HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/20/2000 - STAFF REPORTS JUL-14-2000 FRI 02:26 PM ACBCI PLANNING FAX N0, 3 P, 02
CAL,I G G
i July 14, 2000
U Via Facsimile and
First Class U. S.Mail
Mr. Damon Prieto City Clerk, City of Palm Springs
GEOPPTRO LLC 3255 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Post Office Box 1318 Palm Springs CA 92262
Palm Desert CA 92260
Jeffrey Flashman, Esq. Patricia "Corky" Larson
CRISTE, PIPPIN & GOLD Executive Director
73-550 Alessandro Drive CVAG
Suite 200 73-710 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert CA 92260 Palm Desert CA 92260
David Ready, City Manager
City of Palm Springs
3255 E, Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs CA 92262
Re: LAND USE APPEAL NO, 21
Please be advised, at the appellant's request, the joint City Council
and Tribal Council hearing on the subject appeal, scheduled for
July 20, 2000, has been postponed indefinitely. A new hearing will
be arranged with the City and we will notify all parties as soon as it
is set.
YFPlay�ning
,
Ts
TDirector
AQUA CALIENTI: BAND J
OF CAHUILLA INDIANS ,;r.,> {
TJD/cm
C: Tribal Council
Art Bunce
PSETTERS-YJMTR RE L,U.APPEAL NO.21.7,14.00.doc
600 CAST TAI IQUITZ CANYON WAY • PALM SPRINGS, COVOPNIA 92262 * TCL (760)345-3400 FAR (760) 395-0593
DATE: JULY 20, 2000
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND BUILDING
TTM 28907AND CASE 5.0789-PD252. GEOPETRO/PRIETO. APPEAL BYGEOPETRO,
LLC OFA DECISION BYTHE PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENTTO DENYTHE
ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT FOR A 3100 SQUARE FOOT MINI-MARKET WITH
GASOLINE PUMPING FACILITIES ON 1.22ACRES OF LAND LOCATEDON THE NORTH
SIDE OF RAMON ROAD, WEST OF AVENIDA EVELITA, SECTION18.
The purpose of this report is to provide background Information concerning the subject
appeal. A brief summary of the appeal to the City Council and the subsequent appeal to
CVAG is included below. Attached are staff reports and other documentation associated
with both previously held public hearings on this appeal.
Background:Appeal to City Council 12/15/99
The applicant initially appealed the decision of the Planning and Building Department to deny
the issuance of a building permit. In making this appeal, the appellant focused on the
requirementthat the appellant pay the Transportation UnIforrn Mitigation Fee(TUMF). This
appeal was considered bythe City Council at its regularly scheduled meeting on December
15. 1999. The City Council upheld the decision of staff, noting:
a The applicant failed to appeal the City's action,particularly the adopted Conditions
of Approval,on December 16,1998 approving the Preliminary Planned Development
District A building permit can not be issued unless it is consistent with the City
Council's 1998 approval; and
b. The building permit also can not be Issued because the applicant has not obtained
a Final Planned Development approval and has not complied with the requirements
thereof.
The City Council also recommended that the applicant pursue relief from the TUMF
requirement through the CVAG administrative process.
Note that since the meeting of December 15, 1999, a building permit has been issued.
Background: Appeal to CVAG 6/5/00
On January 14,2000,the applicant,Geopetro LLC,appealed the TUMF to CVAG. However,
the formal appeal process could not commence until after the payment of the TUMF to
CVAG on April 14,2000. On June 5,2000,the Executive Committee of CVAG considered
the appeal. The Executive Committee voted to deny the appeal on the basis°that the TUMF
is a fair and equitable method of mitigating vehicle trips and resultant impacts to the regional
transportation system generated by the proposed development."
I
Topic: Geopetro Appeal
Date: July 20, 2000
Page Number: 2
During the public hearing before CVAG on January 14, 2000, it was pointed out that the
applicant developer is Geopetro, LLC, which is a California entity.
DOUGLA4 R. EVANS, Director
Planning and Building
a 'e —
DAVID REAM 01-ranager
Attachments:
1. Staff report presented to City Council 12/15/99
2. The CVAG administrative record.
l �
DATE: DECEMBER 15,1999
TO: CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND BUILDING
TTM 28907 AND CASE 5.0789-PD 252.GEOPETRO/PRIETO. APPEAL TO THE CITY
COUNCIL BY GEOPETRO,LLC OF A DECISION BY THE PLANNING AND BUILDING
DEPARTMENT TO DENY THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT FOR A 3100 SQUARE
FOOT MIM-MARKET WITH GASOLINE PUMPING FACIIXIIES ON 1.22 ACRES OF
LAND LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF RAMON ROAD,WEST OF AVENIDA
EVELiTA,M-1 ZONE,SECTION 18.
APPEAL: The appeal is submitted by Oeopetro LLC,a company forted by its majority,controlling
owner,Damon Prieto. Mr.Prieto is a Tribal Member of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians.
The appellant has appealed the following:
1• The"refusal"of the Department of Planning and Building,Building Division to grant a building
Permit for previously approved ARCO am/pm mini-market(phase one,Planned Development
District 252)until the appellant pays the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee(TUMF).
This appeal is in response to the City's letter of October 25, 1999 confirming that the TUMF must be
paid. A complete copy of the appeal is attached.(Attachment 1)
There are two basic issues before the City Council. One is to determine if the appeal is timely. If the
City Council decides that it is,then the City Council must vote on the merits. The staff believes that the
appeal is not timely and that,as to the merits,the appeal is not justified.
BACKGROUND
Permit Ismanrn•Application Status
On October 8, 1998,the applicant applied for approval of Preliminary Planned Development District
Number 252 and approval of Tentative Parcel Map 28907. More specifically,the applicant applied
for a Preliminary Planned Development District for a multiple-phased commercial/retail center on 23.15
acres of vacant land on the north side of Ramon Road,west of Avenida Evelita. Phase I of the
proposed Planned Development includes the construction of a 3100 square foot mini-market with
gasoline pumping facilities on 1.22 acres of land. In conjunction with the Preliminary Planned
Development District,the applicant also filed an application for a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide the
Property into eight(8)lots.
In accordance with Section 9403 of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance,it is the intent of the Planned
Development District to ensure compliance with the General Plan and good zoning practices while
allowing certain desirable departures from the strict provisions of specific zone classifications.
Approval of a Planned Development District is a two step process. Step one is Preliminary
Development Plan approval. Preliminary Development Plan approval requires approval by both the
Planning Commission and the City Council. Step two is Final Development Plan approval. Final
Development Plan approval requires approval by the Planning Commission. Final Development Plan
approval is a prerequisite to issuance of a building permit.
103
In accordance with the Map Act for the State of California,both a Tentative Parcel Map and a Final
Parcel Map are subject to approval by the City Council.
Preliminary Planned Development District Number 252 was approved by the Planning Commission on
November 12,1998 by passing Resolution 4618. Preliminary Planned Development District 252 and
Tentative Parcel Map 28907 were approved by the City Council on December 16, 1998 by passing
Resolution 19430. No appeal or request for reconsideration was taken from these actions. Neither
Final Development Plan approval nor Final Parcel Map approval has been issued,although it is
anticipated that the Final Parcel Map will be ready for consideration by the City Council at its meeting
of December 15,1999.
In passing Resolution Number 19430,the City Council included a number of Conditions of Approval.
Condition Number 60 required payment of the TUMF. In addition,the following conditions,required
for Final Planned Development approval,have not been met. Note that this is not a complete list,but
provides an illustration of the scope of non-compliance.
6. Complete final development plans have not been submitted. These plans are required to
include site plans,building elevations,floor plans,roofplams grading per,a revised
preliminary landscape plan and irrigation plan for Phase One development,exterior
lighting plans,sign program,mitigation monitoring programs,site muse-sections,
PmPMY development standards and other such documents as required by the Planning
Commission., To date,final plans are incomplete.
7. Landscaping requirements along the street from are not ores.
a. A detailed design guidelines supplement has not been submitted for consideration by the
Planning Commission. Such a supplement is required prior to the issuance of any permits for the
Planned Development At a minimum,the design guidelines supplement must Include samples of
appropriate architectural dames,Including acceptable primary and accent exterior building
treatments and color palettes,a ludscape unapt with material palette,decorative hndscape
treatments,parking lot light standard design,the design and/or catalog cuts of pedestrian
amenities.such as exterior trash receptacles and ash urns,exterior drinking fountains,shade
struckm such as trellises over outdoor seating areas,and structural extensions over pick-up
windows,street tbmiture and the conceptual design of the proposed water features.
9. Final landscapkug,irrigation,exterior lighting and fencing plans have not been submitted Such
plans are required prior to issuance ofa building permit
16. A draft declaration of oovenants,conditions and restrictions("CC&Rtm)has not been submitted
This must be submitted to the Director of Planning and Building for approval in a form to be
approved by the City Attorney prior to issuance of a building permit
25. An exterior lighting plan in accordance with the lighting ordinance in effect as the toe
each phase has no been submitted This is required to be reviewed and approved by the
Director of Planning&Building prior to the issuance of building permits.
45. A decorative scram wall and/or berming has not been provided along the Ramon Road
and EI Placer stremseape areas.
Since the City Council action on December 16, 1998 to pass Resolution 19430 approving Tentative
Parcel Map Number 28907 and Case Number 5.0789(PD 252),the applicant has begun rough
grading the property and has applied for a building permit. Prior to issuance of the building permit,the
Planning and Building Department must find that construction plans are in compliance with the
requirements of Building Code,Electrical Code,Mechanical Code,Plumbing Code,Zoning Ordinance,
any other conditions established as part of the approval,and that applicable fees are paid.
On January 28, 1999,March 3, 1999 and May 4, 1999,the City's Plans Examiner sent letters to the
project architect noting the project status and forwarding a list of items needed to comply with
conditions of approval and zoning requirements. Although staff has met with the owner on several
occasions since May 4, 1999,complete plans have not been submitted since that date.
2 I ray
APPEAL ISSUES
Staff finds that there are several issues to be considered with respect to this appeal of the Planning and
Building Department's refusal to issue a building permit,some going to procedural questions and others
to the merits. The issues are:
Procedural
1• Rather than filing an appeal with the Tribal Council within 10 days of the City Council's
decision,as required in Section 941 LB of the Zoning Ordinance,the applicant has submitted
the appeal to the City nearly a year later. The City Council decision was made on December
16, 1998 when it passed Resolution 19430.
2. As the applicant has not submitted complete Final Planned Development plans,the Planning
Commission has not approved the Final Planned Development District pursuant to Condition of
Approval Number 6 and Section 9303.E.4 of the Zoning Ordinance(Final Development Plan-
Approval by the Planning Commission). The Final Planned Development District is required to
conform to the Preliminary Planned Development District. If the applicant wishes to make
substantial changes,they must resubmit or amend the Preliminary Planned Development
District
3. The applicant has not submitted a building application in compliance with all of the conditions
identified in Resolution 19430 passed on December 16, 1999 by the City of Palm Springs City
Merit Council,or in conformance with a Final Planned Development District
4. Failure by the City to uniformly and equitably collect the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
(PUMF)on a citywide basis may jeopardize receipt of future Measure A funds from the
Coachella Valley Assdciation of Governments(CVAG),and CVAG has established specific
appeal procedures. The City was previously assessed the TUMF by CVAG after the City did
not collect the entire fee in a case that was appealed to Tribal Council. The appellant has the
option of paying the TUMF and filing a separate appeal with CVAG.
Discussion of Procedural Matters
1. Appeal of Building Permit
Generally in California law,issuance of a building permit is considered ministerial and not subject to
discretionary action,or appeal to the City Council. In actuality the City did not refuse to issue a buildng
permit but sent a letter confirming that it intended to collect the TUMF. The applicant appealed this
letter. This issue has been processed in this matter only due to the provisions of the City's Land Use
Agreement with the Agua Cafiente Tribe which provides for appeals of building permits.
2. Timeliness of Appeal
Traffic Condition Number 60 of Resolution Number 19430 passed by the Palm Springs City Council
on December 16, 1998 states the following:
60. This property is subject to the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee lased on
the MISCELLANEOUS RETAIL SERVICES/SERVICE STATION AND
CONVENIENCE MARKET ITE Codes H and A land uses.
Section 941 LB of the Palm Springs Zoning Ordinance(APPEALS,INDIAN TRUST LAND)slates
that"Notice of appeals to the Tribal Council must be filed within ten(10)days of the written decision of
the City Council which is being appealed,and such filing stays all proceedings in the matter until the
decision of the Tribal Council on the appeal."
3 I ��
Note that since City Council has approval authority of Preliminary Planned Developments and of
Tentative Parcel Maps,the appeal of its decision of these matters is as noted in Section 941 LB of the
Zoning Ordinance.
As this appeal of Traffic Condition#60 of Resolution 19430 has been received by the City nearly
eleven months after action,staff finds that the timeliness requirements outlined in Section 941 LB are not
satisfied.
3. Planning Commission Has Not Approved the Final Development Plan
The Zoning Ordinance provides that after a Preliminary Planned Development District is approved,the
applicant is to prepare final plans and drawings and obtain approval of a Final Development Plan.
Section 9403.E.4 of the Zoning Ordinance states that the Final Development Plan for a Planned
Development is subject to approval by the Planning Commission. Approval of the Final Development
Plan is a prerequisite to issuance of a building permit. The applicant has not submitted many of the
items required for the Final Development Plan and the Final Development Plan has therefore not even
been submitted to the Planning Commission. Without these components,it appears no building permit
can be issued under City ordinances.
Discussion of Merit
4. Potential Repercussions of Not Collecting TUMF Uniformly and Equitably
The appellant has focused the appeal on the requirement for a payment of a TUMF prior to the
issuance of a building permit. Failure by the City to uniformly and equitably collect the TUMF on a
citywide basis may jeopardize i=ipt of future Measure A funds from the Coachella Valley Association
of Governments(CVAG).
The TUMF was included in the Riverside County Ballot Measure"A"which passed on November 8,
1988. Measure"A"requires that the revenue generated in the Coachella Valley be returned to the
Coachella Valley and be used for transportation purposes. The funds are divided into four programs,
15%is dedicated to State Highways,no less than 35%and no more than 40%is being returned to the
10 local jurisdictions for local road improvements,no less than 5%and no more than 10%is dedicated
to public transit projects,and 40%is dedicated to the Valley's regional arterials. The voter approved
Measure A Expenditure Plan requires that over the twenty year life of the Measure A program the
TUMF generate at least the equivalent of Measure A funding toward the regional arterial system.
in general,the Measure A program establishes a comprehensive transportation program which includes
the following:
1. Sales tax allocated to regional transportation programs.
2. TUMF Program.
3. Project mitigation of traffic improvements.
4. Agency maintenance of effort.
All components were deemed necessary to fiord regional transportation improvements. Regional
transportation improvements include bridges,roadways,traffic signalization,traffic coordination,and
other transportation improvements. Measure A sales tax fiends and TUMF funds have been utilized to
construct numerous transportation projects which benefit all properties,including Indian Reservation
lands,throughout the Coachella Valley.
Specific Measure A/TUMF funded projects which directly benefit Agua Caliente Indian Reservation
lands include the Mid-Valley Parkway,the Dinah Shore Bridge,improvements along Indian Canyon
4 1RCo
Drive and Gene Autry Trail,the Vista Chino Bridge study,and other projects located outside of the
City of Palm Springs.
The required TUMF for this project is$134,992.75. A sample building permit and estimated fees from
this project are attached as Exhibit 5. TUMF is calculated based on two inputs:average daily trips and
use(residential,nonresidential w/no sales tax,or nonresidential w/sales tax.) The trips generated for
each land use are derived from the Institute of Transportation Engineers(HE)Trip Generation Manual.
The ITE Trip Generation manual is also utilized in preparing traffic studies for all types of land use. The
applicant's Traffic Study utilized the ITE document to estimate projected traffic volume.
In 1995,the City allowed a developer to make a partial payment of a TUMF fee with the
understanding that the remainder of the TUMF fee would be held in trust with the Bureau of Indian
Affairs(BIA)pending a resolution with CVAG. This decision was made because the developer,BIA
and the Tribal Council felt that the TUMF fee was excessive for a temporary use permit and desired to
review the development traffic study and associated calculated fee with CVAG directly. The matter of
the appropriate fee was not resolved as of February 27, 1996 and CVAG billed the City for the
balance plus interest. The City paid this bill of$27,412.17. The developer and BIA never followed up
with CVAG nor were finds deposited with BIA.
The Tribal Council is now a member of CVAG. The TUMF approval process involves a process
established and administered by CVAG. The appellant is directed to file an appropriate appeal with
CVAG and utilize this administrative remedy. In the event the Tribal Council is concerned about the
TUMF program,it should address this issue directly to CVAG.
In the 1995 case,the Tribal Council determined that the short term land lease and temporary nature of
the use created a justification to question the fee amount. The current appeal is for permanent
improvement and land use.
SUMMARY
On the surface,the City Couheil is being asked to direct the Building Division of the Planning and
Building Department to issue a building permit. Slightly below the surface,City Council is being asked
not to apply TUMF to Indian owned lands proposed for development by tribal members.
In terns of issuing the building permit,criteria needed to be satisfied for issuance of a building permit
has not been met. Many of the conditions established by City Council by passing Resolution 19430 on
December 16, 1998 have not been met. These conditions of approval specifically stated that the
conditions must be met prior to issuance of a building permit. Additionally,in accordance Section
9403.E of the Zoning Ordinance,the Planning Commission is authorized to approve Final Development
Plans for a Planned Development District. As the information needed for the proposed Final
Development Plan has not been submitted,the Planning Commission has not even considered an
application. Final Development Plan approval is a prerequisite to issuance of a building permit.
Regarding TUMF,the City collects TUMF in a uniform and equitable manner consistent with the
requirements outlined in Measure A and the requirements of CVAG. TUMF funds have been used to
make regional transportation improvements that benefit numerous properties,including Indian owned
properties. Failure by the City to implement the TUMF consistent with guidelines could jeopardize
receipt of future Measure A funds from CVAG. Deviation from current City practice is not advisable.
5 I AI
In sum,the staff recommends that the Council take the following action:
1. The appeal is rejected because:
a. The applicant failed to appeal the City's action on December 16, 1998 approving the
Preliminary Planned Development District A building permit could not be issued now unless it
were consistent with the City's 1998 approval;and
b. The building permit also cannot be issued because the applicant has not obtained a Final
Planned Development District and has not complied with the requirements thereof.
2. The City Council will reconsider the issues raised here if the applicant submits an amended
Preliminary Planned Development addressing the conditions the applicant wishes to change
along with a Final Planned Development District consistent therewith through the Planning
Commission.
3. The City Council recommends that the applicant pursue relief from the TUMF requirement
through the CVAG administrative process;directs that the applicant will be relieved of the
condition if so relieved by CVAG;and directs the City Manager to propose a measure to
CVAG on behalf of the City providing that any city be relieved of its TUMF obligation with
respect to any project where a sovereign governing entity such as an Indian Tribe determines
that a development project on reservation land is exempt from the payment of TUMF.
Douglas R.Evans
Director of Planning&Building
Dallas J.Flicek
Interim City Manager
Attachments:
1. Notice of Appeal-Geopelro LLC
2• Report to City Council Dated December 16, 1998 including Resolution and Environmental
Assessment
3. Letters of January 28,1999;March 3, 1999;and May 4, 1999 from the City Plans Examiner
to the project architect.
4. Letter dated May 12,1999 from the City's Principal Planner to Golden State Enterprises.
5. Sample Building Permit
6. Land use Agreement and Appeal Ordinance.
7. Resolution
6 1 �
ann: ey: 'uni tuotWMAAIk:N; iie aeya; jun-a-uu 4:owem; rage zie
Tom EGGuRAATEN
COVNTRYCr tM BtlSM55 PAR% A71 owpY AT I.AW P►c)Nv--7W772-4292
7756a Coui;mYCuaiDAe.,Sumer.191 FAs:7W772-4293
PMM DesuaT.CA 92211 E-MAtti Tonftlp@aol.corn
June 9,2000
QeoPetro,GLC.
C/o Jeffrey Flashman,Fsq.
CRISTE,PIPPIN&GOLDS
73-550 Ales wW o,#200
Palm Desert,CA 92260
Mr.James K.Kawahara
PRESTON,GATES&ELi.LS,LLP
725 SOUth "IsHMStrM Sulte 2i'00
Los Angeles,CA 90017
RE: AMbv GMEVtrn_r C ifILAT Assessment
Dear Gentlemen:
This letter shall sew as formal hotce of the decision of the Executive Committee of the
Coachella Valley Association of Governments to deny the appeal by Geop=o, LLC with
respoct to thcpayment of TUW fttr the proposed commerciai project at assessor parcel number
677-290-024 in Palm Springs,California,
This decision is final for all purposes as of this dam plitsuanl to Code of Civil §
1094.4 any petition for writ of mandate must be filed no later than the 9014 day following the
date ofthis notice.
The administrative record shall be forwarded directly to the '!'ribs! Cotmcil by Carol Cross,
Associate Regional Plaimer for CVAG.
Sincerely,
Toni Eggebrame n
Attorney at Law
W. Tribal Council
TLEJcp 11(y1
i
X de.v X f Prom�o M Al; n u. s a awc 5, Z 0&0
eG.tT•V�. eamvrii► a t4i In g .
officials want to arrange a meeting with some Coachella Valley elected officials.
A meeting was set for the end of June that will include CVAG staff and County
Counsel. A meeting including CV electeds will be arranged A.S.A.P. Corky said
that she has also given a copy of the CDFG letter and determination to Senator
Kelley and Assemblyman Battin.
Councilmember Landes asked what does this determination by CDFG actually
mean. Corky Larson responded that the "extreme" case would be that they could
stop development. Corky said she did not think CDFG would go to this extreme,
but they want to know that we are serious about the 12,000 acres they have
determined is neccessary for the CVFTL Preserve.
7. CORRESPONDENCE
7.1 Letter from S. Lisiewicz, District Director for the State Department of
Transportation in response to CVAG's letter to Governor Gray Davis regarding the
1-10/Palm Drive Interchange.
7.2 Memorandum from South Coast Air Quality Management District regarding 1999
PM10 Air Quality in Coachella Valley.
Corky Larson pointed out that this memorandum shows that the Coachella Valley
is very close to dropping out of the maintenance classification. Corky reported
that these figures have not been adjusted yet for high wind incidence days which
could affect our standing.
S. CENSUS 2000 COACHELLA VALLEY COMPLETE COUNT COMMITTEE (CVCCC)
RECOGNITION AND FINAL REPORT
This item was moved to Item 5A under Finalization of Agenda
9. TRANSPORTATION UNIFORM MITIGATION FEE (TUMF) APPEAL
Tribal Chairman Richard Milanovich stated for the record, that because the Tribal
Council has their own process for the TUMF Appeal he will abstain from any
discussion or vote on this item.
Vice Chairman Gary Grimm opened the Public Hearing for the TUMF Appeal at
6:30 p.m.
Allyn Waggle notified the committee members that he had distributed to them a
copy of a FAX received at CVAG today. Allyn said the information was sent by
the attorney for the appellant, and included a New Statement of Information listing
Executive Committee Minutes June 5, 2000 Meeting Page: 4 1010
Damon Prieto as a managing member of GEOPETRO LLC.
