App.4th 1012 [similar]; and, Nasha v. City of Los Angeles (2004) 125
Cal.App.4th 470 [planning commissioner wrote article opposing a project].)
12/04/2023
Public Comment
The City’s own City Attorney firm BB&K posted – “City Officials Must Be
Neutral and Unbiased” (2020), Gary Schons, on the BB&K website
(republished with permission), which analyzed the Petrovich decision. The
article stated in part: “The now precedent-setting decision in California affirms
that when acting in a quasi-judicial capacity, councilmembers cannot have a
personal conflict of interest, cannot have prejudged the facts and must remain
free of prejudice against any of the parties. A councilmember’s failure to recuse
his or herself could invalidate the decision and expose the public entity, and the
legislator, to potential legal challenges.”)
Thank you for your time in considering my comments. Again, I urge the City
Council to adopt Option (d) requiring various reports related to the impacts of
the initiative.
Respectfully submitted,
Michael E. Guerra
Attorney at Law
457 W. Arenas Rd.
Palm Springs, CA 92262
12/04/2023
Public Comment
Christine Kantner
1840 S. Araby Drive
Palm Springs, CA 92264
christinekantner@me.com
December 3, 2023
Palm Springs City Council
Council Chamber, City Hall
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way,
Palm Springs, CA 92262
Re: Marilyn Statue
Dear Palm Springs City Council Members,
I feel as our leaders you can do better in providing a more
considerate and thoughtful urban plan than what has come to pass on
Museum Way. People from around the world come to visit Palm Springs for
its landscape and modernist architecture. This statue belongs on Venice
Beach- not blocking the eyeline from Palm Canyon Drive to the Palm
Springs Art Museum – a cultural monument on the National Register of
Historic Places. I urge you to remove this misogynistic and tone deaf
statue. Times have changed and it’s time to evolve.
Thank you for your consideration and for your service.
Sincerely,
Christine Kantner
12/04/2023
Public Comment
From:Bonnie Serkin
To:Grace Garner; Jeffrey Bernstein; Ron deHarte; Christy Holstege; Lisa Middleton; City Clerk
Subject:Initiative to Amend Downtown Palm Springs Specific Plan; Agenda Item 4
Date:Monday, December 4, 2023 12:48:23 AM
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments
unless you are sure the content is safe.
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:
A number of legal issues have been raised in emails I have seen relating to the initiative to
amend the Downtown Palm Springs Specific Plan. The impact of CEQA on the proposed
amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan seems particularly relevant. From my reading of
CEQA Portal Topic Paper on Mitigation Measures, it is not clear that a mitigation measure in
an approved plan - such as the view corridor created by Museum Way - can be subsequently
eliminated in the absence of either a reason mitigation is no longer required or the proposal of
a substitute mitigation measure that achieves the same goal at least as effectively.
With multiple issues of law unresolved, it would be prudent for city councillors to choose
Option D at today's hearing, sending this matter to staff for further review.
Beyond legal arguments, there are policy issues. A cursory reading of the 2016 Plan
amendment shows that Museum Way was critical to the Downtown Specific Plan for two
reasons: as a view corridor and as a solution to traffic circulation challenges. The stature of the
Palm Springs Art Museum as an architectural treasure set against the majesty of the San
Jacinto Mountains was a recurring theme in that document. In 2016 this city declared its
reverence for the Museum Building and its stunning natural backdrop. The revised
traffic circulation plan anchored by Museum Way was similarly lauded.
Here are a few references from the 2016 amendment:
Section I - page 4, An early touting of corridors to the mountains at Main Street (the working
name for Museum Way).
II-5, The Project will restore the [historic] circulation grid including Main Street. "This
important vista westerly along Main Street will provide visual presence for the Palm Springs
Art Museum and the San Jacinto Mountains which did not exist with previous development".
II-5, Mention of connectivity between internal components and surrounding development.
III-23, "The existing grid circulation of Main Street extending to Belardo is essential to
succcessful traffic and extension to compete the grid circulation pattern is essential to
improved traffic circulation. View corridors have contributed much to the unique townscape
character of Palm Springs. It is important that new view corridors be created. A particularly
definitive local view will be created by the opening of a new east-west street that allows tree-
framed views in both directions. Views to the west will include the iconic Art Museum with
the mountain behind."