Allyn Waggle reported that On January 141 2000, CVAG received an appeal
letter from Geopetro LLC for TUMF assessed to their 3,748 square foot
convenience market (including 16 fuel dispensers) in the amount of
$134,992.75. As required by the TUMF ordinance, TUMF must be paid prior
to appeals being heard. TUMF was paid by Geopetro LLC on April 14, 2000.
Allyn also reported that the TAC, acting as the "Appeal Hearing Body", heard
the appeal on May 12"', and the report of their findings is included in the
agenda backup material. Allyn stated that the TAC and Staff recommendation
is to deny the appeal on the basis that the TUMF is a fair and equitable method
of mitigating vehicle trips and resultant impacts to the Regional Transportation
System generated by the proposed development.
Neither the appellant or his legal counsel was present to state their case.
Toni Eggebraaten said that she beleives, due to the fact we received this
correspondence today, that the appellant and his attorney would wish for the
Executive Committee to proceed with the appeal.
Councilmember Landes asked why Blythe abstained on this issue at the TAC
meeting. Corky Larson responded that Les Nelson abstains on all items related to
TUMF because the City of Blythe does not participate in the TUMF program.
Councilmember Hodges asked Ms. Eggebraaten that since all the information
presented to the TAC did not show Mr. Prieto as a member of GEOPETRO LLC,
does the newly filed statement of information change her opinion.
Ms. Eggebraaten responded that this new document, prepared the day after the
TAC hearing, only changes one fact. The LLC is still the developer and is formed
under California law which, in the eyes of the law, makes it a "person". It is the
LLC that the TUMF is being charged to, not Damon Prieto.
There being no other questions or comments, Vice Chairman Grimm closed the
Public Hearing at 6:37 p.m.
IT WAS MOVED BY MAYOR CRITES AND SECONDED BY MAYOR WEYUKER TO
DENY THE APPEAL OF GEOPETRO LLC ON THE BASIS THAT THE TUMF IS A
FAIR AND EQUITABLE METHOD OF MITIGATING VEHICLE TRIPS AND
RESULTANT IMPACTS TO THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
GENERATED BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
Executive Committee Minutes June 5, 2000 Meeting Page: 5 1 A ` r
A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN RESULTING IN THE FOLLOWING:
CITY OF BLYTHE AYE
CITY OF CATHEDRAL CITY AYE
CITY OF COACHELLA AYE
CITY OF DESERT HOT SPRINGS AYE
CITY OF INDIAN WELLS AYE
CITY OF INDIO AYE
CITY OF LA QUINTA AYE
CITY OF PALM DESERT AYE
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS AYE
CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE AYE
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ABSENT
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS ABSTAIN
CABAZON BAND OF MISSION INDIANS AYE
MOTION CARRIED WITH ELEVEN AYE VOTES AND ONE ABSTENTION.
10. RIVERSIDE COUNTY INDIVIDUAL DEVELOPMENT ACCOUNTS (RivCo IDAI
Lois Carson gave some background information on the Department of Community
Action and their goal, which is to assist people to move out of poverty with
dignity. Mrs. Carson said that she and Janet Hough are here this evening to talk
about a new program that her Department has undertaken (RivCo.IDA). The
Individual Development Account (I.D.A.) was enacted into law by Congress and
is administered by the Department of Health and Human Services. RivCo.IDA is
a savings incentive program for low-income residents who live in Riverside County.
Mrs. Carson explained that RivCo.IDA will match each dollar saved with $2.00
placed in a parallel savings account. The 2 to 1 match consists of $1.00 from the
federal government and $1.00 from the local community. The participant must
choose one of three goals for saving: 1.) Educational or vocational pursuit; 2.)
Closing costs for a house purchase; 3.) Small Business. The maximum amount a
participant can save is $2000. Upon successful completion of the program, with
a savings of $2000., the participant would receive $6000.
Janet Hough explained that this is not a give away program. The participants will
be required to attend skills builing workshops including money management,
coummuniity resource networking, credit counseling, budgeting, business start up,
etc. depending on their savings goal. Ms. Hough also explained that they have
been successful in starting this program in Western Riverside County, and have
now begun "phase two", which will bring the program to the Coachella Valley.
The program will require approximately $400,000 in local matching funds. Mrs.
Executive Committee Minutes June 5, 2000 Meeting Page: 6 I
eparate
Attachm nt
Item 9
CVAG
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
MONDAY, DUNE 59 2000
6:00 P.M. lAt3
COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
May 26,2000
TO: Executive Committee-
FROM: Carol Cross,Associate Regional Planner
RE: Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee(TUNE)Appeal Sled by Criste,Pippin&
Golds on behalf of Geopetro LLC for TUMF assessed on their proposed project
consisting of a convenience market and fuel dispensers located at 3600 Ramon
Road East(APN:677-280-024).
The following information was compiled by CVAG legal counsel for inclusion in the
administrative record of the above-mentioned TUMF appeal.
This information is being forwarded to you for your review prior to the June 5, 2000
Executive Committee meeting during which the TUMF appeal of Geopetro LLC will be heard
Tom EGGEBRAATEN
COUNTRY CLUB BUSINESS PARK ATTORNEY AT LAW PHONE:760-772.4292
77-564A COUNTRY CLUB DR.,SUITE 191 FAX:760-772-4293
PAw DESERT,CA 92211 E-MAn:ToniEgg0aol.com
May 16,2000
Corky Larson RFrFTVRD
CVAG MAY 1 $ (000
73710 Fred Waring
Palm Desert,CA 92260 BY:,��
RE: GeoPetro.LLC Akpeal of TLW
Dear Corky:
I am sending you this so that it can become part of the administrative record on the TUMF
appeal.
Sincerely,
eTom Egg b
Attorney at Law
Enclosure
cc: Carol Cross
TLF/cp
I
MEMORANDUM
TO: Corky Larson, Executive Director
CC: Carol Cross
Associate Regional Planner
FROM! Toni Eggebraaten, General Counsel
RE: GeoPetro,LLC Appeal of TUMF
DATED: May 15,2000
The following summarizes the basis for my opinion that the appellant has not offered any valid
reason for excusing it from the payment of TUMF.
I. The circumstances of this case are not consistent with the legal authority that applicant
relies on for the proposition that federal law preempts the local TUMF ordinance. The
preemption rule appellant relies on is only applicable where the tax must be paid by the Indian
owner and can be secured by a lien against Indian land. In this case,TUMF is a personal
obligation of the developer that cannot be secured by a lien against the owner's interest in the real
property.
The tax is not to be paid by a Tribe or a tribal member owner. Rather,the applicant
developer is GeoPetro,LLC,which is a California entity. Contrary to appellanfs representations
in its statement of appeal,Tribal Member Ramon Prieto is not the controlling owner of
GeoPetro,LLC. Appellant offers no evidence on this issue and both the appellanfs Articles of
Organization filed with the Secretary of State and its application to the ABC for a liquor license
show George Nicholas Jr. (with an 80%interest)and Robert Archuleta(with a 20%interest)as
the only Members of GeoPetro,LLC. (See Exhibits A;Page 2 of Exhibit B; and Exhibits C and
D.)
II. The appeal was not timely brought. The tentative map for this project was approved by
the City's written resolution in December of 1998. (Exhibit E.) That resolution included the
condition that TUMF be paid. (See page"2-9-41",item 60,of Exhibit E.) The Land Use
Agreement,the Tribe's ordinance and the City's ordinance require an appeal to be taken within
10 days. The December 1998 resolution first imposing the TUMF was never appealed,it is now
final and beyond appeal.
When the application for the building permit was later made, the issue of TUMF was
appealed to the Palm Springs City Council as if the condition were being imposed for the first
time. Even this appeal from the City Council's decision,to CVAG,was not timely because,to
perfect appeal,the TUMF must first be paid under protest. (Exhibit F.) The TUMF was paid)
I � 1
astate of Caiiforma
Secretarp of State
ipiu yoneo
LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY—STATEMENT OF INFORMATION RENEWAL
A$10.00 FILING FEE MUST ACCOMPANY THIS FORM.
IMPORTANT—Read Instructions On Back Before Completing Compleflng This Form. FILED
1. LBDTEDUABILITYCOMPANYNAME hltheosceoftheSmaetaryofState
of the We ofwomia
GEOPETRO, LLC JAN 2 9 1999
P 0 8 DE 1
PALM DESERT
CA 92270
THIS SPACE FOR RUNG USE ONLY
L SECRETARY OF STATE AM NUMSER & JURISDICTION OFFORMATION
6k
IF THERE HAS IN THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN LAST STATEMENT OF INFORMATION
ON FILE WITH THE CALIFORNIA SECRETARY OF STATE,CHECK BOX AND PROCEED TO ITEM 12.
4. EMQADDRESSOFPRINCIPALEMWTNEOFRCE CITY AND STATE ZIPCOOE
3600 RAMON ROAD PALM SPRINGS CA. 92262
& $I IAODRESS M CAUFORMIA OF OFRCE WHERE RECORDS ARE MAINTAINED (FOR DOMESTIC ONLY) CITY LP CODE
SAME CA
LISTTHE NAME AND COMPLETE ADDRESS OF ANY MANAGER OR MANAGERS,AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,IF ANY.OR IF NONE HAVE
BEEN APPOINTED OR ELECTED,PROVIDE THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF EACH MEMBER. (CHECKTHE APPROPRIATE DESIGNATION). ATTACH
ADDITIONAL PAGES IF NECESSARY.
& NAME GEORGE NICHOLAS I I MANAGER
ADDRESS 3600 RAMON ROAD I I CHIEFEXECImVEOFFICER
CITY PALM SPRINGS STATE CA ZIP CODE • 92262 XXMEMBER
7. NAME ROBERT ARCHULETA 11 MANAGER
ADDRESS 3600 RAMON ROAD I I CHEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
CITY PALM SPRINGS 92262
STATE CA ZIP CODE MEMBER
& NAME THE AGENT FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS An CHECKTHEAPPROPRIATE FROM"BELOW
KEITH SHIBOU. CPA _ w*A=IS
KX ANINDIVIOVAI.RESIDMGMCAL810RNUL PROCEEDTOITEM9..:_
I I ACORPORATION"*CH HAS FLED ACERT6.ICATEPURSUANTTO SECTION 150& PROCEEDMITEMI0.
9. STBEEIAODRESS OFTHE AGENT FOR SERVIC:OF PROCESS M CALIFORNIA.- CITY ZIP CODE
1900 E TA U TZ CANYON WAY PALM SPRINGS CA. STE B1 CA 92262
10. DESCRIBE TYPE OF BUSINESS OF THE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY.
GAS
11. NUMBER OF PAGES ATTACHED,IF ANY.
12. I DECLARE THATT%S STATEMENT IS ANDCOMPLEE.
Jul
aF AUTXORUMTo96N )Z
IG.HT7L.f}s �z_ � F
.. aw,r. TWAWAMWIWVFPbNS alur H0 All
DUE DATE:
09/29/1998
tA�
n
SO&SP1L@601211(QM"n _ ,
�RyJO
;1
State of California
13111 Jones
• Secretary of State
• I.II4II1'>;1 coazP ► LLC-1
ARTICLES OFFA1ViZkTION
1291M"AI M-Resd the btstruedoas bafore compiedug the form.
This doeament is presented fir fMq paesnant to Section 170M of the Caftmia Corporadons Code.
i. LLaited Uab ' tome:
QLMrrMiV.0 9 t41n�'6�lwf 14rIWMrr4YwiliC:}I.�rPrIW�"epMdYnf�Ir7+L•rf��
2. Latest date S dryh"ear) t alia�ad�oar is m dissolve:
3.• Thepnzpaaeofthe Imbed UabiWWMMistoopsefoany lawful actoractiftferwbkhalimited liability eomm
may be awnized underthe IleveripUbs Llo"LMft CompagAcL
4. Eowthe name of iaiBal agent farservke ofpraeass and ebgeit die appropriate provision below:
— L It &(14 .,which Is
I wan Individual teslding In t'.allibrols. l'meeed to 4em S.
[ 1acwpwdnwWchhufiWa=d0campmMubSec&o ism of dro CaUf=k C.mporatjoM Code.•Skip Item S
3. IfthaioWaigwflerservieeofpsoeessisnrbAdbL" rabnabmorrnideatWcueetad&misCdWotniL
Sumaddre LM gl4Li H16Hk)A j ( (( )
PA QChlo M,aA6e State: CAL1FOR" ?dpCWc: GI ZZ�f O
ti Uc!imhedAabitiWmn; WwMbem=Wdby: (eltecitace)
[ I oaemeow I I morseaaouemover 11 JknioeplipbUityeomparq•manbas
7. Ifothenaamets ate to be hneloded la the Aeticks of Orpatadoa sRaeir aue ormae sepuate pages
Noz*cr arpW atnrhed,ifapy: .
L 191sheKby6cla WthelamdroptKsawbo FarSseeegeratspesUse
exec.used this inwous"t,whkh aDxadca fs
skyactaaddeed.
FILED
�1 6i b As t of ort�
'typoarpdataaaraofetaeaister . SPP 2 9 1997
Data a4z1 Qe3 ram— ZI •19 9-1 A? Ft orc �., yct`
IRLJONES, of SW
fir,
r�wsw hw...+4e.s-..err� C9�q�OTC
... _uw ic•.a rrwi nut, iw.krw vilm-k= iU to ti`d4d7.)
i �, `attoextA . DL-PPING PARTNIM
YES— NO.,9—
RPPLICRTION FOR RLCOHOL REUERR6E LICENSES)
TOt f
Department lof Alcoholic Beverage Control File Number...:.........346956
42-700 Bob Hope Dave, Suite 317 Rancho hru**,: CA 92Z70 Receipt Nntubel.........1204299
;
(760) 568-09 90 Geosmhical Code........3310
Copies Mailed Date 9-23-98
Issued Date
DISTRICT SERVIIdO LOCATION:
Name of B l$m, ess: ARCO •AMMM
Location ofI Business; i
Number II and •Street NWC "ON RD & EL PLACER
City, Stake Zip Code PALM SPRINGS CA 9M64
County 111111 RIVERSIDE.
Is premise nslde city limits? YES y
Mailing s:
(If diffe>lent: from 72730 aOMERA RD ,
Premise :address) PALM DESERT CA M60
If premise licensed:
Type 0 license
Transferor's names/license: SMART & FINAL STORES CORPORATION 2631*39
Meowisan�_ I Pwo Tt,eo lde �: )>at3 Eta
1. 20 osp-S� waam At® FMLS x TO Pgssapt TMw la YES 0
2 9gP 23,1998 $50.00 �
• 20 OFF-":a n Am AFL mm I Ma us 0 siP 23,1990 $34.00 t
3. 20 M7-9= SM Al® MAdSg TO P817G$E TFA MA. YES 0 SSP 23,1990 $100.00 t
<' 20 OFF-4ux Man jam start pnmzRpzzkn 1A n0 3 MW 23,1998 $117.00 t
5. 20 Op7-51LE.saaa AND PEDUU p S V& aD 1 AV 23,1998 $24.00
TOTAL S32! 00
Have you aver!6dta Have you aunt violated any providous of the A10oholic Beverage C =vl
convicted of a� felamy? Act, Or Alga"Ous of the Deparoueat pe mMug to the•Aet?
Explain UT •answer to the above 40"' On to aauhmana w idt rbaH be:daeaed•D-R of this anolicadon.
Applicant agn�es (a) that soy manager emplyyed in an-sale Heemad premise will bane all the gaaliticadona of a
licensee. and (Ir) drat he win not violate or•cause or permir to be violated my of the peovidon$ of the Alcoholic
Beverage Con#ol 'Act.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of RIVERSIDE Dare SEP 23,1998
:mast try of papt� web pamn wbme sipeaua appear bdw,eetdaa and Svc(l) tfa b m Wsaw. a me of the SWICOU oras= m eueodte
f=90 of the armlet mpwnim, snored m Abe rweV4 appSmka.ddY sat w&W � Mbe thb apron on Itr tahY! RJ dot be has nad dw
caste:-t +� d o omw-a d onof and ma9 ueh an Ira ahme awe: Chad- awae an 4W M drat as peas- edbar thm tm vndkmt or
was mf ditset or (-Brut mmm in dM 90cm at applkaft_
nsadr, (a) Ihat dhe dwerfdt applieadeu or tr bddeions ro be amd-toed order the iteaose(rJ whkh Me app8ndaa b
pop
ase rbapp8 = is atl� do p�ad a lm- at to &M as s eumd dam morn
&ss dmY (�) days peteedmS the lily m whkh tha nepa®mt w to pfn or taobash a pedule m a or far soy
aediaw or wamfwor oc " de"M at 10= aey aedfmr of 911115[uo6 (3) :bat the wMahr appaadm any be wandea-a by ehher 6* appltemt or
the Militia path 4- rcs-Id-B UMMY to We Depummc
Applicant rualcne
(s) AppUcant Sipature(s)
GE
NICHOLAS.C EORGEM MANAGER DER
ABC-231 T Ri-227 MIERA, I
ABC-231 ABc-227 ABC-211 SIG
ABC 211 tags) I
r-vUIDTT
STATE OF CAUFORM—WsweS&TRMWC4,..WN AND HOUSING AGENCY GRAY DAVIS.GOvwnw
DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL
42.700 80b HOPO Drive.Suite 317
Rancho Mrage,CA V,270
(760)5684M
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
January 7, 1999
George Nicholas,Jr.
Geopetro, LLC
PO BOX 1318
Palm Desert CA 92261
Arco AM/PM
NWC Ramon Road&El Placer
Palm Springs CA 92264
File: 20-346956
NOTICE TO PRODUCE OR DENIAL OF APPLICATION
Dear Licensee:
This office has several times requested you to furnish the fallowing information in
connection with the above application:
1. Copy of your real estate lease and any amendment(s) thereto.
2. Please provide documentation that you have applied for a conditional use permit
to the City of Palm Springs.
3. Please provide documentation that you have applied for a Letter of Public
Convenience & Necessity to the Palm Springs City Council.
4. Please verify your source of funds by providing a copy of the loan documents for
the Arco loan and the bank loan.
You have either failed or refuse to furnish the required information so that a full and
complete investigation of your application could be made.
You are hereby notified that if you fail or refuse to furnish the information required
herein within 20 days of the date of this letter, the Department will have no choice but to deny
your application.
If you have any questions, please contact Investigator II 'ltz at 760-773-6524.
Sinc
avid .Gill
District Supervisor
GeoPetro , LLC
RECEIVED
January 21, 1999 JAN 21 1999
pLANNING DIVISION
Steve Eayes
Staff Planner
City of Palm Springs
E. Tahquitz Canyon Drive
Palm Springs, CA 92M2
RE: Arco Am/Pm Request for Public Convenience
Dear Steve:
I would like to submit to the City of Palm Springs a Request for Public Convenience for
the approved Arco Am/Pm located at 3600 Ramon Road,Palm Springs, Ca 92262. I
would very much appreciate this being expedited so that I will not have any delays with
my application to the A.B.C.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter,if there is anything further you need from me
please do not hesitate to call me.
Sincerely,
GeoPetro,LLC
George Ncholas Jr.
Managing Member
P.O.Box 1318 A Palm Dem tt A CA. 92261 A Phone 760-776-6768 A Fox 760-340-9194
APPAOYEB BY t7AMl=COMO"
. . qsa• DEL• MI
Appla D BY CRY COUNCL
RBSOLDnONNo. 4W 13J l aei sarrPo i
NXEO 1TA to*in*
iL S fECi TO ryinfo
GOLDEN SEATS s"Mi tom, =Oi 1M BY ABOVE SW .
• CsmaNa 5.0789/PAZS2/l'PM28907
Northalde of Ramon Road,west otAverfda EnBta
December 16,1"S
: COMMONS OB APPROVAL
Before tlml aoceptamx of fw project, all. condidow Had below shag be completed to the
satlsfon of the City Engineer.the Director of ,the C1daf of Polka,die Flee Chef or
their designee,depeadtDg on which degmim nt c000mmendcd the conditim
Amy agacwmts,easemmb or covenew nagaW to be effiasd Wo shall be in a tum approved
by die CBy Aow=m .
the Begineeriog DhIsi n necommeads dw if thin sppiiadon h approved, swh approval is
wbject to fte hgmwlag onftw beimg completed k omqbm whin City Stendatds and
B.eloopreefl p�of.t�ho
..project, all comlidoes Bated below scull be oomphftd to die
iYNi�{PdI of the Wy�^'�•
LT�L7iimLQi'LL{i�
I. C�onneyct all =�*�u�yy lames to the C by sewn system Lataal 60 not be
WY�IW�tt0YW1G.
2. •Developer sMB cottimw an 8 inch sewer maim am= the entire AIlZPM
CENMB DRIVE AND EL PLACER feodgp and cwmect to fro en 15
inch sewer main at hwnwdm of Ramon Rod But and into the codsting 81nch
sewer rmia io Abpat Cenhm'Drin east of Avwida Bvdits.
3. AB newer maim comimcled by the d wbVer amd to beco®e part of die CIW
sews ap=shag be televised by the dwdoMjdw to aeceptame of add lines.
4. Mok sewer kVwvement pleas I tired by a RegT and C W Eogincer to dw
Bagl w ft Divisim.The platy shall be appmved by the City prlar to
iswamrocf any Staftor baffiftper•
Mwoun m mittd shag hr. &the tblbwwv
A.• .4 dW ofaigoad Cl m tons of Approval firmPlwrtigg Depettmmt.
y
10. A so&repair prepared by a licensed Sala Bsgmeer dell be required for and
Incorporated as an iatmal part of de grading Then for me proposed site.A copy
of de'solb seport shall be sabmbtad to the Do0diog Department and to the
Eo&verlog Division elm with plans,adcu dons and odmr inn anbjea
to approval by tine dq'BUSIMIM prior to the IssUMMof de grading paedL
P.zi a.ri •.
it. CoMd do Bdft Department to 99PM10 requirements prior to tegaest for
DBAIIiA�Br''
12 71t; v ups shall accept all flows imptogiog spat his land and conduct these
Am to an approved dralas structure. On ske reomdm/deteodon or other
measures q*oved by de City Bogioxr shall be teqaload NoSoite faellitin are
deumdoed to be enable to Imndle the benased Haws generated by die
development of the site. Provide a&eel d atim a wady to detaaaim if the
developed Q emecds the espacky of the approved dreinage tasriea prior to
approval of die Parcel Map.
U=
13.• The•projea h subject toan flood control d drahmge Res. The
aaeaggdraimge fee at the present the Is$9,212.00 per sae per Resolution No.
151894pas amllbe paid prior to lssuaace of abdldiogpolmL
14. Any utility cuts hi the existing off-silo Wes 6st Eimade by this development shall
receive trench replacement pavement to mach adsting pavement plus one
additionl inch. See Qry of Palm 3prigp Standard Drawlgg No. 115.&Mment
shall be restand to a smooth ridable our&ca.
15. All itp Um onfor agjaxat to lhis prof a ihall be undeq coded
priar to has em of a cettv�cOe of Ocaspaay. .
16. AU existing utibks shall be abown as the g>adiggWrat plats. The existing sod
proposed service laterals shall be showa loom the main line to the property lira.
The approved od&d gradhi mad plans shall be a4milt and returned to the
C IW of Para ii'priw Bogbote w Divbkn prior to issoeoce of the ard&xte of
may
17. Tie developer Is advised to enaenx all u ft purveyors for detailed requirements
In this project at the eallea possible dte.
1& Nad shell be eoostrucad or planted in the corner cutoff area of rW ddvaway
which don or will emeed de height zogd ed to malmak an appropriate sight
distauoe per City of Palm Springs Stwdird Drawing No.203.
19. All proposed tree within die public dgbtofavay sad within 10 fleet of the public
ddewsdk and/or eorb shall have OW approved dap mot barriers brstalied per
City ofpahn Spriggs Htufacaiag specifiatima.
STREM ,
20. The FAgioeatog Divbim recommends deiteasl M off-site hnprovenieat HEMS
A 33•and 34 at this time do to lack of IA Improvements in the immediate arm.
The develops shall enter Into a coveosat sgreft to construct all mentioned
Tt .
29. Comet a mhdm 8 foot wide sidewalk behind fire'Cab along dw entire
finctage in accondance widt C by of Palm Springs Standard Dmwfog No.210.
30. Cadstiat a 8 foot wife Gass I meandering "qok path (Caltraw Design
Marnab 010w 1000-Biloawrty H miss and Desfw along do entire f entage.
The bL7*path ftlI be constructed of colored Portland an=concrete. The
admbume'shaII be Desert Sand,Palm Spdogs Ta4 a approved&pd cola'by
fie Bogince ft Division.The concrete Ad receive abroomA*L
31. Co 'a crab camp mafhtg arrteot Celttamfa State Aoeesdbft standards at
dro NORTHWEST AND NORTI]EAST canner of the Ramon Road East and E
Plwe and at the NORTHWEST comer of do Ran=Road Fast and
Avedh Bvdka ikon per CSty of Palm Sow Sod. Dwg. Nos. 212 and
212A..r .
* 32. a 14-foot wide landscaped,raised media Island as specified by dro Chy
Bagioxr. ftom AVBNDA EYRRA to INS.-VEST PROPEY TOM
Provide a left tam pocket on den NORTH AND BOOMRT
aides of Eta RAMON
ROAD EAST at EL PLACER immoodon.The Lobe wmdt Sbatl be 4 fed vrWe
and eimil haw Since 0ld8es to fie point whom der deserlscape an begin. The
Imgth.af tfie torn pocket Sfiell be det=Awd•pw Mtrans Highway Dedp
hbmdSw.405 an4bo appmvedby the City EMinw. .
• 93. Remove sad mplaee adsdog pavement whfi a mWmum paxwent sew of 5
iocfi tiapltalt concteoe pavement over 4 hwh mgpqpb base whh a minimum
subgradc of 24 hwbes at 95% relative CAL, OR eTal, !from edge of
proposed batrler cab to dean wwent edge of c&ft pavement almg do eedoe
A etage of the landsaped median Island in accordance with City of Palm Springs
Standard Dzuefog No. 110 and 347. The lavemeos section&W be desigad,
nsT j*W vahea,by a licensed Sobs Engineer and submitted to to City Ensiom
forappmvil.
. y
• 34. Construct an 8 fah baler nub as required for do landscaped media island.
Inclusive of turning poemot. per Chy of Pain SOW Standard Drawing No.
200.•�•
35. Coushoct a 14 Soot wide palooed media island from dte RAMON ROAD EAST
at AVFN DA EVE[II'A Imersecdort to do WESTPROMLIT LOU Provide a
left dun pocket on the NORTH AND SOVTH sides of the RAMON ROAD
EAST at EL PEA= laknectim The ruse wbdt doll be 4 feet wile. TM
length of do rum podow " be deta>mined per Caldans Highway Design
Manual Be—405 and be approved by the!Sty Bagloeer.
36. Coniti6at a ltiO4odtbell by 124iwt whlebus amout on a pardon of die parcel
1 and 2 fiatmges.The coa ft uration daLL be Waved by dro CYy Engineer in
coqancdm with SmUoe Transit Ootanct Stuff ire Tama ffor details regarding
Ws adtp 5tmitnelShdser requitemeota.
)}•..I
37. All firplaeo or,off grade CURB , GUTTER AND AC PAVBM6NT shell be
repaired a replaced along;ft cadre propay ftop adjacent to thepropertty.
38. Reamvs.aed replace mating pavement whir a mbdamtm pavement section of 5
fah aspltalt concrete pavement over 4 fah aggtegtae base whir a mbdmtm
subw&.*.M 24 imbes at 95% relative CourwIl n,.McquaL frem edge of
proposed gamer to dean wvreat edge of rads ft pavement alms due entire
t, AfIQ...4.r :• •w Z
9S% idadw won. OR eTA from Clip of proposed Puler n edge of
proposed gutter along die emme homage In aoemdence whh dry of Palm Springs
Sdodud Dnwfog No. 110 sad 315. The pavement section shell be designed,
using OR*values,by a bussed Solls 13ogiaca and submitted to die Cigr
foe approval.
48 liie ort e-cnide•sac shell be amotnxEed In scoaadasce whh City of Palm
Spriggs Standard Dtawlag No. 101,curb portion only.
49. a cab tamp meeting amensCaffodh State Amy standards st
die SW omw of de Avmift Eveft and Airport Quite Ddve imaaedion per
ClV'ofPdm.Springs&L Dwg.Nos.212 and 212A.
50. All broken or oft grade CURB, GDTTER, AND.AC PAV11LI ff aluII be
ap drod ofrepi cod slag de entineproperiy$rouge adjacent to true property.
MR
51. The M Report prepared for subdivision goarnow for•the subject property and
tiro tavase downs far die rdWq pawl and all areas of rightof-way or
easement dedladon shall be submitted to dte Cyr Rngineer for review cad
approval whhthe Parcel Map.
52. The Pared Map dull be prepared by a Boensed Lend Surveyor or qualified Cvi7
Eigisewand submits to tits Roglseaiog DlMw fat mview.Recordation sball
be completed prler to Iwo&=of grading or building pemdw
.K
72AMC
53. The doveloper sball pmvids ammm m of 48 mebes of ddewdkcleaam>e around
all smxt incalIme, fine hydrant ad oiler abovogomud dicIIift for Undicap
aocesamffity. Mae develgw sball provide now fto*dedication of additional
ftbi dway and w1dotog of die sidewalk Qr aball be responsible for der:
rdaatia of all eshamg traffic signallsafw(y ligid poles,eandult,pail Bones and
all appmtenanea located an to RAMON ROAD BAST, EL PLACER, and
AIRPORTCEN1'REDRIVER Igetof die subject propenty.
rL •
54. The dsvempa shall replace all damaged, destroyed, or modified pavement
legends and striping det is tegdrod by the Cher i3usloter on On RAMON
ROAD BAST f antsp prior to issttaate of a Oeedfieaoe of Oaarpeaey.
.t r
55. Separite•atipiog platy ate to be I, g ? I cad submitted along vshh strew
improvement plans for review ad s pproid by die City Eggmca.
56. El Placer shell be shoed to provide a mwmam of 2 lames swtitbound and
nmft and to Ramon Road East gad Ahpmt Ceram Ddw,mgectb*.
57. Stratmme algae siuR ire e<ea�h mteuectlon iu w wrftw with Cary of
Palm Springs StandardDrawiug Nos.620daoogit W.
7bls ddveft Is pwa ted at the huatl6n prod an me Palimioary develgmmt
ph=,wAh me Md design of die ddvewa9 iocmpmadng a sSBrdfuam laDdsaped"pork
chop" Island to ampase pots W* haardms Wtam nwvmem in and out of this
dsivewiq.•The f d design of the ddveway and'pork drop"soedian shall be reviewed
and apptovc�d hi oosdm2Com whh the land Develop oulphm.
�,
4. Case No',S.0MIPD 25MM 28M sad the atdft�ud approval of Prose One
development for abdl be valid for a period of two(2)yat8. Estes of thm may be
gradedbythePhmdng CoamdsdonVmdmomaWmofsandcurse.
S. liie appal period for tbis appUcWm is 15 akadar days foom fe date of project
approva4 Petmita iv8i not be issued tmtll�e appal period has conducted.
6. M.fiat deveiopo na pleas shall be sabmkbd fa=oodaooe whh Secdm 940.00 of the
Zmhg Osd oom Fbd devdopaiM phis shell boch de sb plain;buitdigg deva*m.
floor Ply ndpbw.vaft ow,a raw paelimimry lasvitape Plan and iaigasm
plan for Plisse One devdopmeA iandsape ad kdodw pbms for I sue pbasa of
devdopmmt(at such thm they ase appllabk), eraDe dw ligbthtg plans, sign psogtam,
Fes.sb mu4wdm,proPmy&mlopma wards and
odwr smb,doameab as= Weed by do Platutlog Comodmko.Fail devnlopromt pbms
dkabe h6bsed wIft two(2)yam of do Ctq Conodl apptovd of dx p vHwfnuy
Planned developmatdisfairt.
6a. blb6 m h ompe sud paddof whacks for die psojact am established as follows (as
musmed fsompoopeety live):
RimonP M-25feetftW3)"
35 fEet(all semabamg itxs)
Ahpmt Cashes Drive-10 fad
El Fbioa-10 f=
.a.t
AveWdaEv"-10 feet
burim pwpaw am(except wag properw Sm of tors I sad 8)-S fiat
Wed p q=W The of lots 1 and 8-25 fm
. ur
- Or mpa to hstee6ece whh Udk flow and tatsker de8vedm,to the sadsfacdm of
the Dhectm of Phnabig and DWIdmg.
6b Minitmtm bm'ldiag sel6wb fro die project me estab)idod m Man(a measures from
RamonRdad-35 fxt
AhportCmkeDdva-20ha r
S Qos : a• cc ..
ffiPlacer:2Qibeti ,0:. .6-•t�'•f:" '
AvadW 13 &-20fbet
• :1£t'
bamimpropatymm(Uceptwestpwpaw lira of lute I and 8)-S fax
good coodkIoa and in accordance with all ordloonces. The CC fit Ws shell a:plain the
sequined mWi®m landscape and baitdbrg setbacks listed In been Be above. do
maiotemace'of aL private aoeeb and de rapahed landscape media-In BI Placer and
required nx#owl puling and access casements and sgseemat that sbill be recorded
dnnagboat die project sit--
The q9tiarmi ebaB submit to fix cky or Palm'Spdogc;,i deposit in an anion-t to be
detemalodby die Chy Manager,for the review oft he CCAWs by die CIW Amen ey.
17. Sepuaoe siictiitepntal approval abd pemdb shall be wqahed for all signs. A detailed
sign program sing be submitted for Review and approval by ire Planning Commission
pry to issuance of boildiag permits. Slgnage for the proposed ARCH w4a mid-
muket should eMw be recessed or ladMival cbmd leroaRs. The*spur symbol on
die pomp island muopy shall also be treated In des sameman-er,and/or MUMID waned to
match dte tak of do aoopy, to the sads6rcdoa of do Director of Plaadng and
Building
18. All matetialsando ftportions of do roof shall be earth roe b-vier.
19. AR roof mounted mechanical apbment AM be smvewd from all possible vantage
points body c*ft and shore per Section 9303.OD of the Zoning Ovdma=. The
screwing spell be considered as an dement of the overall design and must blend wbh the
arcit wwd design of the baitdiog(s). The wad or dwadons and root plans of do
bailer sball b uliaoe any futures or egdpmat to be lowed on the roof of do
building, ire ega*W heights. and type of screwing. Parapets "be at least 6'
above den equipment for ire purpose of screening.
20. No amedar downspouts shell be permitted an any hade on the pmposcd bailding(s)
wbkh are vW*from adJscat streets or residential and wmmucial areas.
21. Paimeser waft shall be dedgoed,installed and unfaftined in compliance widr the comer
cudeet ra;gnirementa as requred in Section 9302.00.D.
22. 77m design,height,Owme and colas of boiMltg(s),knees and walls deg be sabmhoed
for review and approval prior to ismuce ofbdidirgp umbb.
..I.
23. The sores n mrberibglkmeriog shall not exceed fight inches in height.
24. Cousmsctm-'of all new buildings vkVn der pRgject ship meat midm sam*roo&g
represaIDed pan=to Saxton 1092 and related sections of Tide 25 of the
Calftnia Addhistiadw Coda Compliance dog be domed to dw suidacdon of
ffie DhaoorofBaUmns and Saretq.
25. An esWw Nghdng plan in womdame wltb the Bgldog ordinance lit ef&ct at the time
each phase U proposed in development dtall be submitted foe review and approval by
the Me= of PLoot-g fit BuBft jdw to nee Imam of bdldltg pemtib• A
phowmadc amdy ad 's Cnt sbab'ot'all exterior Bgbdog on the bdlding,
bndoJadsapiog,and in die puking lot dal bes for approval pdorto ismance
of a bo&ft'pbna&N ligbb are proposed to be mmmted on bafldags,down4wns dell
bemif¢nd..,,t,;
1
26. Moininatkiiiu'Ua In die parking am shell be an&mja of one-foot andk with a ratio
of average Iigidto mmhmmn light of four to one(4:1).
a J�
with pits ss Beotwallearay w ther�ffi slde abepaddgg s1>s�rive(�
can dwe a common wallmV. one in evay eW(8) aocessble spaoea,but not
less than one(1), Ad be served by an 8 toot walkway an The tight side and sbalt be
dedpded a'no acetesibk'.
40. Asodimpped addestbllhy shall be indicated on be she phm to iwb& be locadoo of
bauffloWed pad hg spaces,des main athance to be proposed Muco a and be path of
travel to be main eohamx. Ca rsiduadon shall be given to pofentid MkUIdea with be
bandiapped aexbhy to to banding dem o doff me gradingplans ibr deepmpaty.
41. Compact and handkgged spaces doll be appropdss*madded per Section 9306.00C
10.
42. Carts shaft be htstalid at a minmmm of five (5) fat from fan of walls, fences,
buildings,or other Muclemes. Auras that we not part of tln manarvubg area shall have
nobs placed at a minimum of taro(2) feet f mn be Fan of walls, fmces or buildings
ddvea'aYs•
49. A8 ewni*shad be mdoodoed and pabdia0y ram.
44. Video sutvelllinge equipment shall be pmvMed, pmmunt ro be pmvktone Of Zonng
Otdimnoa Sadmn 9402.O082,m.2.
45. A d caeadve screen waft and/or mduladng bambW shaft be provided along doe Ramon
Road and M Placer sttamope arras to sweat all vddcoiar ad pump idand acdvity
sssodded wilt Phase One development from areas of public view, parmaat m be
mgahaneoa Of SecdM 9306.00 Of the Zoning Ordinance. Undulating bamiog deal
nitro be paovlded a a meets to screen aed>vWcs from view along Ramon Road for futme
paaxs ofdevelopmedt.
46. Addtdoml b6duwpiog, such as shaft end aamal flowering plant, shall be provided
along the somh and east elevations of the mhi made d building, adjacent to da rotcer
eahy colnmm,to do saddwdm of be DhataaPlanning and Building.
47. A hmdsaped median island dell be b=perobd into be design of din M Placer arm
sect,LromRamonRoad nmt ward to the snub and of Me drive a ww&on Parcel 3.
BI Plow shall be designed as to have two mrbboand haffic lanes and two sooftound
Udb laces. The Bad design and wiM of Ri Placer shall be tevimoW by be OW
Eoginar aad'be Dbeowr ofPhoning and Bndit pdor to FMd Map neoondminn or the
Issou c of ling Pwmb for bapmject,whkhaver occma final•
48. A mexiamn to two (2) hu4bod. ddve4Mzh tt abed be allowed In
conjunction with do proposed Planned Development and Teamdve Pamd Map. This
rapkhament shall bedew#totedonthe Find Map and Find Development Plus.to the
sawn of doDireaorof Planting and Bmldhtg.
49. Each indivkQ phase of development will be requited 06 be pmaiaed as an n bbeeard
review appiicaft at Coaddinnd Use Pemeh,as deemed apse by the Dhecaor of
PbmiogaodBmldmg.
50. The ptojca shell be designed and operated as to comply wilt Section 9216.04 of the
Z.a ft Ordmmx,w"gates to Pal =aace Standards for be h-1-P Zox.
51. Reciptoed paddng and access mancoh dill be provided bucu8bout tee pr*a area,
with apexlWdetaiin incmponod mro Oe C,C&Ws fordw project.
dAwO
63. Aid mkpb="6e ea6mift6 to ft Rim"C=W Dqm mnt of Hov&omoW
64. HtebP�1 �LowI�dadtsig�
TONI EGGEBRAATEN
CoUffMy CLUB BUSINESS PAM ATTORNEYAT LAW PHONE:760-7724292
77-564A COUNTRY CLUB DR.,SUITE 191
PALM DESERT,CA 92211 FAx-760-7724293
E-Mm ToniEuGaol.com
January 31, 2000
Mr.James K. Kawahara
TRESTON, GATES&ELLIS,LLLP
725 South Figueroa Street,Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90017
RE: TLW Appeal by Geopetro,LLC
Dear Mr.Kawahara:
An appeal to CVAG of the TUMF assessment has been received. However,the appeal to
CVAG is not complete until the assessment that is the subject of the appeal has been
paid.
Initially,you suggested that your client pay the TUMF to a third party escrow holder until
the issue was resolved. On CVAG's behalf; I rejected that proposal because it is
inconsistent with CVAG's appeal procedures applicable to all appellants. Alternatively,
you suggested the funds be paid under protest to Palm Springs, to be held in a separate,
interest-bearing account by Palm Springs until the issue was resolved. You now report,
however, that Palm Springs'staff states that they are obligated to transfer-such collections
to CVAG within a short period of time of receipt. Palm Springs will only hold the funds
if CVAG will give written authority for a procedure,again, inconsistent with CVAG's
appeal procedures.
As I indicated on the telephone,I believe that it is poor government policy to create
exceptions to procedures that are intended to apply evenly to all appellants. By requiring
the TUMF be paid before the appeal, it shifts the burden to the appellant to adjudicate the
validity of the assessment. The most significant leverage that the jurisdictions have when
it comes to collecting TUMF is the fact that a permit will not issue. If exceptions are
made that allows the permit to issue prior to the payment of TUMF,which would be the
case if an appellant were able to avoid the payment pending appeal, the agency would
suffer a risk of collection that the policy was intended to avoid. An exception also opens
the door to a challenge by a later appellant who is denied a similar exception.
r VON,lD,T
Preston I Gatesl Ellis u
Jamesk@prestoagates.com
(2 13) 217-4337
February 14, 2000 7E�f
�%TD
SS ? 7 aw
Ms.Patricia A. Larson 135C.
Executive Director
Coachella Valley Association of Governments
73-710 Fred Waring Drive
Suite 200
Palm Desert,CA 92260
Re: Appeal of TUMF by Geopetro, LLC
Dear Ms.Larson:
I am writing on behalf of Geopetro,LLC and its owner Mr.Damon Prieto in response to
your letter dated February 4,2000. Furthermore, i understand that the TUMF appeal has been
pulled from the agenda of the Technical Advisory Committee(TAQ meeting last Friday,
because the TLW has not yet been paid to the City of Palm Springs.
On behalf of Geopetro,LLC and Mr. Prieto, I accept the representations that you have
made in your letter to the effect that the Coachella Valley Association of Governments
("CVAG")will refund the TUMF payment plus interest which may have accrued upon receiving
such direction from the Tribal Council of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. I have
been authorized to inform you that subject to the agreed upon conditions,Geopetro,LLC will
Pay the TUMF to the City of Palm Springs no later than February 28,2000.
Please contact me at(213)217-4337,if you have any questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
J es K.Kawahara
JKK jkk
cc: Richard Milanovich,Agua Caliente Tribal Chairman
Art Bunce,Tribal Attorney
Tom Davis,Tribal Planning Director K I
MtMA0000t�L=W 211400SOOPM
LAW FIRM I A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING OTHER LIMITED LIABILITY ENTITIES L
rr—
725 SOUTH FIGUEROA STREET.SUITE 2100 LOS ANGELES.CA$0017.5421 TELL(2131 624.2395 FAXs(2131 624.5924 W".prest0ngetes.e0m
Alxhoon COeuf d'Alene Mens anon i..s.. , . n.....-n. . .. . ... - I -
Apra.-06-00 09:17A Coache11&Va11ayAZZOCOfGOV 750 340 6949 P.02
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANAXNG
This Memorandum of Understanding("MOT')is made and entered into on this J 6 day
Of 1998, by and betweca the Coachella Valley Association of Governments
("CVAG")and the Aqua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians("Ague Caliente').
WHEREAS, CVAG was established for the purpose of coordinating and improving local
governments'response to common issues impacting on the Riverside County desert area; _
WHEREAS,the territory of several sovereign Indian nations lie within the Riverside County
desert area, all of which are impacted by the area-wide and regional concern common to CVAG
member jurisdictions;
WHEREAS,the CVAG member jurisdictions recognize that Indian Tribes located within
the Riverside County desert area can contribute to and benefit from participation in the inter-
governmental forum that CVAG offers;
WHEREAS, however, CVAG is a public entity organized by virtue of a joint powers
agreement entered into on or about November 1973 and thereafter amended from time to time(the
"Joint Powers Agreement") that defines CVAG's authority and provides the method by which
CVAG shall exercise that authority;
WHEREAS,further, CVAG may act only upon a majority vote of the parties to the Joint
Powers Agreement as provided therein,and any actions not so approved would be outside CVAG's
lawful authority and subject to avoidance by a court of competent jurisdiction;
WHEREAS,pursuant to Goverment Code Section 6500 at seq. an Indian nation may not
be a party to a joint powers agreement but a joint powers agency may contract with an Indian nation
1 IA
Ap,v-06-00 09: 17A CoachrallaVallOYAssocO'Mov 760 340 5949 p_O4
serve at the pleasure of the Tribal Council and may be removed at any time,with or without cause,
at the sole discmdon of the Trbal Council.
The tribe shall be entitled to five representatives on the General Assembly,each of whom
must be a current member of the Tribal Council.
Tribal representatives shall comply with all conflict of interest provisions adopted by CVAG
in the same manner as the representatives of the signatories to the Joint Powers Agreement.
2. Tribal Contributions
Agua Caliente shall be obligated to contribute to CVAG's budget on an annual basis and in
the same mamrer as the CVAG member jurisdictions,except that the tribe's contribution shall be
calculated by reference and shall be equal to the lowest contribution assessed any single CVAG
member jurisdiction.
In the event that this MOU is terminated in any manner, CVAG shall return within a
reasonable time of any request therefor a portion of the corresponding annual contribution of$7,130
(or the lowest amount paid by any single CVAG member)prorated by reference to the number of
months of tribal participation in that current fiscal year. CVAG shall have no obligation to return
any annual contribution or portion thereof for any fiscal year prior to the year in which the tribe's
participation was terminated
3. Condition of Trbal Participation on TUMF Matters
Tribal Participation,as provided herein,on any matter related to the collection,expenditure
or administration of Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee(TOME)monies shall be conditioned
on the Tnbe's support and collection of TUMF.
3 f ► 1 � �
APti -06-00 09: 17A CoachollaVallQyAsZOCOPGOV 760 340 5949
• P.06
Modification This MOU may not be modified except by written agreement executed by
duly empowered and authorized representatives of all parties.
Agua Caliente Band of Cabuilla Indians
By:
Richard Milanovicb,Tribal Chairman
Coachella Valley Association of Governments
By.
Mad Glassman,Chair
Attest by,_gAZU'.