12/04/2023
Public Comment
III-32, (about landscaping, not statues) "The major focal point will be the intersection of Main
Street and Museum Drive. Landscaping in this area shall act as a frame to the Palm Springs
Art Museum building, and not obliterate the structure."
The Environmental Impact Report, 2012 Addendum, similarly points to the importance of the
view corridor amid the visual impacts of "intervening development". It required analysis of the
potential impacts on mountain views.
For these reasons, I urge you not to choose Option A, under which you would take action to
vacate Museum Way today.
I write this as a Palm Springs homeowner who is in residence here for just under half the year.
Bonnie Serkin
310 S Patencio Rd
Palm Springs, CA 92262
12/04/2023
Public Comment
From:City of Palm Springs
To:City Clerk
Subject:*NEW SUBMISSION* Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs
Date:Monday, December 4, 2023 6:37:36 AM
Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs
Submission #:2858671
IP Address:151.124.105.69
Submission Date:12/04/2023 6:37
Survey Time:14 minutes, 21 seconds
You have a new online form submission.
Note: all answers displaying "*****" are marked as sensitive and must be viewed after your login.
Full Name/Nombre
Stephen Winters
City of Residence/Ciudad de residencia
Palm Springs,
Phone (optional) /Teléfono (opcional)
Email (optional/opcional)
srwchicago@gmail.com
Your Comments/Sus comentarios
As a Palm Springs resident and a strong supporter of our Art Museum, I urge the council not to approve a
permanently vacating Museum Way and not to approve putting the decision to vacate to a public vote at this time.
The supporters of leaving the statue where it is have not shown that the city’s tourism industry would be damaged
were the statue simply to be relocated from the street to the adjacent park or to another easily accessible public
location. In their petition gathering effort they represented that the public must approve keeping the statue where
it is or the statue would be removed from Palm Springs. They did not explain that the statue could simply be moved
to avoid blocking the public street but retained in a prominent location. The proponents of vacating the street must
be required to show that the tourism industry would be measurably harmed were the statue to simply be relocated
so that it does not block the street and the public’s unobstructed view of the iconic museum.
Thank you,
City of Palm Springs
This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email.
12/04/2023
Public Comment
From:City of Palm Springs
To:City Clerk
Subject:*NEW SUBMISSION* Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs
Date:Monday, December 4, 2023 6:40:28 AM
Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs
Submission #:2858677
IP Address:72.132.213.68
Submission Date:12/04/2023 6:40
Survey Time:2 minutes, 44 seconds
You have a new online form submission.
Note: all answers displaying "*****" are marked as sensitive and must be viewed after your login.
Full Name/Nombre
Cathryn Pfuhl
City of Residence/Ciudad de residencia
Palm Springs,
Phone (optional) /Teléfono (opcional)
Email (optional/opcional)
Your Comments/Sus comentarios
Move the Marilyn statue to a more appropriate space. Reopen the street.
Thank you,
City of Palm Springs
This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email.
12/04/2023
Public Comment
From:City of Palm Springs
To:City Clerk
Subject:*NEW SUBMISSION* Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs
Date:Monday, December 4, 2023 6:50:33 AM
Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs
Submission #:2858692
IP Address:108.185.129.225
Submission Date:12/04/2023 6:50
Survey Time:4 minutes, 26 seconds
You have a new online form submission.
Note: all answers displaying "*****" are marked as sensitive and must be viewed after your login.
Full Name/Nombre
Catherine Mahon
City of Residence/Ciudad de residencia
Palm Springs,
Phone (optional) /Teléfono (opcional)
(425) 681-9543
Email (optional/opcional)
camahon@aol.com
Your Comments/Sus comentarios
I urge the Council to move the Marilyn statue to its originally designated place in the downtown park or to another
City park location. The “temporary” closure of Museum Way has become permanent in conflict with the City
guidelines. Please open Museum Way as a thoroughfare as originally designed.
Thank you,
City of Palm Springs
This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email.
12/04/2023
Public Comment
From:City of Palm Springs
To:City Clerk
Subject:*NEW SUBMISSION* Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs
Date:Monday, December 4, 2023 7:12:37 AM
Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs
Submission #:2858739
IP Address:104.28.85.133
Submission Date:12/04/2023 7:12
Survey Time:9 minutes, 47 seconds
You have a new online form submission.