Patricia A.Larson,Executive Director
P-IMMMOCUMAWACAU 5 IA3Y
CVAG
COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
SWO • Cathedral City • Coachella • Desert Hot Springs • Indian Wells • India • La Guinta • Palm Desert • Palm Springs • Rancho Mirage
County of Riverside • Ague Caliente Band of Cahul la Indlahs • Cabazon Band of Mission Indiana
January 7, 2000
Mayor Will Kleindienst
City of Palm Springs
3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, Ca 92262
Re: Response to December 22nd letter regarding Geopetro
Dear Will:
I am in receipt of your letter of December 22nd regarding City Council Resolution
19701. The action by the City was absolutely correct since any waiver of TUMF can only
be done by the CVAG Executive Committee.
There seem to be two courses of action for Geopetro at this stage. One is to appeal
for a waiver of TUMF to the Executive Committee. We have received no notice of appeal
from Geopetro. The other is to go directly to the Tribal Council for relief. Richard
Milanovich has always said that the Tribe supports TUMF and its collection. However, this
particular situation is different than most since the majority owner is Indian. I will not go
further into the specifics of this direction except to suggest that it might be a good for us
to talk to Richard/or the Tribal Council in this regard.
However, the real thrust of your letter is concern that if the Tribal Council should
allow the developer to go forward without the payment of TUMF, the City of Palm Springs
will be stuck paying the fee even though the City did everything legally possible to collect
the fee. Clearly, that would be an undue and unfair hardship on the City. Under such
circumstances, CVAG would = require the City to pay the fee.
I am sure you are thinking that very thing has happened one time in the past. I would
like to discuss that with you, but for the purposes of this letter I want to assure you that
it has never been the policy of CVAG to hold a jurisdiction liable for TUMF payment if it has
fulfilled every possible legal requirement such as appears to be the case with Geopetro.
Lastly, it may be that you believe CVAG needs a formal policy statement in our TUMF
procedures which makes the subject clear. Staff can go in that direction if you wish and
we will certainly let Doug Evans know of any and all committee meetings. I do not believe
any such policy statement will be controversial. I'd like to chat with you about this when
you have time.
Sincerely,
Patricia A. Larson
Executive Director , ( �
cc Allyn Waggle
Carol Cross
73-710 Fred Waring Drive,Suite 200 Palm Desert,CA S2280 0 (760]346.1127 FAX[7801340a949
O� PALM S
City of Palm Springs
Office of the Mayor
rou�.o 32e0 Go
7o1Wuia Y°u War'Pa(m Sprinss,Cddmja 92262
Cg1I FO IL TEL(760)323.82N•FAx(760)323-e207•MD(760)VA-9527
7JAN
HIED
December22, 1999 - 82000Mrs.Patricia Larson,Executive Director -^
Coachella Valley Association of Governments
73-710 Fred Waring Drive,Suite 200
Palm Desert,CA 92260
Dear Mrs.Larson;
At its meeting Wednesday,December 15',the city Council adopted Resolution 19701 upholding the City stairs
decision denying the issuance of a building permit to Geopetro LLC. Geopetro LLC is a company whose majority
controlling owner is a member ofthe Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians.
Geopetro LLC's appeal focused on whether or not a Tribal Member developing reservation land has an obligation to
pay TUMF. As this was the appeal's focus,in adopting Resolution 19701,the City Council voted to propose to
CVAG that any city be relieved of its TUMF obligation with respect to any project where a sovereign governing
entity,such as an Indian Tribe,determines that a development project on reservation land is exempt from the
payment ofTUMF. The City should not be held liable for the TUMF due to the action of a sovereign nation
overruling the City's requitement and over which the City has no fimber control.
It would be helpful if you would forward this proposal to the appropriate CVAG subcommittees and to the Executive
Committee of CVAG for then consideration.
Enclosed please find a copy of the appeal. This is included to help you to understand the applicant's situation and
position on this matter.
1 would appreciate your advising City Planning Director Doug Evans when the various committees of CVAG will be
considering this matter. Also,ifyou need additional information,please contact Mr.Evans at 323-8245.
1 hope you have a wonderful holiday season.
Sincerely,
e
" ". G. KID
William G.Kleindienst
Mayor
IA %
Post Office Box 2743 0 Palm Springs, California 92263-2743
CVAG
COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
Blythe • Cathedral City - Coachella • Desert Hot Springs - Indian Wags - Indio •.Le points • Palm Desert - Palm Springs • Rancho Mirage
County of Riverside • Ague Calients Send of Cahugla Indians"- Cabazon Band of Mission Indiana
June 15,2000
Tom Davis
Planning Director
Agua Caliente Band
of Cahuilla Indians
600 E.Tahquitz Cyn Way
Palm Springs,CA 92262
RE: Administrative Record-TUMF Appeal of Geopetro LLC
Dear Tom,
The following documentation is being forwarded to you as CVAG's administwive record
of the TUW appeal Sled by Geopetro,LLC.
Please feel flee to call me at 346-1127 ext. 118 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS
C"dam (�'s.-S,
Carol Cross
Associate Regional Planner
D ECE # yE
2. D
PLAIVIVIAfG DIVlS(ON
►vrre.pv.wi...u.r.�.s•.+.ro.,�,uc.p
IA37
73-710 Fred Waring Drive,Suits 200 • Palm Desert,CA S2260 (7601346.1127 - FAX f7801340 5949
BACKUP
MATERIAL
CVAG
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
FRIDAY, MAY 121 2000
10:00 A.M.
CVAG OFFICES, ROOM 1 IS
"CVAG
COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
Myths • Cathedral City - Coachella - Desert Hot Springs - Indian Wells • Indio - I.a.Guinte • Palm Desert - Palm Springs • Rancho Mirage
County of Riverside - Aqua Caliente Band of Cahulla Indiana • Cabazon Band of Mission Indiana
May 3,2000
TO: Technical Advisory Committee(TAC)
FROM: Carol Cross,Associate Regional Planner
RE: Transportation Uniform Ktigation Fee CWW Appeal filed by Criste,Pippin&
Golds on behalf of Geopet ro LLC for TUMF assessed on their proposed project
consisting of it convenience market and fuel dispensers located at 3600 Ramon
Road East(APN: 677-280-024).
In accordance with Section 7 of the adopted TUMF Ordinance,"An applicarit who disputes the fee
may file a written notice of appeal with the Executive Committee of CVAG within 15 days of
imposition of the fee.The Executive Committee of CVAG must decide the appeal by majority vote
and within 60 days of the filing of the appeal."
STAFF RECOMMENDED MOTION:
THAT THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY CObZffTTEE RECOMMEND THE EXECUTIVE
COM[MWTEE DENY TIM APPEAL OF GEOPETRO LLC ON THE BASIS THAT THE
TUMFIS A FAIR AND EQUITABLE METHOD OF MITIGATING VEHICLE TRIPS AND
RESULTANT IMPACTS TO THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
GENERATED BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
On January 14,2000,CVAG received an appeal letter from Geopetro LLC for TUMF assessed to
their 3,748 square foot (sf) convenience market (including 16 fuel dispensers) in the amount of
$134,992.75.TUMF,however,was paid on April 14,2000 initiating the formal appeal process.
TUMF was calculated on the proposed development as follows:
Convenience Market - $21,985.60 per 1,000 square feet(sf)
$21,985.60:3.748=$82,402.03
Vehicle Fueling Position(VFP) - $4,382.56 per position
$4,382.56x12 = $52,590.72 ) A 3?
TUMF in the amount of$134,992.75 was correctly calculated and assessed by city staff.
78.71D Fred Waring Drive.Suite 200 - Palm Desert CA 92260 • r7Rrn aaR 11 P7 • FAY r7An1 9Ar1 R0A0
COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
T[JW Appeal
Geoparo LLC
Page-2-
Plans submitted to the city of Palm Springs identifies 16 VFP, however, use of the Convenience
Market category provides a credit of up to 4 VFP without additional TUMF assessment. Therefore,
TUMF was assessed on 12 VFP
Although the appellant contends that costs incurred to improve the pubic right-of-way on Ramon
Road should be sufficient contribution towards transportation infrastructure,as a regional fee TUMF
exclusively addresses vehicle trips generated by new development, and is in addition to fees
required by the permitting jurisdiction. The appellant is not paying fees above and beyond what any
other developer would be required to pay for a similar project.
It is the opinion of CVAG staff that TUMF is applicable to the proposed development and was
correctly assessed according to adopted TUMF policy.
M1\admie`�ol\t cb-12 \G j--App.Impd(
V
COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
PROCEDURES FOR T IMF APPEALS
The Executive Committee has named the TAC as its Hearing Body for TUMF appeals.
The order of the hearing should be as follows:
• CVAG Staff review,
• Questions of staff by the TAC
• Hearing opened by the Chairman
• The party with the burden of proof(usually the Appellant) speaks first.
• Any party rebutting the Appellants statements (usually a city or county
representative) speaks next.
• Due process must be observed. This means the Appellant is entitled to:
1. Notice;
2. A meaningful opportunity to be heard;
3. As much time as (s)he wishes to take as long as (s)he is on the
subject and M repeating himself, and;
4. All information known by members of the Hearing Board if such
information will enter into their decision making.The decision must be
based only on information revealed during the Hearing. If Hearing
Board members know something learned outside the hearing, that
must be stated during the Hearing If it is to be used in making the
decision.
• The Appellant and rebutting parties can speak alternately as many times as
necessary providing the party with the burden of proof is allowed to speak
last.
• If desired, the Hearing is dosed.
• Questions by the TAC.
• Discussion by the TAC.
• Action by the TAC.
Fn.vn.wgona.m�o
.1, h. 1Y VV II 1A ) 11 YO
I11L:1 v, lilJ�� lLu ev v-- wva •••
f
'OACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
11ythe • Cvthadral City • Coachella • Desert Hat Springe • Indian Wells • Indio • La.Oulnte • Palm Desert • Palm Springs • Rancho Mirage
County of Riverside • Aguo Collents Vend of Cohuilla Indiana • Cabazon Bend of Mission Indiana
TUMF COLLECTION FAO'RM Q < �/
JURISDICTION: t� 1 //0�� / �?7 . J/B'(�1LDIN ERMIT NO.:
BUILDER/DEVELOPER: 7�-D C
PROJECT NAME: 1'I 1-n T
PROJECTADDRESS: /S4147)O—YL
TOTAL SO. FT. OF LOT: f TOTAL SO. FT. OF BUILDING 48
LOT NO.— TRACT NO. 2-810 Z ^ APN: 77 - Z)
aR1#1Hf##It#1}111#t*f}!f}#f/rtM}lilt!lffl#fY}ff'f#t#t#Mtt1f#M1if#Y4iY#YrtfSiYft#f}1t1#fYf#Hrf}i##ff#i#Yllfifilt}fY
,SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED ONLY:
( )- SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED $794.31 PER UNIT=$794.31 LAND USE CODE= 1110
ALL PTHER USES:
( NEW { ) ADDITION
LAND USE CODE LAND USE UNIT CODE I TUMF PER UNIT 1l OF UNRS $ TOTAL PER USE
1 z z 3 C' i7i�-S f f! r 983-4° x 3 77f`, = $
TOTAL ' � Char9cc�
S`/b. 7Z Un dpY
RETAIL SERVICES: TOTAL FEE DUE, ALL PHASES Cs 13 207•
COMMENTS/REMARKS 4
-/�/�l�
Sta amelOepartment Date Permit Issued
tfalff flrfeMt#wtfttftl#feNiterittef##aff M»tM1e##t#tft}1#1#y#rrNltar»t+fr1}+f.f#smartrlesf 1+rf#ta1+f 1+.f.1+
FOR CVAG USE ONLY
YES NO
IS FEE PROPERLY COMPUTED?
IS ALL INFORMATION PROVIDED?
DATE DATAATA ENTERED
M.long"
73.710 Fred Wering Drive,Suita 200 Palm Desert,CA 92260 (760)346-1127 FAX(760)340.5949
to
• •♦ ♦ VU 1♦1.II L♦ lJ
u♦11 u• IAL;1 JII\IPUJ ILL uV V. VVu. ' "+y
€a yz crrYOFPBUILDING PERMIT
We twraaac rwrcrleal aloe a i « a gIf
auwarrw 01 26 99 �" 1553 1800.00 xlelaer aerwlrox x x x x X
u.wu.e..
Geo afro LLC P.O. Box 1328 Palm Desert 760 776-6768
aeaur. a%.m..
Owner
aaw. rar.w.«wa 750,000.00
Cadiz & Cadiz 110 W. Esealones San Clemente
Tovalwer Am" ea"nl see receipt
3Gp En a. 17620 Sherman 0217 Van Nuys, CA ^""`""'
aw a raa p�,y�
3 28907 3600 RAMON ROAD EAST 001°np1 3,475.60
m N.yM Ow.sv AA rM.IMN aun6Maa
52901 M 83 8460 e0t3101 547.34
$**whom aft AGO, 1,40011%mble SWUM
CoragtllClad 677-280-024 157.50
BNaa .
Footaoa 3748' 0 4712 9o,44" 100.00
ur sepy a.n twml. arwu.r nn.
aoda Pwerb.«a.
Cercial 2 VN X 0 0 00f�7P1 60.00
� cwwoa.rr
Construct Convenience market with gas pumps and °Dif10' 3,384.00
canopies. alF.,rrl.w�w..
mrar++e 0.00
alr.rrna
mr 0.00
a...rnp.eaal
46.00
Market: 3,748 s.f. a.•..w►
Canopies: 4,712 s.f. 3.744.00
tlwJynrllw.
Tel 0.00
ai• *&Wsaonnlo
ooa+owaanoo�lotnlmn/ulmtnawoncs i907170t 13,858.00
LWORTANT
11,188.56
TMmwnaatNapamlK"AotahW0 bran appraNat ift"cnaanypravWONaaW FIND
eigraeoraNNsrloaasata4w. uwno
134 992.75
m �pamb*n the Bo o amid 8d*bvbg an Me po. t]uulpsa m pYno an net wle,aagrw 0.00
PW*AftTM owner and/eraomn�la a ntpomMla fa a4tabOl o al properW 1M*L AN Ld go&Mm be �'
3,750.00
rr...r r..
TNaaemW�YlwphaMwwkioirotaprtedMt20aaysarxmaod�ntadaysUaposat»Man ao+-m= 905.00
Napaaaom.
f aNytMl am hrrAlar vd8r an ragakamans a tM qty a Pun 8pN18o a thgr apptymtNa 0.00
panataW W Wenpnd datd�ao ragoYomaua mwt tw oornpNtad pdar m 6at ggpaglp�and rise no
aardpadonaaealponeyaaNl»hauadwGItodrfanaNtaaaraqu4anrmoanmet Ieoftsot 0.00
fbaw X
andet %vW1AabdarMokMb1W@WWc r*M
T07ALFPB 176 208.75
J "
ukkasunftflargiftlmpro IpodautWrIadand odaNINSPECTORB COPY NERIATTHUt119lR B 3904
it
JAiy 2000
NOTICE OF APPEAL BY:-
Identification of Appellant:
Geopetro LLC
c/o Criste, Pippin & Golds
73-550 Alessandro Drive, Suite 200
Palm Desert, California 92260
Phone: (760) 862-1111
Facsimile: (760) 776-4197
Action Appealed:
The refusal of the Tribal Council of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
to reverse the City Council of the City of Palm Springs' December 15, 1999
refusal to issue a building permit. (Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and
correct copy of Resolution No. 19701, as revised, denying the permit.) The action
of the City Council,pursuant to the agreement between the City of Palm Springs
and the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, was appealed to the Tribal
Council of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. The Tribal Council, by a
letter dated January 4, 2000, directed the matter be appealed to the Coachella
Valley Association of Governments ("CVAG")prior to its ruling on the issue.
(Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the letter of January 4,
2000).
Grounds for Appeal:
Geopetro LLC is a company formed by its majority, controlling owner, Damon
Prieto. Mr. Prieto is a Tribal Member of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla
Indians ("the Tribe"). Geopetro LLC seeks to develop a gas station and
convenience store on Mr. Prieto's Indian trust property located at 3600 East
Ramon Road, Palm Springs, California.
The City Council of the City of Palm Springs (hereafter "the City") refused to
grant a permit until Mr. Prieto pays a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
("TUMF fee")
The TUMF fee constitutes an unauthorized and federally preempted exaction on
Indian economic activity within the reservation boundaries. Denial of this permit
based on this exaction is improper.
Relief Soueht: ) 6� V2.
A decree from CVAG that Geopetro is not required to pay the TUMF Flee..
Backeround
Mr.Prieto is the beneficial owner of an Indian trust allotment within the reservation
boundaries of the Tribe. Mr.Prieto,through Golden State Enterprise LLC,a company in which
he is the controlling owner,is constructing a phased development on his allotment. As the initial
phase of this development,named Airport Plaza,Mr. Prieto,through another company he
controls, Geopetro(the appellant herein),is developing a convenience market with gas pumps
and canopies. Airport Plaza is an Indian-owned development on reservation land.
On January 26, 1999, Geopetro submitted an application to the City for all required
building permits,plan checks,inspections,and fees. Among the fees requested by the City is a
TUMF fee of$134,992.75. The City is collecting the TUMF fee on behalf of CVAG.
On October 25, 1999,the City of Palm Springs,Department of Planning&Building,
Building Division refused to issue a building permit to Geopetro unless the TUMF fee was paid
by Geopetro.
Because of the numerous possibilities relating to the appropriate jurisdiction to hear
Geopetro's appeal,the appeal was filed with various bodies. On November 3, 1999,an appeal of
that decision was made to the City Council of the City of Palm Springs and the City of Palm
Springs Administrative Appeals Board. The Administrative Appeals Board declined to hear the
appeal because it did not fall within its jurisdiction. The City Council accepted the appeal and
ultimately ruled on it.
On November 5, 1999,the appeal was filed with the Tribal Council. Upon leaming the
City Council had decided to hear the appeal, the Tribal Council dismissed the appeal without
prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
On November 9, 1999, the appeal was filed with CVAG. On November 18, 1999,upon
learning the City Council would hear the appeal,and thus the administrative remedies within the
City had not been exhausted,the CVAG appeal was withdrawn.
On December 15, 1999,the City Council of the City of Palm Springs heard the appeal of
Geopetro to the Department of Planning&Building,Building Division's decision. Subsequent
to this decision,the City Council issued Resolution No. 19701,as revised. Geopetro makes this
appeal from this final action of the City,because the TUMF fee constitutes an unauthorized
exaction on the economic activity of an individual Indian on his allotted trust land within the
Reservation boundaries.
On December 27, 1999, Geopetro appealed Resolution No. 19710,as revised,to the
Tribal Council pursuant to the Tribal ordinance governing appeals.
e ' t
Jdn 4,2000,the Tribal Council ruled that an appeal to CVAG was necessary to
complete administrative remedies with CVAG,thus denying the app
eal to the Tribal Council.
This appeal is timely filed pursuant to that notice and section 7 of the CVAG TUMF Ordinance.
13 I
AA
Resolution No. 19701
Geopetro appealed to the Tribal Council from the City's Resolution No. 19701, which
sets forth the following rulings and rationales. Geopetro appealed from Sections 1, 3 and 4,
which are still at issue by virtue of the Tribal Council's ruling:
Section IA. A Building Permit cannot be issued because of items one through four regarding
the approval of a Final Map and Final Development Plan. Geopetro was informed that these
matters would be resolved once the issue of the TUMF fee was resolved. Geopetro is prepared to
seek approval of the Final Map and Final Development Plan once the TUMF fee payment is
resolved.
Section 113. The City has concluded that it "does not have the authority to, nor does it think it
appropriate to waive" the TUMF fee for six enumerated reasons.
1. TUMF fees are derived based on the anticipated impact a proposed development will
have on the regional transportation system.
2. The City collects TUMF fees in a uniform and equitable manner consistent with
guidelines included in Measure A and provided by CVAG.
3. CVAG has provisions for a formal appeal of TUMF fees.
4. TUMF and Measure "A" funds are utilized to address regional transportation needs.
5. Transportation improvements funded with TUMF fees have benefitted both Indian owned
lands and non-Indian owned lands.
6. Failure to collect TUMF fees in a uniform and equitable manner could jeopardize the
City's receipt of Measure A funds.
Section 2. The City pledged to "reconsider the issues raised her if the applicant submits an
amended Preliminary Planned Development addressing the conditions the applicant wishes to
change along with a Final Planned Development District consistent therewith to the Planning
Commission."
Section 3. The City advised Geopetro to "pursue relief from the TUMF [fee] requirement
through the CVAG administrative process with the understanding that the applicant will be
relieved of the condition if so relieved by CVAG"; that the City "directed the City Manager to
propose a measure to CVAG on behalf of the City providing that any city be relieved of its
TUMF [fee] obligation with respect to any project where a sovereign governing entity such as an
Indian Tribe determines that a development project on reservation land is exempt from the
payment of TUMF [fees]; and shall bring this matter to the attention of the Tribal Council and
shall seek the Council's support concerning CVAG's consideration of this matter."
14
Section 4. The City Clerk is instructed to mail a copy of this resolution along with
information regarding "formal appeal of TUMF (fee]to CVAG."
TUMF Fees
In November 1988,Riverside County voters approved Measure A,which authorized a
one-half cent increase in sales tax over a twenty-year period to be used for transportation
purposes. The fiord of money will pay for 25%of regional transportation improvements. The
TUW program was developed by CVAG to create an additional 25%for improvements to the
transportation system. The remaining 50010 must be fimded by local jurisdictions using federal,
state or local funds.
CVAG describes TUMF as "a development impact assessment which will provide
funding for transportation improvements throughout the Coachella Valley dictated by the
demands of new development." In other words,a tax or exaction on new development.
The assessment is basedaipon the number of vehicle trips the new development is
expected to generate. The fee is calculated based on a table established by CVAG. The fee is
collected by the local jurisdiction and transferred to CVAG for allocation to the Regional Arterial
Program.
TUMF Fees Cannot Be Collected from Indian Developers on Indian Land
The federal purposes implicit in setting aside Indian lands for the residence of the tribe—
self government and economic support—preempt state and local jurisdiction to tax Indians.The
reasoning applies to all forms of taxation and exaction. Mescalero Apache Tribe v.Jones.411
U.S. 145, 148 (1973). As a matter of federal law,state or local government cannot impose a tax
on Indian economic activity or Indian trust land located within a reservation. This is generally
recognized as the per se rule against Indian taxation. McClanahan v Arizona Tax Commission
411 U.S. 164(1973).
Federal preemption arises from extensive federal Indian land legislation,such as the
restrictions on alienation cited above. The protection of Indian trust land through federal
legislation has been one of the principal means by which the federal government has sought to
.secure the economic well being and tribal autonomy of native Americans. "If tribal lands were
not subject to restraints on alienation and tax immunities,market forces and state tax assessors
would eventually erode Indian ownership of the reservation." Boisclair v. Superior Court (1990)
51 Cal.3d 1140.
Mr.Prieto's land was allotted to him pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 951 et seq. This land is
held in trust by the United State for the benefit of Mr. Prieto. Local governments are preempted
from regulating the land,which is subject to tribal regulation only.
t I - -
15
Moreover, the fact that California is a Public Law 280 state does not change the
presumption against taxation or regulation of Indian land. Bryan v. Itasca County, 426 U.S. 373
(1976) [holding that Public Law 280 did not authorize the taxation of Indians].
The TUMF fee is based on a local sales tax provision approved by Measure A.
Therefore, such a fee is unlawful under federal law. To the extent the fee is a disguised sales tax
on the patrons of the store, it is an impermissible sales tax. If the TUMF fee is characterized as a
fee to local government for transportation infrastructure improvement, it is an impermissible
encumbrance on the economic activity of a Tribal Member on Tribal lands. In any regard, the
TUMF fee, as applied to economic activity on Indian land, is a per se violation of federal law,
which preempts local law.