Note: all answers displaying "*****" are marked as sensitive and must be viewed after your login.
Full Name/Nombre
Steve Spear
City of Residence/Ciudad de residencia
Palm Springs,
Phone (optional) /Teléfono (opcional)
Email (optional/opcional)
spearsd@icloud.com
Your Comments/Sus comentarios
The Marilyn Monroe statue sets the wrong tone for the city. It represents a character that she played in one movie
and is rather sexiest. It does not represent her and who she was as a person. It shows her in a provocative position
in the middle of downtown. How many people do you see taking pictures up her skirt? Is that really what we want
the city to be known for? If you want a statue of Marilyn Monroe, then put an appropriate one there along with info
about her and her life.
Thank you,
City of Palm Springs
This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email.
12/04/2023
Public Comment
From:City of Palm Springs
To:City Clerk
Subject:*NEW SUBMISSION* Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs
Date:Monday, December 4, 2023 7:57:40 AM
Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs
Submission #:2858864
IP Address:66.74.17.225
Submission Date:12/04/2023 7:57
Survey Time:7 minutes, 58 seconds
You have a new online form submission.
Note: all answers displaying "*****" are marked as sensitive and must be viewed after your login.
Full Name/Nombre
David Birch-Jones
City of Residence/Ciudad de residencia
Palm Springs,
Phone (optional) /Teléfono (opcional)
(760) 219-8338
Email (optional/opcional)
davidbj@ix.netcom.com
Your Comments/Sus comentarios
Regarding the Marilyn statue - it was placed there illegally by the hotel group, and ballot signatures were obtained,
in part, by subterfuge ("We're the Museum Preservation Society" a paid signature gatherer told me, but
couldn't/wouldn't back that up). Make the hoteliers remove that giant tawdry piece of trash - it would look much
better when placed in the Hilton Hotel's pool area - if Mr. Dada likes it so much - he can host it.
Thank you,
City of Palm Springs
This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email.
12/04/2023
Public Comment
From:City of Palm Springs
To:City Clerk
Subject:*NEW SUBMISSION* Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs
Date:Monday, December 4, 2023 8:01:02 AM
Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs
Submission #:2858882
IP Address:66.74.10.4
Submission Date:12/04/2023 8:00
Survey Time:36 seconds
You have a new online form submission.
Note: all answers displaying "*****" are marked as sensitive and must be viewed after your login.
Full Name/Nombre
John Denison
City of Residence/Ciudad de residencia
Palm Springs,
Phone (optional) /Teléfono (opcional)
Email (optional/opcional)
JLDenison@mac.com
Your Comments/Sus comentarios
The list of negatives describing the Seward Johnson installation is well known but widely ignored, particularly by
members of city government (council and legal) and the resorts association. The most glaring issue at this juncture is
an active legal appeal that is oh-so-close to a hearing. The council isn't content to let the court weigh in, an obvious
sign that the city is beholden to a lobbying group intent on preempting a ruling against the installation. The city
attorney should explain why his advice was to move ahead with any other initiative before the legal challenge is
heard. It's time the city owned up to its mistake by allowing a so-called "temporary" placement that closed a street
city taxpayer dollars helped pay for. When you add in the sexual objectiveness inherent in this work and its
monstrous size, a city as welcoming and affirming as Palm Springs should have turned this down. If you won't
remove it now, at least relocate it to let our Museum Way be clear.
Thank you,
City of Palm Springs
This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email.
12/04/2023
Public Comment
From:Alyssa Chavez
To:City Clerk
Subject:FW: Initiative to Amend Downtown Palm Springs Specific Plan; Agenda Item 4
Date:Monday, December 4, 2023 8:40:25 AM
Good morning,
Please see the email below.