The City cannot withhold a building permit based on a failure to pay an unauthorized
exaction that is preempted by federal law.
The Collection of TUMF Fees Violates the City's Agreement with the Tribe
The City and the Tribe, in an agreement with the Tribe over the application of zoning and
land use regulations, entered into an agreement that allowed the City to "collect all fees
heretofore collected or as may be amended and reasonably related to the cost of..." zoning and
land use ordinances. This agreement was entered into before the passage of Measure A.
The TUMF fees are not part of the agreement between the City and the Tribe, which sets
forth the exclusive mechanism for the City to charge fees to Tribal members with respect to
zoning issues on Tribal land. The City has admitted that it has negotiated with the Tribe to
update the existing contract, and to include the issue of TUMF fees, but no agreement has been
reached. Therefore, the City cannot impose payment of such fees as a condition to issuing
permits for current development of Tribal land.
There are no other contracts or agreements between the Tribe and any governing body
that expressly authorizes the imposition of TUMF fees upon an Indian developer of his own
allotted trust land.
Geopetro Is Providing Transportation Infrastructure
The stated reason for the imposition of the TUMF fee is to pay for improvements to
transportation infrastructure. Geopetro (and its related entities) is paying for all the
transportation infrastructure improvements required by this development on Indian land. This
collection of a transportation tax without acknowledgment of the substantial costs incurred by
Geopetro is not fair or equitable.
Geopetro will incur the following costs to improve the public right-of-way on Ramon
Road near Airport Plaza:
k /�9Y 7
4
cIW
[aing Removal 24,010.0tall Paving 57,967.0c Signal 160,078.0c Striping 19,000.0 and Gutters 13,320.0t Manholes 1,375.0verlay 5,120.0tter 3,750.0
Path 19,950.0
us Tumout 10,800.0
landscaping
dicapped Ramps 1,750.
!walk 12,000.0
rhead 49,038.0
Right-of-Way 65,000.0al Trans ortatio 44S 0.958.00astracture ve a is
In addition, Geopetro also intends to widen Ramon Road,which will require it to permit a
right-of-way to the City for additional property. While some of these expenses are those
normally associated with the development of a piece of property,certain of these expenses
There is no basis to impose a TUMF Fee in addition to these improvements.
Conclusion
There exists no legal basis for the imposition of TUMF fees on Indian trust allotment land
within the boundaries of the Reservation. As such,CVAG should issue a waiver of the TUMF
fee for this project.
17
RESOLUTION NO. 19701
OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA,PROVIDING A DECISION ON AN APPEAL BY
GEOPETROLLC,ONTHE REFUSAL OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
PLANNING AND BUILDING,BUILDING DIVISION TO GRANT
A BUILDING PERMU FOR ARCO AMRM MINI-MARKET
(PHASE ONE,PLANNEDDEVELOPMFNf DISTRIG72S2)UNTIL.
THE APPELLANT SUBMITS AN APPLICATION IN
CONSPLIANCE WITH ALLCITYZONINGREGULATIONS AND
OTHER CONDMONS OFAPPROVAL;AND ALL APPLICABLE
FEES ARE PAID.
WHEREAS,Geopeao LLC,a companyformcdbyits ui jnrity,eontmllingown=TnW M=bcrDamon
Prieto,has filed an appeal to the City Council ofthc City of Palm Springs regarding the refusal of the
Building Division of the Ci VsPlatning and BuildingDepzRmrntto issue abuilding permit fora3100
squue footauni-market withgasolinepumpingfacilities oa 122 acres oflandlocato3onthe=ffi side of
Ramon Road,west of Avenida Evelita,M-1 Zone,Section 18;and
WHEREAS,thesubiedpropertyiswithin=areawheethcCityCouncilofthe City ofPalm Springs,in-
passingResolution 19430 onDecember 16,1998,appmvedTentativePateel Map 2S907a0dPrclimk=y
Planned Development District 25Z and
WHEREAS,ittpassingF6�oludon 19430 onDccember 16,1998 the City Council included aspartoftho
resolution Conditions of Approval;and
W IIEREAS.the appeal has been filed with the City appmdmately ten monttss after City council Passage
of Resolution 19430;and
WHEREAS,Section2.0S.040 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code states that aotiee of an appeal of
actiontakenbyanad,.idmtativeofEceroradmia stativeag=cyofthecityshallbcAlednolaterthanten
daysfollowingthodateoftbomailingto appelantt ofna is ofthtacdoufrcmviMchtbtappcal istakeaar,
if there is no such mailing atdlornorc is regtvred,no later than fifteen days following the date of the action
which is the subject of the appeal;and
WHEREAS.inaccotdancewifittbsTn'balLaadUuAppcalOrdiaanceeaactedDeamha12,1978,the
aopeel ofa decisionofthe City CcuncilmustbemadctothcTnbal Council wh1drxtendaysfrom thedate
of receipt by an appellant of the written decision of the City Council being appeals;and
WHEREAS.onDeoember 15,1999 the City Council held a dulynoticed public firing onsaid appeal
and received testimony from the applicant and other persons present,and having considered the written
and oral testimony presented at such hearing.
BEff PMOLVEDBYTHE CTIYCOUNCILOFTEE CITYOFPALM SPRINGS,AS FOLLOWS:
Section1. Thattheappealofthedeceonb)t PlanningandBw2crmgDepa—t,BuildingDivision
to refuse to issue abuilding permit is overruled and the decision stands based on the
following findings:
A. A Building Permit cannot be issued for the following reasons:
,2evr s-E� - l ? i
EXHIBIT
1R
819701
Page 2
1. AbwUMpamitmaynotb-ba,.edurA&cF2WMapbappmvedbythe
CiryCoumpand&eFiadDewlop nm?lani3approvedbythePlam4
Commission and,in fact,the applicant has not applied for a Final
DevelopmealPlanwheom equtn*a.JbalDevelopmentPlanbasnot
been approved by the Planning Commission or the City Council.
2. -The Conditions of Approval required to be complied with prior to
issttarce ofa Building Pamitbave not been met.
3. City Suffhavaadvisedtheapplianibothwsbally and in writing on
la=uy28,1999;M=M,19 ,=dMay4,1999ofdefielendainthe
application for a building permit and the applicant bas not submitted
materials to address tLese deficiencies.
4. 7he applicant Wed toapped&eTeontiveParcel Map and PwRailnuy
PlaeimdDevelopenetttDirduatdtheknmaoeafacryhtdidiogy�i[muss
be consistent with*Am appmvale.
B. Onirsmetits*cCityComSdoanotbavethomW oftlo nwdoesit
thidehappropdarerowaivetheTtantposmtioaUniformMtdgadonFee
(lUMF)wbich was passed on November 8.1989 by the voters of
$iventde County(Measma"A')IN the:following reasons,
1. TtW is derived based On the sndeipated impact a proposed
development will have onthenaioad transportation system.
2. '1beCiyccgk sTUbffinawffm ad%dnblemmt mndu=u b
guidelines iordudedinMasmeA mAprovi&A by Cosa Valley
Association of Governments(CVA%
3. CVAGbaspovisions for afwrmiappealofTUMF.
4. TUMF and Mum "A" fiends are Ufflined to address regional
ucaospoetaddon needs.
S. Trmsportadoniopvv=emfmdedwi&TLTWhavebmefiuedbmh
Indian owaad lands and non-killan Owned UndL
6. FOure to collect TUbff in a tm1furm and equitable mancer could
jeopudiu the CWs rec$ptof Measure"A"tfmds.
Sudon2. TbattheCiWCounot7vM=condderdmisomedsedhereiftheappliearrtatrbmitsan
ammdedPrelimioaayPleaedDevelopmemsddn�agtba000�tiOnstLetytp6eanewdsa
tocimpalwgwithaF•maiPbmnedDevelop oMDWktcomistmtthuvMthtotbe
rhmingCominission.
SecdonI ThattheapplieamisadvisedtopursustelieffmmtbaTtlbffrequirement&a ghdw
CVAGadotiOismtmpo=vatheu do =ftdnuhea BcwtwMbeelievedof
tic eondidon if so relleved by CVAG;thutbe Covocfi duets the City Manager to
paoposeammmtoCVAOonbehaifoftbeC!Wproviftd ua WdWberelievedof
t
FEB-02-00 BED 16:47 CITY OF PS FIKKICE FAX W. 760 322 8320 P.04
R19701
Page 3
itsTtllvff obligadoneHtltcespeum nq+pmJeetwhetoasovaeigteg��8�tY�
as enladiantHbe detCrmines that a developmeazproject on waervadon Inad is exempt
fromthepa MMofi W.that the C!vbbna*ihaUWwg*ismat=tothew6 don
of the Ttibal CotmeU and stall seek the Coim0's stOba ommning CVAG's
cona cmdonof*amatter.
Seaion4: ThatticCbYClerkisiascuetedtomaUaoopyofddsraoltedonwduappeUemalongwtdt
infottaadon wacemingthe formal appeal ofUWvo CVAO:
Adopted Us11 day ofj 1999.
Ayes: 1OCinfiien%;Jones,Hodges,Oder,Rell"puWn
Noes: None
Absent;None
Abstiiallone
Attest
CifYOFP CiS
ay -
CigMatuga `�CrtyChit
REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORbt:
cAueyT�
a y January 4, 2000
a p� GEOPETRO LLC
UIL�P� c/o Mr. Jefffrey S. Flashman, Esq.
CRISTE, PIPPEN &GOLDS
73-550 Alessandro Drive, Ste. 200
514 HUNDRED Palm Desert CA 92260
Re: NOTICE OF APPEAL NO. 21
EAST TAHQUITL CANYON WAY RESOLUTION NO. 19701 OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
(APPLICATION OF TUMF FEES)
PALM SPRINGS Dear Mr. Flashman:
Please be advised that on December 27, 1999 the Tribal office
OILIFORNA received your "Notice of Appeal' and your filing fee of $300.00. This
action corpplies with Section II.B.2 of Tribal Ordinance No. 5. In
accordance with Section II.B.4 you have thirty (30) days from
92262 December 27, 1999 or by 5:00 p.m. January 26, 2000 to file in the
Tribal Council office:
TELEPHONE
(760) 325-3400 "a. A complete duplicate copy of the record and material
previously considered bylthe] City Council, including
maps, exhibits, photographs; reports, etc.
F95 b. Transcripts of an and all proceedings before the City
C/60)325-0593 P Y P 9 Y
Council, including study sessions, at which the subject
matter on appeal was considered, or discussed. A
certified copy of the City Council minutes will be
acceptable, in lieu of stenographic transcripts, provided
that such minutes are in sufficient detail to demonstrate
that all points raised by the appellant were thoroughly
understood by said City Council.
C. A written statement by the appellant indicating where, in
his or her opinion, the material required in a. and b., of
the above, support the modification or reversal of the
decision of the City Council. This written statement
may be of any length the appellant desires, but shall be
accompanied by a one-page summary thereof if the
length of the principal statement exceeds three pages."
Non-compliance with the above shall be subject to dismissal of the appeal.
In addition, due to the unique nature of the appeal, the Tribal Council
requests that you complete your full administrative remedies by the appeal
process available through • the Coachella Valley Association of
Governments (CVAG). This must occur prior to the Tribal Council setting
t /,g r"_ RMIRIT Pi
vpA�Ueyr tr ! GEOPETRO LLC
' 'A 01/04/00
Page-2-
m �.
�` A�A the matter for formal consideration. Having satisfactorily completed the
appeal, the Tribal Council will, subject to the exceptions noted in Section
IIIA of the Ordinance, refer the appeal to the Tribal Planning Director and
Indian Planning Commission for report or comment.
Please contact me if you require any additional Information.
Si "re
,
4a:1
tPlanning
,AICP
irector
AGUA CALIENTE BAND
OF CAHUILLA INDIANS
TJD/cm
C: Tribal Council
Art Bunco,Tribal Attomey
Dallas Reek, Interim City Manager
Damon Prieto, Golden State Enterprises
James Kawahara, Esq., Preston, Gates,Ellis, LLP
3
P:LLMERS-UMEOPEW LLC 1.400. W
IF
BACKUP
MATERIAL
CVAG
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
MONDAY, JUNE S, 2000
6:00 P.M.
CVAG CONFERENCE ROOM, SUITE 1 IS
COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
May 25,2000
TO: Executive Committee
FROM: Carol Cross,Associate Regional Planner
RE: Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee MJMF)Appeal filed by Criste,Pippin&
Golds on behalf of Geopetro LLC for TUMF assessed on their proposed project
consisting of a convenience market and fuel dispensers located at 3600 Ramon
Road East(APN:677-280-024).
ISSUE:
In accordance with Section 7 of the adopted TUMF Ordinance,°An applicant who disputes the fee
may file a written notice of appeal with the Executive Committee of CVAG within 15 days of
imposition of the fee.The Executive Committee of CVAG must decide the appeal by majority vote
and within 60 days of the filing of the appeal."
STAFF REC.OMMF._ __ D MOTION:
THAT THE EILECUTIVE COMM TlEE DENY THE APPEAL OF GEOPETRO LLC ON
THE BASIS THAT THE TUMF IS A FAIR AND EQUITABLE METHOD OF
MITIGATING VEHICLE TRIPS AND RESULTANT IMPACTS TO THE REGIONAL
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM GENERATED BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
TAC(Meeting of 5-12-00): Concur
On January 14,2000,CVAG received an appeal letter from Geopetro LLC for TUMF assessed to
their 3,748 square foot(sf) convenience market (including 16 fuel dispensers) in the amount of
$134,992.75.TUMF,however,was paid on April 14,2000 initiating the formal appeal process.
TUMF was calculated on the proposed development as follows:
Convenience Market - $21,985.60 per 1,000 square feet(sf.)
$21,985.60 x 3.748-S82,402.03
Vehicle Fueling Position(VFP) - $4,382.56 per position
$4,38256 x 12 = $52„590.72 X-01
TUMF in the amount of$134,992.75 was correctly calculated and assessed by city staff.
ITEM 9
�$
COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
•rune:Apped
omp*oLLC
Pw-2-
Plans submitted to the city of Palm Springs identifies 16 VFP,however,use of the Convenience
Market category provides a credit of up to 4 VFP without additional TUMF assessment.Therefore,
TUMF was assessed on 12 VFP
Although the appellant contends that costs incurred to improve the pubic right-of-way on Ramon
Road should be sufficient contribution toward transportation inhwtructme,as a regional fee TUMF
exclusively addresses vehicle trips generated by new development, and is in addition to fees
required by the permitting jurisdiction.The appellant is not paying fees above and beyond what any
other developer would be required to pay for a similar project.
The attorney for the appellant,Geopetro LLC,contends the owner of the proposed development is
Damon Prieto,a member of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians who is developing his own
land However, the Limited Liability Company Articles of Organization and Statement of
Information Sled with the State of Califomia Secretary of State identify two members;neither one
is Damon Prieto.Photocopies of these documents are attached for your review.
It is the opinion of CVAG staff that TUMF is applicable to the proposed development and was
correctly assessed according to adopted TUW policy.
�r .aor.roao�o.00,e.-Ap,.r.pdWc
I
' • r
COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
..f
REPORT OF THE TUnnE naaEni NEARING BODY
DATE OF APPEAL
May 12, 2000
TIME
The Appeal Hearing was opened at 10:07 a.m.
APPELLANT
Geopetro LLC
REQUEST
Appeal filed by Criste, Pippin & Golds on behalf of Geopetro LLC for TUMF assessed
on their proposed project consisting of a convenience market and fuel dispensers
located at 3600 Ramon Road East (APN: 677-280-024)
CVAG STAFF REVIEW
On January 1412000, CVAG received an appeal letter from Geopetro LLC for TUMF
assessed to their 3,748 square foot convenience market (including 16 fuel dispensers)
in the amount of $134,992,75. As required by the TUMF ordinance, TUMF must be
paid prior to appeals being heard. TUMF was paid by Geopetro LLC on April 14,
2000.
Carol Cross reported that the development is owned by Geopetro LLC, a California
Entity, and CVAG has received no documentation that either of the two listed
members are tribal members. It is CVAG staffs opinion that TUMF is applicable to the
development and was correctly assessed according to adopted TUMF policy. It is the
recommendation of CVAG staff that the TUMF appeal be denied on the basis the fee
was correctly and appropriately calculated on the development.
APPELLANT
James Kawahara, represented Mr. Prieto. Mr. Kawahara stated the development
should be exempt from TUMF for the following reasons:
TUMF APPEAL - GEOPETRO LLC - MAY 12, 2000
20
COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
1 . Application of the TUMF to a tribal member is pre-empted by federal law.
Mr. Prieto is a member of the Ague C,gliente Tribe, a federally recognized
Tribe, his land is located within the Ague Caliente Reservation.
2. The land the development is on was allotted to Mr. Prieto by an Act of
Congress.
3. The Supreme Court has recognizes that local governments cannot tax
Indian lands, including allotments; Mr. Prieto is the owner of Geopetro
LLC and is developing his own land. (Cited McClan vs Arizona Tax
Commission in which the Supreme Court ruled that there is a "per se"
rule against taxing Indian lands).
4. Federal Law provides that the Tribal Government is the governmental
entity that should regulate what takes place on Indian land.
5. The Ague Caliente Tribe has entered into an agreement with the City of
Palm Springs identifying permits and feesto be collected by the City of
Palm Springs. TUMF was never agreed to by the Tribe.
Mr. Kawahara requested the committee review the agreement between the Tribe and
the City of Palm Springs the Tribe authorized fees directly resulting from the
administration of the permit process. There is nothing in the agreement that
authorizes the city to collect TUMF. In this case the governing body of the Tribe has
not spoken on this issue.
Mr. Kawahara also stated that today is the first time he has heard that staff was
concerned with the ownership issue. Mr. Kawahara said he would be happy to
provide documentation showing Mr. Prieto's involvement, but the information is
confidential and would be subject to a protective order.
Mr. Kawahara also stated that Mr. Prieto should not be liable for TUMF due to the fact
that he has paid for improvements to Ramon Road which include; curbing, gutters, and
a traffic signal. Mr. Prieto has also paid to widen Ramon Road near his development.
Mr. Kawahara stated that even if CVAG was able to impose this fee, it doesn't seem
fair not to credit Mr. Prieto for the improvements to the Regional Transportation
System that he has already provided.
Mr. Kawahara concluded by saying the basis of their appeal is federal law, and that
neither CVAG staff nor legal counsel has provided an opinion on what our arguments
have been on federal law. Mr Kawahara said that even if the TUMF is not a tax but
a fee and it is being used to regulate the type of developments on Indian land, that is
TUMF APPEAL - GEOPETRO LLC - MAY 12, 2000
• 21
�S�
r i
COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
also pre-empted by federal law (cited Cabazon case that involved bingo regulation; the
Supreme Court ruled that the State of California.,.cannot regulate gaming on Indian
lands, the same way that development on Indian lands cannot be regulated).
QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS FROM THE HEARING BODY
Corky Larson stated, for the record, that CVAG has sent a letter to Mr. Kawahara that
states CVAG acknowledges the Tribe has final jurisdiction. Mrs. Larson said in the
letter it states that if CVAG denies the appeal, and the Tribe decides to grant the
appeal, TUMF fee paid by Geopetro LLC will be refunded.
Rob Parkins asked Mr. Kawahara if Mr. Prieto planned to appeal any of the other fees
for example; construction tax fee, sewer hookups, drainage fees, public arts fees, etc.
Mr. Kawahara replied in the negative.
Hal Schilling asked if it is the appellants position that he voluntarily made the
improvements to the transportation system, or were these a requirement of the
development.
Mr. Kawahara responded that the improvements made were required by the City of
Palm Springs.
Dallas Flicek stated that years ago the City of Palm Springs, through funds generated
by an assessment district, widened the south side of Ramon Road. Mr. Flicek said
that at this time, they could not improve the north side of Ramon Road because they
did not have right-of-way. The City felt that since the residents of the assessment
district had contributed to the widening of the south side (and they couldn't assess
the Indian land on the north side) that it was appropriate for the developer to provide
these improvements as a condition of the project.
Les Nelson asked that since the appellants's basis for appeal are exemptions granted
under federal law, was there anyone present that could speak to that issue and as to
why the TAC should not consider this in making their decision.
Toni Eggebraaten, CVAG Legal Counsel, said that the authority the appellant is relying
on is distinguishable. In the Cabazon bingo case, the tax would have been paid by the
Tribe or a tribal member. The distinction here is that the TUMF is being assessed
against Geopetro LLC, a California entity, not a tribal member.
Ms. Eggebraaten reported that in respect to ownership of Geopetro LLC, the burden
should be on the applicant to establish tribal membership. Ms. Eggebraaten added
TUMF APPEAL - GEOPETRO LLC - MAY 12, 2000
22 l�
/ 1
COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
that she checked with the Secretary of State and has a copy of the "Articles of
Organization" for Geopetro LLC. The state of California requires that all managing
members be listed, the documents on file only list George Nicholas and Robert
Archuleta and checked the box stating they are the only members of the organization.
Ms. Eggebraaten said that in her opinion the applicant and the owner of the project
as distinguished from the allottee (who may be leasing it) is Geopetro LLC and is not
a tribal member.
Ms. Eggebraaten agreed that the Tribe does have the right to hear the appeal and
determine when taxes will apply. Ms. Eggebraaten also said that in her opinion the
agreement the Tribe has with the City of Palm Springs is broad enough to cover
TUMF. Regardless of that interpretation, Ms. Eggebraaten reported that the more
recent agreement between the Tribe and CVAG, when they became members of
CVAG, reconfirmed it's commitment to the regional purpose of CVAG, one being the
collection of TUMF. Ms. Eggebraaten said the Memorandum of Understanding
between the Tribe and CVAG provides for Tribal participation in TUMF.
Pat Pratt said that the issue here is a disagreement as to the controlling interest and
ownership of Geopetro LLC. Mr. Pratt said that the letter from the applicant clearly
indicates that he is a controlling owner, but the information filed with the Secretary
of State does not suggest that.
Mr. Kawahara responded that this is Mr. Prieto's development and his company and
they can provide additional information if the committee requires that to make a
decision. In terms of the assessment district, Mr. Kawahara commented that Mr.
Prieto did grant right-of-way to the City and did participate in the Regional
Transportation Planning through the improvements he has already made.
Mr. Kawahara again stated that the TUMF does fall upon a Indian company owned by
a tribal member. Mr. Kawahara said he does not believe that the agreement between
the Tribe and the City applies to TUMF, and he suggested that if the Tribe has agreed
to the imposition of TUMF on an Indian owned company, that fact should be
established and made clear.
Regarding the papers filed with the Secretary of State, Mr. Kawahara responded that
the Tribe does not have a Corporate Statute or Charter so companies cannot be
organized under Tribal Law. Mr. Kawahara again stated that the "real party' here is
Mr. Prieto and he does have partners, but it is his membership in the Tribe that makes
this a different situation.
TUMF APPEAL - GEOPETRO LLC - MAY 12, 2000
- 23
r COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
TIME
Chairman Genovese closed the public hearing at 10:22 a.m.
DISCUSSION BY THE TAC
Rob Parkins stated that aside from the good argument made by Mr. Kawahara, all of
the fees (some are called taxes) are not being contested, and the TUMF is the same
as a flood control or drainage fee. Mr. Parkins also commented that he sees nothing
out of the ordinary that should exempt this traffic generating enterprise from the
TUMF.
ACTION BY THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
IT WAS MOVED BY ROB PARKINS AND SECONDED BY HAL SCHILLING THAT THE
TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMEND THAT THE EXECUTIVE
COMMITTEE DENY THE APPEAL OF GEOPETRO LLC ON THE BASIS THAT THE TUMF
IS A FAIR AND EQUITABLE METHOD OF MITIGATING VEHICLE TRIPS AND RESULTANT
IMPACTS TO THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM GENERATED BY THE
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. MOTION CARRIED WITH THE CITY OF BLYTHE
ABSTAINING.
TUMF APPEAL - GEOPETRO LLC - MAY 12, 2000
24
COACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
,.g
PROCEDURES FOR TUMF APPEALS
The order of the hearing should be as follows:
• CVAG Staff review.
• Questions of staff by the Executive Committee.
• Hearing opened by the Chairman.
• The Appellant speaks first.
• Any party rebutting the Appellants statements (usually a city or county
representative) speaks next
• Due process must be observed. This means the Appellant is entitled to:
1. Notice;
2. A meaningful opportunity to be heard;
3. As much time as (s)he wishes to take as long as (s)he is on the
subject and not repeating himself; and;
4. All information known by members of the Hearing Board if such
information will enter into their decision making.The decision must be
based only on information revealed during the Hearing. If Hearing
Board members know something learned outside the hearing, that
must be stated during the Hearing if it is to be used in making the
decision.
• The Appellant and rebutting parties can speak alternately as many times as
necessary providing the party with the burden of proof is allowed to speak
last.
• If desired, the Hearing is dosed.
• Questions by the Executive Committee.
• Discussion by the Executive Committee.
• Action by the Executive Committee.
MW
25
' State of California
Bill Jones
Secretary of State
y�, LLC_1
o�'�$�AN�!'LA,�Y'I�ON
IL►�OR7ANT-Read die huhu lout bmcompledagtheform.
Thb doeuaaat B pemated forrft porsaaat to Seetin 17060 of the CdCamts Corporations Code.
I. adrANN LWWcwW s.�.rra.nr�..yva zrP+'rer�p.sr.r.w.K.ir+o<�
2. Latest date (men9dde tM)in wift dw Imbed lialdoy c=pvW is m dbeohc
Se be - ack @Oqq
3.-Ibeparpateofdsc Hmieed Iiald�oompanyistoeapga heaay lawful aaaraetivigforwbkha limixd liability eompaay
may be a4pmised aada dta Beve:)yKdla L9a�ed Compsay Aat.
4. Enterthe eoflaWa;;&rsavkeofproeessogick d 66 III I iatelaovbioabelow:
dLciZi' [g 1�1 .which is
[dim.
indtvIduel res(ding Ca Captanla. Proeaod to Uagt S.
[ I aeoepaukawhiChicufieda 1505ofdoaffamlaCKpocalm Code.04 item 5
andptaaxdtolltemtL
5. Itd>aio9iai ageatforaavieeofpeaasa isaa ,emera6usinessartesideaWl4acaaddras is aQfomta:
Stmsaddrem: (�c1�t,�e� h hbet,�Ay Ill t
City: kAUCrtO mlaAek Stdc CALPORMA zipcoft 9Z?�O
6. TheradmdWhOyaompanywdibem a by: (ehakaee)
I ] oaamanega [ ] aaast um oaemaaager I I d l P+to'm s
7. J admmamusaretobehuladedtofheAttlelaofOmeahadona mchamearmaeaepaenapager.
Nombaotpages attadud,ifagy:
L 1tlah=byde—ddmtlantdmpe=who Ars«eeggetsWeWe
eseatrodthishut�whidtgpxulioah; . .
aga6caoddead. . .
��//qq /^' • • l o t9�� a�aoi5
FILED
Ar-vary uiCtmLAs Ma. at sw ofo(Sfeb '
Typaurp`t"ma'f z I SEP 2 9 1997
Date i2 21 .19_LI_ 96AW OFry�
B1lJONEStrfState
ucr rw•■eaa.a.M.,rr. �'q� Oft
nwp.a. Nc d ARY
9R
/� •-•• • �taCe of �Laliforttia •
• � r �iecretarp of �itate
LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY-STATEMENT OF INFORMATION RENEWAL
A S'10.00 FILING FEE MUST ACCOMPANY THIS FORM.
IMPORTANT—Read Instructions On Back Befam Completing This Form. FILED
I. LWITEDUABILIYCOMPANYNAME lAlheolfiteofiheSet►etEyofSbte
otleStbolCabda
GEOPETRO. LLC JAN 2 8 1999
P D BOX 1318
PALM DESERT
CA 82270
6n1.,101ES,Sedetazy of State
•• I TAB SPACE FOR FLING USE ONLY
2 SECRETARYOF STATE FLE NUMBER & JURISDIC IONNO/FFORMATION
V►1
IF THERE HAS 91ER WMIC1,09014MIN THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN LAST STATEMENT OF INFORMATION
ON FILE WITH THE CALIFORNIA SECRETARY OF STATE,CHECK BOX AND PROCEED TO ITEM 12
/. $TMNrADDRESBOFPRINCIPILL.EXECUTVEOFaCE CITYANDSTATE LPCODE
3600 RAMON ROAD PALM SPRINGS CA. 92262
s jA00RESS IN
CAUfORNY10FOFFICEN HERERECORDS ARE MAWTAINED (FORDOMEBTICONLY) CITY 21PCODE
SAME CA
LAST THE MMAND COMPLETE ADDRESS OF ANY MANAGER OR MANAGERS.AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.IFANY.OR IF NONE HAVE
BEEN APPORrED OR ELECTED.PROVIDE THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF EACH MEMBER. (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE DESIGNATION):ATTACH
ADDITIONAL PAGES IFNEC
4 NAfJE GEORGE NICHOLAS I I► AWER
ADDRESS 3600 RAMON ROAD I I CHIEF ECECU 1VEOFFii
CITY PALM SPRINGS STATS CA ZIPS 92262 Y MEMBER
T. NAME ROBERT ARCHULETA I I MANAGER
ADDRESS 3600 RAMON ROAD I I CHIEFEXEaJmVEOFFICER
CITY PALM SPRINGS STATE CA ZIP CODE 92262 10;MEMBER
L NAME7HEAGEHTFORSEMMOFPROCMANDMMTHEAPPROPRUITEPROVISIONB& W.
MITE SHIBOU. CPA esxHa
KX ANWp1RDULRG41MIUCMNOFIBA.PROCEEDTOM3AL -
ACORPORATMWHICHHASr1EDACERTFCATEPUMUANT7O8ECWH ISM PROCE®roREM I&
P. STREEZADDRMOFTHEAGENTFORSMWESOPPROCESSINCAUFOWAll Ctrc 21PCOOS
i goo E nffoutrsCANYON WAY PALM SPRINGS CA. STE B1 CA 92262
10. DBSMWTMOFBUSWWOFTHMLWMLMMWCOMPAW.
GAS
to. NUMBER OFPAOES ATTACHED.IFANY.
tZ 77 TANOCOMPLETE.
)Z 0
71R1lOP AURgRIt6DTO8gt1 Ti
O���GEOFty�
l- -4e_ II[.Ht az
RPRYIf��ANOT CM°P6RSONSglptp
DUE DATE: N
o
27
rr-
. • t by\l Ptl
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
BUILDING PERMIT
OATe RAro+iGc hAntMeit CAo[ ! 4 w V C
auaxnn 01 26 99 "►'� 1553 � iso0.00 �' oeAwux x x x x x
G;e0 tro MG Hox 1318 Palm DesertlCh 760 776-6768
AaO+N tmt. v.w,en
Owner
Amm— 760,000.00
Cadiz 6 Cadiz 110 W. Sscalonem San Cl t—OWAM Elm
ee.+c» see receipt
JGP rm. 17620 Sharman 217 Van Nu m CA "°"'"o'
u # y„yyh�y
3 20907 360o RAMON ROAD PAST 3,475.60
u 080JMry A.A ow*b nnam"
52901 M 33 1 8460 001iii01 547.34
SMW WAS swa a" n.. VWT,.
0«unudnd 677-200-024 157.50
g wN weam
r 3748' 0 1 4712 001-l"0' 100.00
Commercial 2 vm X 0 0 0017°' 60.00
Construct convenience market with gas pumps and 0mmen 3,394.00
canopies. VAfmPb jWV-
e"saw 0.00
alr.ralw
oamem 0.00
emwrrralw
46.00
Market; 3,748 s.f.
Canopies: 4,712 s.f. 3,744.00
�rrAtl.awn
T+A 0.00
a...oe....anta.
oonorearrakateawM+roo rwrApnurtanawoscZ*AmW ' 10i 13 859.00
OIIPORTAN
7lwkgwrb�oHhhpa�NttWMaocWMawb.tntpprovtlottiNWdAOonolwg.peritlawalrany 11,188.56
alytrawmyatawawaoamhw. 220me
'oi7i70 134 992.75
YYpMbM ofwodtUladepetbN�pp0wd Mt0f01YY 0rNq od tMJe0. QwelpNbplNtew net MMaNMM 0.00
b a�.rerwut a Yw awlmno.nd swy otiNano.
/xoaw.AterN► ol.taatniWweprtytnrallumv#w w....ar»
'0°7700 3.750.00
nw.titw
IWONWAVOU WWwarisnotawnedInt20do"MVWmetaft140depd mbehm a o°'—°° 905.00
tan"Y"IomINn o*WON npur«iwwatM.Ckyofrum 3pMpo»eMyappytpyre 0.00
Pahl and emdoatfedOd Own MQWI muebe pbtwFwMupoeftnwatmoo
ati0tatie,01OOM L%Yw*behnwdWAvA *moatenmquwmonwwmxIaWIYtw 0.00
IWw Oh nbswatlwteWMtpmabnhtwendaxnR
YWALM 176 08.75
Uput
ThhMnBuIIAnSPamWtal.nP^ov�Y�dWt+�wdoneTvdwopd,CTGRS COPY PEaYr►NUMBFa B 3904
�R
��MJIVAC
•:OACHELLA VALLEY ASSOCIATION of GOVERNMENTS
Slow •Cw*d"aq .C�..w.,�.hoft •OWR ft Sp fts•kWbn Woos .Ndo •.1a OdM� •Wbn Omr%•PGMn 8p+inpL •ft cft Mrage
//.
C-•'•-•of Nor" •Ara Odom BMW ofD*ob Mani• Bad Of n MWkns
TUMF COLLECTION FORM /� q
JURISDICTION: (-./�y'_ dj4l ,m�ILa1OERMIT NO.: (�
BUILDERIDE'VELOPER: / —./IT L I C
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECTADDRESS: �f f1"1 GTE
TOTAL S0.FT.OF LOT: TOTAL S0. FT. OF BUILDING
'�4-
LOT NO. TRACT NO. gL�� APN: �77'1.Q� ' LSG
alKQE FAMILY DIXAMM ONI Y:
( )-SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED $794.31 PER UNIT=$794.31 LAND USE CODE=1110
ALL QMR USES:
( NEW ( ) ADDITION
IJINO{ISECOOE I 4WD USE UtMTCODE TUAIFPQiUk11T eoFtwars i TOTAL PER USE
a 4� A S-0 X 3, 74.60 : #W-
IZ.Z.2. Dist• vnif5 fj ¢, 3V,' '6 ��4 ChAl9
OTAL •$
-V.s-7o• 7a: w�d,
RETAIL SERVICES: TOTAL FEE DUE,ALL PHASES c4a7%v-
COMMENTSIREMARKS Ci'�od
Date Permit Issued
FOR CVAG USE ONLY
YES NO
18 FIB:PROPERLY COMPUTED?
MALL INFORMATION ENTERS PROVIDED? 1��
DATE DATA ENTERIC
w Wnrr<
7$710 RvdVftft Drove,S*s 200 Paton DuaM CA92260 p60I348.1127 FAX(780)34M"
29
r I
RECEIVED
•JAN 1 4 2000
NOTICE OF APPEAL BY.
_.
Identification of Appellant:
Geopetro LLC
clo Criste,Pippin&Golds
73-550 Alessandro Drive,Suite 200
Palm Desert,California 92260
Phone:(760)862-1111
Facsimile: (760)776-4197
Action ARRWed:
The refusal of the Tribal Council of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
to reverse the City Council of the City of Palm Springs' December 15, 1999
refusal to issue a building permit. (Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and
correct copy of Resolution No. 19701,as revised,denying the permit.) The action
of the City Council,pursuant to the agreement between the City of Palm Springs
and the Ague Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians,was appealed to the Tribal
Council of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. The Tribal Council,by a
letter dated January 4,2000,directed the matter be appealed to the Coachella
Valley Association of Governments("CVAG")prior to its ruling on the issue.
(Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the letter of January 4,
2000).
Grounds for Appeal:
Geopetro LLC is a company formed by its majority,controlling owner,Damon
Prieto. Mr. Prieto is a Tribal Member of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla
Indians("the Tribe"). Geopetro LLC seeks to develop a gas station and
convenience store on Mr.Prieto's Indian trust property located at 3600 East
Ramon Road,Palm Springs,California.
The City Council of the City of Palm Springs(hereafter"the City")refused to
grant a permit until Mr.Prieto pays a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
("TUMF fee")
The TUMF fee constitutes an unauthorized and federally preempted exaction on
Indian economic activity within the reservation boundaries. Denial of this permit
based on this exaction is improper.
Relief Souk:
A decree from CVAG that Geopetro is not required to pay the TUMF Fee.
30 ��
+ r
Background
W.Prieto is the beneficial owner of an Indian bust allotment within the reservation
boundaries of the Tribe. Mr.Prieto,through Golden State Enterprise LLC, a company in which
he is the controlling owner,is constructing a phased development on his allotment. As the initial
phase of this development,named Airport Plaza,Mr.Prieto,through another company he
controls,Geopetro(the appellant herein),is developing a convenience market with gas pumps
and canopies. Airport Plaza is an Indian-owned development on reservation land.
On January 26, 1999,Geopetro submitted an application to the City for all required
building permits,plan checks,inspections,and fees. Among the fees requested by the City is a
TUMF fee of$134,992.75. The City is collecting the TUMF fee on behalf of CVAG.
On October 25, 1999,the City of Palm Springs,Department of Planning&Building,
Building Division refused to issue a building permit to Geopetro unless the TUMF fee was paid
by Geopetro.
Because of the numerous possibilities relating to the appropriate jurisdiction to hear
Geopetro's appeal,the appeal was filed with various bodies. On November 3, 1999,an appeal of
that decision was made to the City Council of the City of Palm Springs and the City of Palm
Springs Administrative Appeals Board. The Administrative Appeals Board declined to hear the
appeal because it did not fall within its jurisdiction. The City Council accepted the appeal and
ultimately ruled on it.
On November 5, 1999,the appeal was filed with the Tribal Council. Upon learning the
City Council had decided to hear the appeal,the Tribal Council dismissed the appeal without
prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
On November 9, 1999,the appeal was filed with CVAG. On November 18, 1999,upon
learning the City Council would hear the appeal,and thus the administrative remedies within the
City had not been exhausted,the CVAG appeal was withdrawn.
On December 15, 1999,the City Council of the City of Palm Springs heard the appeal of
Geopetro to the Department of Planning&Building,Building Division's decision. Subsequent
to this decision,the City Council issued Resolution No. 19701,as revised. Geopetro makes this
appeal from this final action of the City,because the TUMF fee constitutes an unauthorized
exaction on the economic activity of an individual Indian on his allotted trust land within the
Reservation boundaries.
On December 27, 1999,Geopetro appealed Resolution No. 19710,as revised,to the
Tribal Council pursuant to the Tribal ordinance governing appeals.
On January 4,2000,the Tribal Council ruled that an appeal to CVAG was necessary to
complete the administrative remedies with CVAG,thus denying the appeal to the Tribal Council.
This appeal is timely filed pursuant to that notice and section 7 of the CVAG TUMF Ordinance.
: 31 = I R'G 7
Resolution No. 19701
Geopetro appealed to the Tribal Council from the bty's Resolution No. 19701,which
sets forth the following rulings and rationales. Geopetro appealed from Sections 1, 3 and 4,
which are still at issue by virtue of the Tribal Council's ruling:
Section lA. A Building Permit cannot be issued because of items one through four regarding
the approval of a Final Map and Final Development Plan. Geopetro was informed that these
matters would be resolved once the issue of the TUMF fee was resolved. Geopetro is prepared to
seek approval of the Final Map and Final Development Plan once the TUMF fee payment is
resolved.
Section 1B. The City has concluded that it"does not have the authority to,nor does it think it
appropriate to waive"the TUMF fee for six enumerated reasons.
1. TUMF fees are derived based on the anticipated impact a proposed development will
have on the regional transportation system.
2. The City collects TUMF fees in a uniform and equitable manner consistent with
guidelines included in Measure A and provided by CVAG.
3. CVAG has provisions for a formal appeal of TUMF fees.
4. TUMF and Measure"A" funds are utilized to address regional transportation needs.
5. Transportation improvements funded with TUMF fees have benefrtted both Indian owned
lands and non-Indian owned lands.
6. Failure to collect TUMF fees in a uniform and equitable manner could jeopardize the
City's receipt of Measure A fiords.
Section 2. The City pledged to "reconsider the issues raised her if the applicant submits an
amended Preliminary Planned Development addressing the conditions the applicant wishes to
change along with a Final Planned Development District consistent therewith to the Planning
Commission."
Section 3. The City advised Geopetro to"pursue relief from the TUMF [fee]requirement
through the CVAG administrative process with the understanding that the applicant will be
relieved of the condition if so relieved by CVAG";that the City"directed the City Manager to
propose a measure to CVAG on behalf of the City providing that any city be relieved of its
TUMF[fee]obligation with respect to any project where a sovereign governing entity such as an
Indian Tribe determines that a development project on reservation land is exempt from the
payment of TUMF [fees];and shall bring this matter to the attention of the Tribal Council and
shall seek the Council's support concerning CVAG's consideration of this matter."
32 �� ��
♦ r` f
Section 4. The City Clerk is instructed to mail a copy of this resolution along with
information regarding "formal appeal of TUMF [fee]to CVAG."
TUMF Fees
In November 1988,Riverside County voters approved Measure A,which authorized a
one-half cent increase in sales tax over a twenty-year period to be used for transportation
purposes. The fiord of money will pay for 25%of regional transportation improvements. The
TUMF program was developed by CVAG to create an additional 25%for improvements to the
transportation system. The remaining 50%must be funded by local jurisdictions using federal,
state or local fiords.
CVAG describes TUMF as"a development impact assessment which will provide
funding for transportation improvements throughout the Coachella Valley dictated by the
demands of new development." In other words,a tax or exaction on new development.
The assessment is based upon the number of vehicle trips the new development is
expected to generate. The fee is calculated based on a table established by CVAG. The fee is
collected by the local jurisdiction and transferred to CVAG for allocation to the Regional Arterial
Program.
TUMIF Fees Cannot Be Collected from Lndian Developers on Indian Land
The federal purposes implicit in setting aside Indian lands for the residence of the tribe—
self government and economic support—preempt state and local jurisdiction to tax Indians.The
reasoning applies to all forms of taxation and exaction. Mescalero Apache Tribe v.Jones.411
U.S. 145, 148 (1973). As a matter of federal law,state or local government cannot impose a tax
on Indian economic activity or Indian trust land located within a reservation. This is generally
recognized as the per se rule against Indian taxation. McClanahan v. Arizona Tax Commission.
411 U.S. 164(1973).
Federal preemption arises from extensive federal Indian land legislation,such as the
restrictions on alienation cited above. The protection of Indian trust land through federal
legislation has been one of the principal means by which the federal government has sought to
secure the economic well being and tribal autonomy of native Americans. "If tribal lands were
not subject to restraints on alienation and tax immunities,market forces and state tax assessors
would eventually erode Indian ownership of the reservation." Boisclair v. Superior Court (1990)
51 Cal.3d 1140.
Mr.Prieto's land was allotted to him pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 951 et seq. This land is
held in trust by the United State for the benefit of Mr.Prieto. Local governments are preempted
from regulating the land,which is subject to tribal regulation only.
33
1 • I
Moreover,the fact that California is a Public Law 280 state does not change the
presumption against taxation or regulation of Indian land. Bryan v.Itasca County.426 U.S. 373
(1976) [holding that Public Law 280 did not authorize the'taxation of Indians].
The TUMF fee is based on a local sales tax provision approved by Measure A.
Therefore,such a fee is unlawful under federal law. To the extent the fee is a disguised sales tax
on the patrons of the store,it is an impermissible sales tax. If the TUNE fee is characterized as a
fee to local government for transportation infrastructure improvement,it is an impermissible
encumbrance on the economic activity of a Tnbal Member on Tribal lands. In any regard,the
TUMF fee,as applied to economic activity on Indian land,is a per se violation of federal law,
which preempts local law.
The City cannot withholda building permit based on a failure to pay an unauthorized
exaction that is preempted by federal law.
The Collection of TUMF Fees Violates the Citv's Agreement with the Tribe
The City and the Tribe,in an agreement with the Tribe over the application of zoning and
land use regulations,entered into an agreement that allowed the City to "collect all fees
heretofore collected or as may be amended and reasonably related to the cost of..." zoning and
land use ordinances. This agreement was entered into before the passage of Measure A.
The TUMF fees are not part of the agreement between the City and the Tribe,which sets
forth the exclusive mechanism for the City to charge fees to Tribal members with respect to
zoning issues on Tribal land. The City has admitted that it has negotiated with the Tribe to
update the existing contract,and to include the issue of TUMF fees,but no agreement has been
reached. Therefore,the City cannot impose payment of such fees as a condition to issuing
permits for current development of Tribal land.
There are no other contracts or agreements between the Tribe and any governing body
that expressly authorizes the imposition of TUMF fees upon an Indian developer of his own
allotted trust land.
Geopetro Is Providing Tuasportation Infrashvcture
The stated reason for the imposition of the TUMF fee is to pay for improvements to
transportation infrastructure. Geopetro(and its related entities)is paying for all the
transportation infrastructure improvements required by this development on Indian land. This
collection of a transportation tax without acknowledgment of the substantial costs incurred by
Geopetro is not fair or equitable.
Geopetro will incur the following costs to improve the public right-of-way on Ramon
Road near Airport Plaza:
070
�4
Auti-vitE COSt
aving Removal 24,010.0
einstall Paving 57,967.0
raffic Signal 160,078.00
raff�c Striping 19,000.0
urbs and Gutters 13,320.0
djust Manholes 1,375.0
C Overlay 5,120.0
Gutter 3,750.0
ike Path 19,950.0
us Turnout 10,800.0
dicapped Ramps 1,750.0
idewalk 12,000.
verhead 49,038.0
dsca mg Right-of-Way 65,000.0
otal Trans ti i n 4S 40.958.00
nfrastracture Im vements
In addition, Geopetro also intends to widen Ramon Road,which will require it to permit a
right-of-way to the City for additional property. While some of these expenses are those
normally associated with the development of a piece of property,certain of these expenses
There is no basis to impose a TUMF Fee in addition to these improvements.