Thank you,
Alyssa
From: Mark Coleman <mc2coleman@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 3, 2023 9:54 PM
To: Christy Holstege <Christy.Holstege@palmspringsca.gov>
Cc: Alyssa Chavez <Alyssa.Chavez@palmspringsca.gov>; Lauren Wolfer <Lauren.Wolfer-
I@palmspringsca.gov>
Subject: Initiative to Amend Downtown Palm Springs Specific Plan; Agenda Item 4
NOTICE: This message originated outside of The City of Palm Springs -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open
attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:
I’m writing to urge you to vote for option D on Monday,
authorizing the preparation of additional reports regarding the
impacts associated with amendments to the Downtown Palm
Springs Specific Plan. When the City Council approved the
provisional closure of Museum Way to install PS Resorts's
Marilyn Monroe statue, the public was promised that
economic studies would be prepared to assess the financial
impacts of the statue. I have asked my district representative
on many occasions to share the data supporting claims that
the Marilyn Monroe statue is a significant driver of tourism
revenue. On October 27 my district representative said they
would ask Aftab Dada’s office to share their data on the
12/04/2023
Public Comment
statue’s impact. I have not received any information from the
City, PS Resorts or Mr. Dada’s office despite multiple requests
to see the data that substantiates their claims.
The lack of transparency and appearance of bias
surrounding the Marilyn Monroe statue, the Palm Springs City
Council and PS Resorts is unsettling. Council members who
received contributions from the chair of PS Resorts had to
recuse themselves from recent discussions related to the
Forever Marilyn statue. PS Resorts has taken down the website
featuring the organization’s officers, their programming
priorities and the contact information for each member
organization. The PS Resorts website has been replaced
with Forever Marilyn Palm Springs, a site entirely focused on promoting
the Marilyn Monroe statue.
I encourage the Palm Springs City Council to leave city
planning decisions in the hands of city planners, not hotel
operators and real estate developers. Please make decisions
based on verifiable data rather than biased and unverified
claims from private interests. Please consider that CReMa
supporters are seeking relocation of the statue to a site that
does not require illegal street closure or amendments to the
long-approved Downtown Plan. In an exchange with a council
member a fews years ago, they noted their preference for
Frances Stevens Park as a location for the statue. I endorse
and agree with that reasoned point-of-view. I urge the city
council to preserve the approved Downtown Plan and select a
12/04/2023
Public Comment
safe, appropriate and legal location for the Marilyn Monroe
statue.
Mark Coleman
12/04/2023
Public Comment
From:City of Palm Springs
To:City Clerk
Subject:*NEW SUBMISSION* Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs
Date:Monday, December 4, 2023 9:33:26 AM
Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs
Submission #:2859210
IP Address:75.85.222.123
Submission Date:12/04/2023 9:33
Survey Time:59 minutes, 32 seconds
You have a new online form submission.
Note: all answers displaying "*****" are marked as sensitive and must be viewed after your login.
Full Name/Nombre
Scott Connelly
City of Residence/Ciudad de residencia
Palm Springs,
Phone (optional) /Teléfono (opcional)
(760) 799-5541
Email (optional/opcional)
scottdesert@gmail.com
Your Comments/Sus comentarios
I urge you to follow the previous plans that were supported by the public in the general plan and keep the road
open. Consider how the closure might affect public safety with the addition to additional structures that will be built
in the surrounding area. Many issues such as the lawsuit, appearance of conflict of interest or bias, could be avoided
with a simple solution: move the statute 100 feet over to the the park as per the original general plan. There will be
just as many Instagram photos taken which should satisfy anyone who is counting.
Thank you,
City of Palm Springs
This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email.
12/04/2023
Public Comment
From:City of Palm Springs
To:City Clerk
Subject:*NEW SUBMISSION* Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs
Date:Monday, December 4, 2023 12:43:54 PM
Submit Public Comment to the City of Palm Springs
Submission #:2859914
IP Address:75.85.218.106
Submission Date:12/04/2023 12:43
Survey Time:7 minutes, 10 seconds
You have a new online form submission.
Note: all answers displaying "*****" are marked as sensitive and must be viewed after your login.
Full Name/Nombre
Timothy Leary
City of Residence/Ciudad de residencia
Palm Springs,
Phone (optional) /Teléfono (opcional)
(415) 531-0511
Email (optional/opcional)
timjleary@yahoo.com
Your Comments/Sus comentarios
I’m writing to ask the City Council to vote to move the Marilyn statue from Museum Way as was initially planned.
She is fun, but should not block the road that the residents of the city paid to have installed. People will find her
wherever she is. I was surprised when she was placed there. Museum Way was part of a larger plan to improve the
downtown. It should be open.
Thank you,
City of Palm Springs
This is an automated message generated by Granicus. Please do not reply directly to this email.
12/04/2023
Public Comment