Conclusion
There exists no legal basis for the imposition of TUMF fees on Indian trust allotment land
within the boundaries of the Reservation. As such,CVAG should issue a waiver of the TUMF
fee for this project
IA71
35
• n' f
RESOUMONNO.19701
OF TILE CCIY COUNCIL OF TILE MY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA,PROVIDING A DECISION.ON AN APPEAL BY
GFAPEMLI.C,ONTHERDWALOFTIMDEPARTMENrOF
PI.AIMOANDBUI DING,BUMMODIVISIONTOGRANT
A 13UIMING PERM[i'FOR.ARCH AMIPM b1mwARm
MSEONE.PL4NNEDDEVaAPIrWDIMIRICT95? tWM
TIME APPELLANT SUBMITS AN APPLICATION IN
00beL ANCE WITHALLCITYZON NGRFAUTATIONSAND
OnMCONDATONSOFAPPROVAL;ANDALLAPPLrABLE
FEE$ARE PAID.
WIIERFI+S.OeoDeaoLLC,aoompmyf�edbyiamgo�yeoneo11in6ovmaTdbelMeml+aDamaa
PriatobuSicdmappnitothe CityCotmdlofthefSyofYslmSpriggsreya<diogthcoeEwlofeha
BwldmgDivisioaof*CCWSPk=bsaodBuildtogDgw mattoisstxabuUftpmukfora310O
s4tmefootwmimmlrrswiihpsolmepumplggSaToHaonl?2saesoflmdbc wdmfMnQglhMeof
RWMRoad,wex dAveaWaEvcrd%)&I Zane.Seaton 19;and
WHEREAS.thesadaxp vpaWisw mnsmvd+n dwCbyCamalofdwaw*fPalmSp h*%In
pt�iogRnsolo4on19430onDexmber16,1998,spp<owdTeamivePanxlMap28907aadPie>�ry
Flamed Development DIstda M and
WEWAS,Inpu togRaolndon19430anDeosmber16.19Mt wCiWC=akdododWPWCf&e
rMsolodanC0vft nsofApproval;and
MUPYAS,teap Wbosbeeaf WwmttheCftyepp mdmudytwmandnsfEaCizYevocapaomega
ofRes"on 19430;and
WHEREAS.Seetum2.05.040 ofthe Palm SpriagsMmieipal Cade antes tbatnaree of mapped d
acdanrda:nbymoffrod<gradmin>seodvrs�geaeyddadrysballbafilodm lei
dagstedsecdfhema'fmgtogpdi�ofnarttoeofd�eaaion$aatwbieh4uSppeel ist�ma,
itthereismsnrhmal'iogaodloenonetst�egdredaolrwe�mffilemdgSfolloadogdffidatadtlaaaodan
which b she MAIM of tba appeal;and
aRiERFAS,inao�moewhh4iein'bel�eadUseAppalOS�moemaetedDeoember12,1978,tba
gVedofadocistonoi�e6jy0o®almontbomedetotbelbTel wlddntmdaysfiomthedak
dreodptbyanappdkAdtbew Act,aderisiond*e(SIyC mw lbdmWmt%and
VHERFAS.onDeamberMl999ftCiW mmalbddadalywdWpdbHcb=b*cnsaid%VW
aadraeivadasamaoyfi+omtbeapplipotaodoberpeaoaspreseoSandbavingoomidaadthesuiIam
sW oul asdmomRSmted at m*beating
BETTRESOLVEDBYTiMCffYOOUNMOFMMCITYOFPALMSPM(KASFOII.OWS:
Sccdml. TbazEseappmldQadedaionbythePl aodBni�gDepecanmr.Hml�ggDivima
• tosefirsemiswaab�dldingpannitBovemdedand0fededstoasmndsbasedend�e
follovrtngfiadie�gs: '
A. ADWHiagPumetamotbeksmdfot&ohRawiogteaswx
/# 7Xm
36
EXHIBIT (1
R19701
• Page 2
1' AbwldinsPemkmaynotbaLmiedwstwFm2ibrapisVPovcdbytile
CS4'C mmAwAdoFmoDevdcpa mPlanisappwvedbytbeplatmiag
Commission;and,in fact,the applicant has not applied for a Find
DevdopmeotPhn andconwquewlyaFintlDevdopmentPlanhadnot
been appmved by the Plaoahrg Commission or the City CouwA
2 The Conditiow of Approval required to be complied with prior to
isstunee ofa Boildiq Pcrmit bave notbcm m*L
3. City Staff have a"wd*eappUcambotbVdbmpy and inwditan
Ianuary28,i999;Mardr3,1999;a d May 4.1999oMfideadesinthe
apPliadon fora budding permit and the applicantbas not submlmd
maUtWS to address there defieteneia.
4. TheMG=a Wed to appal dwTmttive Parcel bhp and Prdiminary
PhmWDevdopmwDinduatd%elnuareoeofanybuil ftyc mitmm
be eonsise=U th these approvals.
B. OniumaitstbeCIWCmmdldoesnotbuc&e=Ww t w nwdmit
&b*itappropriaatowaiv dzTrmspcamti=Un%cmMidpdonFee
CrUMF)which was passed on November 8,1989 by the voters of
Riverside Cmmty(Masora"A')for dra follovimS reasomc
1. TUh,¢ is derived based on du aSdpated impact a paoposed
developman will bee on dae ugtonal awsportation system.
Z 'theCitycoll=UTUdffbratadk=mdw otabkmamerwnasoeacwhb
SuidetinaiodudedinMeameA and providedbyCoachella.Valley
Assodadon of Oovemmmts(CVACI).
3. CVAObaspmvisiomfotaf MdVpealofTERO.
4. TUMF and MM=OA" fiords are Wliud to address Norval
trmspomaonrrads.
S. Ts�Pot�timprovemanufundedwithTCJblFhavebenehuedbedr
ln&-owned lords ad non-wian owned finds.
6. Farl=to what TUMF in atmrfotm and egtdubk mamercoutd
. the C{ty's!t%dpt of Masrme"A"lhsi3s.
Section2 ThatdreCityCams1wi11newsiderrhsiasaesalsedlrQeifdreapplteamaobmtoan
aPimnedPlDev� addrasdxcoo�nemtheapprxmtvrrshes
• PianaiegCemmissiom D`se1°pmeatDistrictaewidtmdu
Seedoa3: ThattheapplteantisadvisedmpwmeretieffmmtbeTUNFragrdremew&mushdie
CVAO vepaaasswbhthenokmnftdtatdreappH=v4Uberelkvedof
the w12Mdonifso M&vedbyCVACrtbatdse Cotmdl ditm the OWIfinMerto
pmposeameasmem CVAdonbddfofdmCbyytovf ftdmauyeigberefievedrd
37
j FEB-" WED 16:47 CITY OF PS FIWXE FAX N0. 760 322 8320 P.04
R19701
Page 3
ctsTUMFob9pdonwlthtespaxem auryptojeual;ese asovereigngevemittgendrystxh
ataalndimTnbede2�ainesdutadavelopmpscprojoxon onlaadisexempt
fmmtbepaymxatoflUMP.dwtheCgyMaoageeshallbdoS4tt U=MltOtheanedoo
of the Tdba1 C000al and shall seek tha Cous4's m4&n t oneeming CVAVs
consideration of this manor.
Seetioa4: ThaztheGq�CXeticislnstm�eedmttmlaaopyofdtiisatsohtiaaw9ua3Pet�aalong+v�t
information emueeming the factual appeal of MR m C VAG.
Adoptedthls]ldayof 1999.
Ayes: Klek&mxr,Jonas,HodmOdmPsU"pogAa
Noes: Now
Absem:Now
AbminNoate
AMC
CIIYOFP MO,
DY
City Msmgec Cap Clerk
REVIEWED AMAPPROVEDASTOFORM
pf
38
r hot.
Q
January 4, 2000
�p GEOPETRO LLC
10 O' c/o Mr.Jefffrey S. Flashman, Esq.
�'gHU11�' CRISTE, PIPPEN &GOLDS
73-550 Alessandro Drive, Ste.200
Palm Desert CA 92260
Re: NOTICE OF APPEAL NO.21
East c41"WW RESOLUTION NO. 19701 OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
(APPLICATION OF TUMF FEES)
K119111a Dear Mr. Flashman:
Please be advised that on December 27, 1999 the Tribal office
aasouca received your "Notice of Appeal' and your filing fee of$300.00. This
action complies with Section 11.13.2 of Tribal Ordinance No. 5. In
accordance with Section 11.8.4 you have thirty (30) days from
December 27, 1999 or by 5.00 p.m. January 26, 2000 to file in the
Tribal Council office:
060OK
) 3= "a. A complete duplicate copy of the record and material
previously considered by[the] City Council, including
maps, exhibits, photographs;repiirts,etc.
kin b. Transcripts of any and all proceedings before the City
V60)395-CW3 Council, including study sessions, at which the subject
matter on appeal was considered, or discussed. A
certified copy of the City Council minutes will be
acceptable, in lieu of stenographic transcripts, provided
that such minutes are in sufficient detail to demonstrate
that all points raised by the appellant were thoroughly
understood by said City Council.
C. A written statement by the appellant indicating where, In
his or her opinion, the material required in a. and b., of
the above, support the modification or reversal of the
decision of the City Council. This written statement
may be of any length the appellant desires, but shall be
accompanied by a one-page summary thereof if the
length of the principal statement exceeds three pages
Non-compliance with the above shall be subject'to dismissal of the appeal.
In addition, due to the unique nature of the appeal, the Tribal Council
requests that you complete your full administrative remedies by the appeal
process available through•• the • Coachella * Valley • Assodation of
Govemments(CVAG). This must occur prior to the Tribal Council setting
it //�7-r EXHIBIT
♦ t
• GJA CAUL t• • GEOPETRO LLC
01/04/00
• • Page_2_
the matter for formal consideration. Having satisfactorily completed the
CAHUI��' 9 Y P
appeal, the Tribal Council will, subject to the exceptions noted in Section
IIIA of the Ordinance, refer the appeal to-the Tribal Planning Director and
Indian Planning Commission for report or comment.
Please contact me 9 you require any additional Information.
Si re ,
mas J. Davis,AICP
al Planning Director
AGUA CALIENTE BAND
OF CAHUILLA INDIANS
TJD/cm
C: Tribal Council
Art Bunco,Tribal Attomey
Dallas Flicek, Interim City Manager
Damon Prieto, Golden State Enterprises
James Kawahara, Esq., Preston, Gates,Ellis, LLP
r 1
P.gEr 3M-TJU0EOPE=LLCi440*c
40
Law Offices of
CRISTE, PIPPIN& GOLDS
73-550 ALESSANDRO•'
ROBERT L.PIPPIN SUITE 200 TELEPHONE:(760)862-1 n I
MICHAEL A.CRISTE PALM DESERT,CA 92260 FACSIMILE:(760)776-4197
IRWIN L.GOLDS E-MAIL: CPOCA0ao1.c=
JEFFREY S.FLASHMAN
JULIAN S.SUMMERS
June 5,2000
Via Facsimile and Fidelity
340-5949
Mr.Allen Waggle
Coachella Valley Association of Governments
73-710 Fred Waring Drive, Suite 200
Palm Desert, California 92260
Re: Cwpetro LLC TUMF Appeal
Dear Mr. Waggle:
At the study session regarding the above-referenced Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee
Appeal,James Kawahara,Esq.represented that he would provide your office with updated corporate
records regarding Geopetro LLC. To that end,we are enclosing for your review,and for inclusion
in the record of the hearing of this TUMF Appeal,of a copy of the Statement of Information for
Geopetro LLC,the appellant herein. This document has been filed with the Secretary of State of
California.
As you can see,this Statement of Information denominates Damon P. Prieto as Managing
Member of Geopetro LLC.
Thank you for your attention to this correspondence.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey S. Flashman,for
Criste,Pippin&Golds
Enclosure
cc: James K. Kawahara,Esq. (via facsimile)
y0gwpelrocval{IO2wpd
• 6- 5-00; 1 :22PM;JOSEPH A. GIBBS. ESO ;760 779 1780 N 2/ 3
- I
State of California
Bill Jones
Secretary of State
LIMITED LU181UTY COMPANY-STATEMENT OF INFORMATION
MISS
I. LANTEDLIMPLITYCOMPANYNAME
GEOPETRO LLC
P 0 BOX 1318
PALM DESERT CA 92261
L SECRETARYOF SMTE FIE NUMBER ,IIIpBpMIMy OFFOFMATM
a
101997272015 CA
t SWEETAODRESSOF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICE CTTYANOSTATE
ZIP CODE
3600 RAMON ROADI, PALM SPRINGSj CALIFORNIA 92262
L SPINET ADDRESS IN CALIFORNIA OF OFFICE WHERE RECORDS ARE MAINTAINED(FOR DOMESTIC ONLY) CITY ZIP CODE
SAME CA
S CNECITTHE APPROPRIATE PROVISION SHOW AND NAME THE AGENT FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS•
xI AN INDIVIDUAL RESIDING IN CALIFORNIA.
I ACORPORATION WHICH HAS FEID A CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO SECTICH HNN OF THE CALIFORNIA CORPORATIONS CODE.
Am"n"ANS• I MR. JAMES KAWAHARA
Z ADDRESS OF THE AGENT FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS IN CA V MIU.W AN NDMDM CITY ZIP CODE
725 S FIGUEROA STREET, SUITE 02100t LOS ANGELES CA 90071
L DESCRIBE TYPE OF BRBINESS OF THE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY.
GAE
L NAME DAMON PATRICK PRIETO I XIMAIGUTER
ADDS 3600 RAMON ROAD I 'MEMBER
CITY PALM SPRINGS STATE CA aP 92262 ( 1 CEO.IF ANY
IS NAME ROBERT M. ARCHULETA I IMANAmt
ADDRESS 3600 RAMON ROAD I XIMEMSER
COY PALM SPRINGS STATE CA ZIP 92262 I ICEO.IF MY
It. NUMBER OF PAGES ATTACHED.IF ANY. (11,ONE
la 1 THIS 8TAtWw AND COMPLETE.
May 13, 2000
TURF OFE AL TO SON DATE
DIIEDAM
SECWA79 FORM LLC•12(REV.11A1% APPROVED BY SECRETARY OF STATE
6- 5-00; 1122PM:JOSEPH A. 0166S. ESO :760 779 1780 # 3♦ 3
• y
PAGE 2 OF 2
GEOPETRO LLC
STATE OF 94FORMATION
CALIFORNIA SECRETARY OF STATE
CONTEVED LIST OF MEMBERS•
NAME: GEORGE NICHOLAS,JR. (X) MEMBER
ADDRESS: 3600 RAMON ROAD
CITYISTATE: PALM SPRINGS CALIFORNIA 92262
Tom EGGEBRAATEN
COUNTRY CLUB BUSINESS PARK ATTORNEY AT LAW PHONE:760-7724292
77-564A COUNTRY CLUB DR.,SUITE 191 FAX:760-772.4293
PALM DESERT,CA 92211 E-MAIL-ToniEggoaol.com
May 16,2000
MAY =000
D
Corky Larson
CVAG
73710 Fred Waring
Palm Desert,CA 92260
RE: GeoPet_m. LLC Appeal of TUMF
Dear Corky:
I am sending you this so that it can become part of the administrative record on the TUMF
appeal-
Sincerely,
*TOMh en
Attorney at Law
Enclosure
cc: Carol Cross
TLE/cp
MEMORANDUM
TO: Corky Larson,Executive Director
CC: Carol Cross
Associate Regional Planner
FROM! Toni Eggebraaten,General Counsel
RE: t`"' GeoPetro,LLC Appeal ofTUMF
DATED: May 15, 2000
The following summarizes the basis for my opinion that the appellant has not offered any valid
reason for excusing it from the payment of TUMF.
I. The circumstances of this case are not consistent with the legal authority that applicant
relies on for the proposition that federal law preempts the local TUMF ordinance. The
preemption rule appellant relies on is only applicable where the tax must be paid by the Indian
owner and can be secured by a lien against Indian land. In this case,TUMF is a personal
obligation of the developer that cannot be secured by a lien against the owner's interest in the real
property.
The tax is not to be paid by a Tribe or a tribal member owner. Rather,the applicant
developer is GeoPetro,LLC,which is a California entity. Contrary to appellants representations
in its statement of appeal,Tribal Member Ramon Prieto is not the controlling owner of
GeoPetro,LLC. Appellant offers no evidence on this issue and both the appellants Articles of
Organization filed with the Secretary of State and its application to the A13C for a liquor license
show George Nicholas Jr. (with an 80%interest)and Robert Archuleta(with a 20%interest)as
the only Members of GeoPetro, LLC. (See Exhibits A;Page 2 of Exhibit B; and Exhibits C and
D.)
H. The appeal was not timely brought. The tentative map for this project was approved by
the City's written resolution in December of 1998. (Exhibit E.) That resolution included the
condition that TUMF be paid. (See page"2-9-41",item 60,of Exhibit E.) The Land Use
Agreement,the Tribe's ordinance and the City's ordinance require an appeal to be taken within
10 days. The December 1998 resolution first imposing the TUMF was never appealed; it is now
final and beyond appeal.
When the application for the building permit was later made,the issue of TUMF was
appealed to the Palm Springs City Council as if the condition were being imposed for the first
time. Even this appeal from the City Council's decision, to CVAG,was not timely because,to
perfect appeal,the TUMF must first be paid under protest. (Exhibit F.) The TUMF was paid
Larson
Page 2
May 15,2000
(whereby the appeal to CVAG was perfected)well beyond the 10 day deadline for an appeal to
CVAG. (Exhibit G.)
M. The Land Use Agreement between the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and Palm
Springs does encompass TUMF even though it was adopted after the effective date of the
Agreement. The language could not be more all-inclusive:
"[T]he Tribal Council shall by ordinance or resolution make applicable to Indian
trust lands geographically located within the City the laws,ordinances,codes,
resolutions,rules,or other regulations of the State of California and of the city,
limiting,zoning or otherwise governing,regulating or controlling the use or
development of Indian trust lands within the geographical limits of the City. . .
IV. It is not true that,because this project is on Indian land,the project does not impact the
infiast ucture for which TUMF is collected. If potential customers were not going to travel the
Valley's roads to patronize this business,there would be no point in the commercial venture.
V. This matter is not governed by just the agreement between the City and the Tribe. There
is an agreement between the Tribe and this body. The administration of TUMF is the ultimate
example of the type of regional issues that CVAG members, including the Agua Caliente Band,
influence through active participation in CVAG. When the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla
Indians became a member of CVAG it covenanted to support the collection of TUMF. (Exhibit
H,page 3,paragraph 3.)
End.
Mate of (California
0 AIerretarp of State
iota 3ronem
LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY—STATEMENT OF INFORAIIATION RENEWAL
` ` A$10.00 FILING FEE MUST ACCOMPANY THIS FORM.
IMPORTANT—Read Instructions On Back Before Completing This Form. 1. �..FILED
1. LMREDLWSILTYCOMPANYNAME bl�ledboftheSwIfazyol to
oftheStateofCaCdomia
GEOPETRO. LLC JAN 2 8 1999
P 0 BOX 1318
PALM DESERT CA 92270
f THIS SPACE FOR FLING USE ONLY
2. SECRETARYOFSTATEPILENUMBER 8. JURISDICTIONOFFORMAMON
IF THERE HAS AW01278RANIMPIN THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN LAST STATEMENT OF INFORMATION
ON FILE WITH THE CALIFORNIA SECRETARY OF STATE,CHECK BOX AND PROCEED TO ITEM 12.
4. STROTADDRESIS OF PRV40PAL E CECUINE OFFICE CITYANDSTATE ZIPCODE
3600 RAMON ROAD PALM SPRINGS CA. 92262
S. MEET ADORES W S CAUFORMA OFOFFlCEWNERERECARDSARE MAINTAINED (FOR DOMESTIC ONLY) CITY ZIP CODE
SAME CA
LIST THE NAME AND COMPLETE ADDRESS OF ANY MANAGER OR MANAGERS,AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER.IF ANY.OR IF NONE HAVE
BEEN APPOINTED OR ELECTED.PROVIDE THE NAME AND ADDRESS OF EACH MEMBER (CHECK THE APPROPRIATE DESIGNATION). ATTACH
ADDITIONAL PAGES IF NECESSARY.
a NAME GEORGE NICHOLAS I I MANAGER
ADDRESS 3600 RAMON ROAD ( I CHIEF OUICURVEOPFICER
CITY PALM SPRINGS STATE CA ZIP CODE • 92262 Y MEMBER
7• NAME ROBERT ARCHULETA I 1 MMMA=
ADDRESS 3600 RAMON ROAD I I CHEFE)ECUTNE OFFICER
CITY PALM SPRINGS STATE CA ZIP CODE 92262 119MEMBER
& NAME THEAGENTFOR SERVICE OF PROCESS AND CNECK THE APPROPRIATE PROVISION BELOW.
KEITH SHIBOU. CPA _ .vnewIs
KX AMB YO)ALRES MIMCMJFORISA PROCEEDTOITBAA.0
1 A CORPORATION WHICH HAS FEED ACEIMPICATF PIIR9UANTTO SECTION ISOS. PROCEED TO ITEM 10.
A ST9EEIAOORESSOFTHEAGENr FORSERVICEOFPROCMMCALVMNUL CITY ZIPOODE
1900 E TAHOUITZ CANYON WAY PALM SPRINGS CA. STE B7 CA 92262
10. DESCRI6ETYPEOFBUSWMOFTNEUWrMLIABRITYOOMPANY.
GAS
11. M AGNIA OF PADES ATTACHED.W ANY.
12. I DECLARETHATreN STATEMENT IS AND COMPLETE. p
jo
JZ /®
TIIRSOF AUNIORmyoum TE
OFJy�
TYP PPoNT AND OFPfASONSMINM
DUE DATE: (19/2911998
N
F Q
n
SO$4W4 0 W17R Rnwe fy �Ryi
n
ii
SECRETARY OF STATE
I, BILL JONES, Secretary of State of the State of California,
hereby certify.
That the attached transcript of 61 page(s) was
prepared by and in this office from the record on file, of
which it purports to be a copy, and that it-is full, true
and correct.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I execute this
certificate and affix the Great Seal of
the State of California this day of
a - • �", FEB 0 9 2000
a
m
Qq C f F O RN�P Secretary of State
See S80e Fmm CE•I08 IM 69M ry
State of California
Bill Jones
1� Secretary of State
I►i�ORr�isT-Read the Imtrswdm befene eompkdag dw than.
'Phis dosamant b peeseated ier1�paauat m SeeWa 1'NSO o<tbe tYRPsraia Corporadom Coda
i. Liam�OOm���r.rwM+ r••�r.Mvr4rP+'re�rr�r+rnrrr�,a•r��
RTR
2 LAW do ( /day/y oil ahidt tlss iimibd U�Big eamprry is fo dtswhe
Se tuber aG a0qg
3.- Tbepmpose of the lbalmi llil •aomprq b Io aka N say bttrlul set ar sedvity tixwbkh a Iuaiosd INbiliry eatttpatty
may be aepaised ttttdx d1a BaverlyItRla 1,iabed7.i�p Ootepmlr Act
4. Ene ilm mm of fatal ageat dsrservke ot9ro pet am Cho*the appmpr4m Provbwn below:
duit whichis
�i�J m iodivIdwl raid6q fa CaliPotuia. l!iorsOd 10 Uam S.
l aeotpmatioawbiebhasSledaeadliMpmspaetbSeedon ISO oftheO aaisCmporafaasCode.iSldpImmS
aadptoceedooRemi&
3. hi�he bdWl sgem fir aaviea orpsoaas is saw,aauabminas orresidmWl qkm address fa California:
stratadd= Lo9&4L4 FH6HOAj Ill t
Or. QA146HO I'1 UZA6E Statx CALIFORNIA Zipcoft gZZpO
Ii. MolimWilebilligremmpanywillbemampilby: Obmk ae)
[ -1 mm [ 1 a oredmottomstnga [ 1 dNid�icyeomt>,ro'
% IfodtxmatoeraaatobehrehrdodfadwAtdrhaofOrpaiaweaatta*aaeortttamseI I-PpgpL
Narobetofpspessttsdred,ffsPy: .
L hisben;bydeaimeIdmUsgtdupemomielo Farseaa.getsperUve
aoeatsed 96 btsa+ment,whfeb srtaatlaa is
agaetaaddesd.
FILED
A NMudlkeoilNStenlayd8ab
7�peOCp t=m*G(o qpubW SEP 2 9 1997
Date: CC—m�3E� .2.1 .19_i.,i— 264 OFpy�
ILL JOKS.S of-%* �
UrA �sn••r4�•re+r•atir
rswswas ur ��AFd O�
n
V
I
E Cyr
SECRETARY OF STATE
I, BILL JONES, Secretary of State of the State of California,
hereby certify:
That the attached transcript of _L- page(s) was
prepared by and in this office from the record on file, of
which it purports to be a copy, and that it-is full, true
and correct.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I execute this
certificate and affix the Great Seal of
-•` ggILL+�F;,�y �• the State of California this day of
FEB 0 9 2000
CqL►FORN�p Secretary of State
UeSup frorm CE•1OB Uw 3?BI
.. ac ,a rrtui rw•. �+••w al A,aR,Llt �u �J'f'fG4CJ� Y.lu
�• �r r i o aatr A. D rl., PPING IPA811Y68
f Y=— NOg.
I{
!
j RPPLICRTION'FOR RLCDROL REUERR6E LICENSES)
TO:
Department of •Alcoholic Beverage Control File Number...*.... ....346956
42-700 Bob Hope Drive, State 317 Receipt Number.........1204299
Rancho Min M: CA 92270 Geopraplucal Code.......3310
(760) 368 90. Copies Mailed Date 9-23-98
issued Data
_�_ILi ���
DLSTp=sizivuYG'WCATION: RAjNCRn MIRAGE
Name of B iciness: ARCO (AWPH
Location of�Btisihess:
Number I'I aid* Street NWCR%AMON RD EL PLACER
City, 5tata Zip Code PALM SP2WGS CA 92264
County i RIVER§ID&
Is premisgt*
city limits? YES
Mailing(If dirom 72M 0OMERA RD
prtsmise t'sddtess) PALM DESERT CA 92260
If premise iiceinaed:
Type ofI license
Transferoe names/license: SMART & ENAL STORES CORPORATION 26310
Mrwnaft m,e. MMUMMCU00 Mild rm =a !lU= ADS' am ILA
1. 20 OTP- 'Nffi'R Mao mBBe@f TO PERSON TRAM M YES 0 SEP 23,1998 $50.00 s
2. 20 OFF- •flZM AND At ML Ply NA YES 0 SSP 23.1998 $34.00 s
3. 20 OPd- DEER MW 1 w pmairso TR7l RL YE$ 0 SO 23.1990 $100.00 e
4. 20 OP[-*= an AND STAYS Pn1GD elks nU 110 3 W 23,1998 S317.00
S. 20 OPP-GALE x= Am 81MEM Pa d"nes N► NO 1 ffi 23,1998 $24.00
1 SbTAL $325.00 _
Have you been Have you twik violated my provisions of the Ale boBc Beverage Control
convicted of "my? Act, of regab'dons of the Deparrto at pufthft to the•Act?
Iltolda av ataaer to the Have asemoni on a aunt wbkh shall be: decreed*wet of this aooyadoa.
Applicant sgrles (a) that my mama employed in on-sale licensed premise Will have all the qualifications of a
Ucsnsoe. and 4h) that he will not violate or came or prsmit to be violated my of the provisions of the Alcoholic
Beverage Act
STATE OF CAiLWORNTA Cottety of RIVERSIDE Dace SEP 23,1998
0138MMOMM
� ter Dania.rem ah�appaas tro>oR«tet3a aead a�(1) >is t:as apinast.«see of me aP�«m eatemims tones fo see :apppgdon.dsh atghedsed m mare trb ,DDseada oa as 6aait: (Z) trac ha to tea tr.d tme(aa the eewma tbaaot m mst aeb et,me arse aueeme.es made :wa ae ava (!) trn m t� other thae Ma aDDE®a «s �dhas « toLl'eet ham >0 Ira apples «appliemis batNrt a bt emdefld aedY the Ee+e+a(4) rer vhleh bin sPpOmim itOg tiro errata applimdea « pep:eoa�b ttst tosde ro saaialp the pt�mt� a lot « to 0slen m apmxet mraed Lsm tmn(90) � e be 40'ee trbfer bs emda aP� is 85ed vim ma Dapreomt«m ids «marUrr a pseeemee so « roc aafmataior« m defraed a iojOm nip ae6t« � temdaa: to the the aesia appntvdm mq' he .riWdtua h evha me applkmt «
the Bosun r/irr w swami nabUby so do Depaammt
ApplicantName(s) Applicant Signattlre(s)
GEOPEMO ac
NICHOLAS.C BORGE M MANAG W M1WM
ARCHULEM ROBERT M RA.MMSM
ABC-231 ABc-227 A8C_211 SIG
ABC 211 (41DB)
F'XHIPI`I'
.. ra.w 44.VI r,u , nun, rtruW(ly 1'111CMaC IU 7!lG4G7�APPUCA ON `SIUMATNR9 UNIII 1'.dj L ••
f 0 PARTN 0 GOAPORATM 0 gyCHylpOAL • Q OTHER
dLIM L"UrfCOMPANY GS(XEONMM
2 Ffe Number lieanes�YPe Type Of TrenmeMon
20-26315 OFP fggyE DDIIBLE TUNIS 6E
3 a Of�e)
� i
v! x I I
.. PALM DESMMS 4 1 oldf.
Promlgs
1tQC BD.'to ffi. PL&M, PALIL A%nm, CA
sSIGNATURF
Name:
GeorgeiNicholas Jr, i Maaain Mem
ber
emer 09-422_B8
5ILWY MEMBERS ;
George INitholas Jr.
Robert 1Miera Archuleta
6GAL ftMWERS oF A UMM iP p
1 ,
T U PAf�((TN ipY r P I l0 p
Geo o Hidholas JR. 1 8p 7L .A
i
RobertjM3era Archuleta 20 ,x
%
of Riverside —22-98
tMr PAffAMQY P EPY. +t»"hove "Pum tfNow, and aayc r) Harson is an appMnn4 Drone of#w
epPdearoa.or mewAve after d Mte appdemnt 4olPor on.formed in flte forogoinq apptinlbn.daly authorb ad to nplm ass
an b~' M ant he has rid an roregt* and foaMa the aann 4 a"Weed and Vat eaeh of an above detenfaras
therein made afb(ole; (3)that no penaon oew then the app om"or app0eants has any cirsd ar induct merest in Mre *at
app6aana's bl�to be o Wooed ardor an tkmfsa(s)far wfaaft Mae appBntlar is made: (d)gm the OmWer appi neon at
Proposed trerolar H Dot made ro s--*the Payment of a ban or to halm ao agfaemea afaered Into more than ninety(90)days
Prig Ma d6y an w'4d Mn tmoete►VOC2 bri is NOW with(he Qeparbnant or to gain or establish a pmknm s to or for any
oredRor or tnfla(eror or to defraud at injwe airy eeed8ar or ttansfsner. (e)that afe tranatar appYntba may ba wbadrawn by eMar i
eop�uarreau�ha.It�rcoMvar�r�ayaar. we•rt�at
t
eor Nicholas Jr. 9_2298 f - 8•
Pont Name Gate
Robert�M ara Archuleta 9-22- 8
Prfit Nana . Signature Oats
eC-21 f SIB
TOTAI P.FS
STATE OF OAUFORWA—Kimue,ty TAANSPCn wr10N AND HOUSING AGENOY GRAY DAMM,OayMpr
DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOUC BEVERAGE CONTROL
42-700 Bob Haile[Niue,Suite 317
RanchoIWrag%CA 92270
(760)568-0990
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
January 7, 1999
George Nicholas,Jr.
Geopetro, LLC
PO BOX 1318
Palm Desert CA 92261
Arco AMIPM
NWC Ramon Road&El Placer
Palm Springs CA 92264
File: 20-346956
NOTICE TO PRODUCE OR UML OF APP TCAT ON
Dear Licensee:
This office has several times requested you to furnish the following information in
connection with the above application:
L Copy of your real estate lease and any amendment(s) thereto.
2. Please provide documentation that you have applied for a conditional use permit
to the City of Palm Springs.
3. Please provide documentation that you have applied for a Letter of Public
Convenience & Necessity to the Palm Springs City Council.
4. Please verify your source of funds by providing a copy of the loan documents for
the Arco loan and the bank loan.
You have either failed or refuse to furnish the required information so that a full and
complete investigation of your application could be made.
You are hereby notified that if you fail or refuse to furnish the information required
herein within 20 days of the date of this letter, the Department will have no choice but to deny
your application.
If you have any questions, please contact Injavid
r H iltz at 760-773-6524.
Gill
' District Supervisor 00
;c1I°R G
GeoPetro , LLC
RECEIVED
January 21, 1999
JAN 21 1999
pLANNING DIVISION
Steve Hayes
StaffPhmner
City of Palm Springs
E.Tahquitz Canyon Drive
Palm Springs,CA 92262
RE: Arco Am/Pm Request for Public Convenience
Dear Steve:
I would like to submit to the City of Palm Springs a Request for Public Convenience for
the approved Arco Am/Pm located at 3600 Ramon Road,Palm Springs, Ca 92262. I
would very much appreciate this being expedited so that I will not have any delays with
my application to the A.B.C.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter, if there is anything finther you need from me
please do not hesitate to call me.
Sincerely,
GeoPetro,LLC
George Nicholas Jr.
Managing Member
f�
P.O.Box 1318 A Palm Desert A CA. 92261 .A Phone 760-77W68 A Fax 760.340-9194 �
-,I-.$ Q�
amiss®R Ramses eetrrti"
�.ls dart_
VCITY CMMCL
• RSROLMONNO.' f3J I sorp•Po' ,
RO1TA rbwluft a M30 ;
u su rcr m u:�rwo
GOLDliNBrATSRPI'MUTIM 1708ctWaS trr melt,tvti
Case No.&M/PD29MV28M
Nardi dde dRamon Road,wet of Avenida Bre to
December 14 IM
CONDMOM OF APPROVAL
Bellow gal aooeptarce of me F*cf, ell ecndhiom Holed below shed be oampteoed m the
athfacdon of ft City Engineer,me Dhec or of Fhmdgg,&a Chief of PoNoe,the Fhe C hWor
dick tgaee,depmdtgg on vA tch deparmrat secommcaded go condiftei.
Asp agreemcats,amemem of Covaanb regohnd to be entered food shell be in a Loren approved
bydoC yAUom k.
The BogiveerL>Pi Dlddon Mocameah mat U this appNathw•is approved, such approval h:
sutim to-do ti Mft eanditam behrg completed in COMPHOW *elm City samdacds aid
Bef= ad aooephooe of me 1rg19M AR condidom Nded below dmR be ecmoded to dill
atslsctan of me Ciq Bagines.
SANrrARVSMM
-16 l'/
1.1 Coodad AN seallazy Srdmla to me City sews sr, Lateral dmB rM be
ooucecoedatmmbole.
2. •Develops drR ocmlrad an 8 inch sews main acmes me came AMPOBT
CE47RB DRWB AND ffi.PLACER han"m and camas to the eAsdog IS
hrh sews mein at imemsdon of Raman Road Eat and brio tie axbft 8 b&
aevaermain bn Ahpart Ceahe Drive east d Avcaida Bvditi.
3. AR sews mdm oamomacd by the davebps ad to became part of me City
sews system died be tdevlsed by dodevdspspdstoacoepuoa of sad Nnm.
4. Sd mit$ewer imPovuzM Plans I by a Rued C hA Bngtnes to to
BogioeaioB Dividon.The pleas died be approved by me CIW Prior to
isnma of and grading or buU ft petmkL
Mllilwa ssdmdMd shiff hick de m rg:e Mowh � . ,f�
A.- sdWofdgwdC=NtamofAWavvlfwm.p'o 'gD ..w .•
. • t
B. ''Proof Of Peoei dedr "s!'°'n-N�►� GOL'I'OBCLD�L
§'eby asmmeowgcenmk eon. idmbmmmrotagmemmb, etc. required
Y•.
l:. Sewer Smdy/Repot.IF Mgahrd by Om MndNDII4
vfiJl P•il ..
vi
S. Aop utaMROPMPMUW ddedwnkfepast3moothsaod coon of
rabid doameob a1nB be aobmi�d to me Cky Bogioeer TA&me&st mbmktd
ofme Gmft plm
6. a.Gmdiog Plu p Waved by a Regiesaed Pmfeadoml to die Bgpoeeaag
DIgTsiaa Air plan disk. Qzadiog plan dmB be aobmkW to the Phmdag
Depailmmt for prior to aobmiml to die DIvlebn. the
Gmft Plan dM be approved by to Clly B •pdw to buoroee of aq
.rum«�sP�. .. .',.• , -
• mbAmitmliocb�datl�efoUowm�.. -r.s• .::.:;
A.t-a y of tiedPLmhg DepactmmtTOW
cammmb
B. 4y of stood Comdtttoae afAppmv84omPyomio<Dqww3mt,
C.;�,;;.Capy-of SBe Piro stamped approved rod algoed by the Plamdng
:e-Ypl 4n.•-1.• d ..
, D' ;3CoPYO(MRepostprepamd/cpdeoedv"past3mowb
1 . *" Copy'.ofSolbRepmtPrequiredi"yliesecood
F.:;;'Cajy of*dmku Smdy/Repmt.IF re9dred by these cmdidaa.
G.. ,iLCW of the Goad Co=acft Ae6tity Sam Water Fermi from the
Smoe Water Resources Canrd Board(hone No. 916 687.OM b&a
�. CSty&gdoeerpdartobamnceoffiegaftPemdt
7. Dmmige awake 00 be provided 4=9 to all curbs Rod sidaaal m-3' wide
rod 6•y deep-to laep mdmaae waw from emft the Public areal..>oadaa�s,
or gown.
S. D4veloper"obtain a General Coos=ft Acts*Simm Weser Purr Sam
do Sls%,WMW Resources •Com d Board Obone No. (916}657-W rod
pro s OW Of 101310,Wbro eaneo W to de Chy Bryddeer Prior to lseRanae Of
9'bt pemdt is Modred where consWxdm acd*rmalb In trod dbmlbauoe of
S Ae.,or more OR leas dum S Ae., but IM of a ImW common plan of
develop®eur or SdL)
9. •Ea IJa000idrooe wid<C[ty Of Palm Springs>tdnddpal Code, Sadbn 8.5I►.00, tlx
dt a doper abaB post whr the CIW a ash band of two Wouradd ddkrs
Pat am Im MWIllim meamm of ezodowWowsrod Mkdgg to ids
•.'der: aroma
woo am#
v
r
10. A sdls raPoit prepared by a premed Soli Ad be rephed for ad
bseorpmmed es as haegrol part of the gadbg plan fOr the psOposed As.A copy
Of 6e'3085 reepott shall be sabmimed to pro Balift Daparauctca and to an
EaShmeft Dlwddon dM wa gm.calculations ad cant iotm=don subject
to approvd by the Coy prim to the bmaoce otthe pftgp®h.
bQ%4
it. CooMft a
8pellftolift Depattmeur n pet PM10 refphemenm prior torequest for
:=,i6bokst
The de OPa shall accept an powa implaft upon his bad and condm these
flows to an approvved dmbrage encase Oftak rdendadddeatlon or other
mmm approved by the City Bogbea shall be required if offm E3cllft are
dete'� b be motile to ban& the used flows gm=W by the
devebpmeat.of the site. PmW&a ddWW dswioape sh*to dete+n im if the
devetaped meeds the apodty of the is dtaimge arrias Prior to
approval of the Paid Map.
13. 1he-=*ct issu6J�to flood toad sad datimye n fees. The
aarjeCdeaiospe in at the present time IS S9=00 Per acre per Resolmian No.
15113g{Pcashallbe paid oorso)smugofabftpem L
a,-
Sv�AL�.Y,3•.-. .. . . ,
14. AzW v ty enm in the abtbg Of-site pavemuE 1male by this&WMmeat abed
node &each repiaoemeot pavement to match adstbg Pavement piss one
Smadsrd Dmft No. 115.Pavement
sball be to a e
15. All ;.cpt4p k w' 4v IOes Oda 84aoent to this prajeet shall be 3mdergtowded
priatoismaocoofaCad6cabofowpow. . •.
16. All cda ft Mlles shag be shown on die SmftWrm pins, The RbaB ad
The appwnd od&d Ste fthamet plain dnp be 19ia3i@ aOd XCM=d m the
Ciq d Palm SpdW Enhoe g Dlvbbn pdor to bwence come ardBam of
ocwpucy.
17. The davebpa b advised to confect all�tt4 p fz damped
Rcrthis P499 atdroadiest possible dam.
18. Na&h chap beamrtacleda placed la the comwaPo ma of EW&h"V
which does of will Meed do bdght raphod to mabdak an appropriate s*t
dbmace Pet Cq ofPalm 4du8s Standard Drawbg No.208.
19. All proposed troy withb rise pd&d*W&way iod wbhin 101bet of die public
A aalk aad/or curb shag have Cky Wroved dap root hea3en humped per
Ci M
pip �,p1
MM
:l41.
20. The EVocabg Divisim mends dekml of ofi"db b>ptavemem YENS
A 33-and 34 at this dom du to lack of fA imptovemenm Is the bmxdlate am
The devdopa shall eats bto a oove0ent 31gcOdgg to 0 all mew
1 :�• �.7 :j•.y'a 00
&b8 do audio ftmmSe*on do iegoat of des Coy of Pw m
Sodup •Dheemr. Depanmem of Tg=V stmkn at sash time as deemed
necemq:The covemont aha8 be sdxdme .wtdt dre( Plan.Y1e Graft
Farah wffimot be isa =0 compkdonofdo rnamata
21. Amjbpsvmnm s whim dw at4eet t wgy WOOD a Chy of palm 8pdops
Bzkschmft Pbmrh Work shall be snowed-mccau -io,Raohdiam 17950-
Readdc ft saes Work anMv*and S=cdmy Th=uW m.
22. Subm@ aaeet hnptovemem plans prepared by.a Rued Gull Bogiaeer m am
EcOmetiog Dbidm The phut(s)Ad be spptoved by dre OW prior to
ismome ofaoygtadk8 air bWWng peunitL
14 mbmhW shall incb&die iblladog,IF appnablx
&T!• •CIDPYOf otAppawalteomPLr�gDepattioeat
L ,k3 As tt mmla and hopmvemmt pbms apptomd by CIy Busimor. IF
' J'•.i�Z > 1. i•'e ..
.r...CKPWdof Psoclaft dedications ofdowway psemma manacbmem
wvmub6 ralubmement avmwoK air. ta@*w
I��m by dtere ao�dons.
23. The&• ,• J Rd J 0
!�J �P YOIC Vl do Rmm NIoa�LL Ban at
CWo Road or Rum Road Bass at VAa Rnsd Tatiic Skkft and Rodadug
Impmvcmmb which have been alaladed m be$1,740.00 per do 1bft Impact
Study,daoed Ocmber5.L"%j j IbyACrC=dftBW=wlm
Bedgr ..
'Sku,
Tee. Dedlaft anpad�Nmd y W
dgh*d-V ay Of 10 txt 0)Pu�vk�ieth/e ummem half am
VW of SD Ad dM do yp �an adfid d deWidonofdgkd-
way lzdobus mm-m ad Akw kakog apadmar&V Lmatagee ofpamb 1
and2..
25. Dediate ao WMood 12 foot wlde menial for bmdtape,d k mnt aid Nicyck
P�P�A along the cadre findaYa : ,... ' .
26. Consioctan 8 hsitcmb and gmkr,42 that NORM of ema m akmg dro audio
8aohge, v idt a 35 foot radios curb rearm at do So1TP nuff comer of dtc
ptapety.AND AT TBB RAMON*ROAD BASF AND EL PLACER
D=RSBC14ON par CIWofPWm Spfqp SmnhdDaysaig No.200.
27. Caaga die BAST AND WBSf halve of a 6 hoot own puer and spsodsd a
die k0unda of RAMON ROAD BASF sod EL PLACER wldt a Bow So
pandlel to 6ro aooasie of RAMON ROAD BAST in amrd mw whh(Sty of
Paalmmctg4. dop StmdadDuwiog No.MD and 206.
2L Tbeldaewq approach shall be constiocied in aoaadaooe whh City of Palm
-*!W 9mndsrd Dawlog No. 2015 aid have s mhdo® VAM of 24 Red to
s000moft a nab amp on both dit madr of do-pods chop'medlar island.
ThedWmVappanachabd(bemistmmnTaanddgbttunontoily. Meg.
lalaod'ahan be designsd to dbammage ktt ftmbW movemeab acme Ramon Road
Ir ,
�j
a-�-3�
29. C.onianct a mbtloatm a toM wide sdiewa>t behind do'curb slang the entire
fimstagainaccadamStil ChyofPalm Springs Mandud Draft No.210.
30. C adWnset a 8 fort wide Chu I maodering bleYrde pads maltam Design
Maori.Cl opl r IOW-Blimsy Planning and Design)&bog the cadre toniggn.
The bicycle path shaft be constructed of okdaar I Peedaod oement eooerem.The
admbmne shall be Desert Sam,Palm Springs Tao,or approved apal color by
the Bt>Bloeeft Dividon.The eaaeete M neoeive a broom finish.
31. Cow a curb arap mathB anent CaUlook Sum AncaubMq standards at
tine NORTHWEST AND NORTHEAST cameo of die Ramon Road Bast and ID
Placer h>teaeelon and it the NORTHWEST coma of dw Ramon Road Past and
Avenida Bvdh hmeaadim per(Sty of Perim Spdogs Sid. Dwg. Nos. 212 and
212A.:
• 32. Comanct a 14400t wide]aadscaped,raised median island as specified by the City
Faghtea Lam AVIRM BVEMA to TBB•WEST PROPERTY LDGL
Provide a left tam pod mt an the NORTH AND SOUTH sides of die RAMON
ROAD BAST at EL PLACER.fulawalm The lame wid8t abaft be 4 Aw wide
and dhall have am cobbler to the point where On dese scape an begin.The
Leaglh:pf 9ne tom pocket aball be detemsieed:par Cft m Highway Design
Mason Sea 405 sod be staved by ere CJWBaglmer.
• 33. Pima and replace esladog pavement wldt a mioimom pavement aecem of 5
hnch. pavement over 4 hhc t�gg S * base whit a mhdmrmr
an6g<ade of 24 inches at 95% sdeive arop&aion. OR sunk Lom edge of
psopored basic curb m clan aaacut adgn of existbg pavement along sine eahe
ltomtge of Oro hmdsaped median island inae000dance with City of Palm Wage
Standard Drawbg No. 110 and 347. The pavement secdon shall be designed,
aslag.'R•vahm by a licessed Solis Engines and sobm8aed to do(Sly Bogima
floe&ppmval.
• 34. Construct an 8 inch baaier orb as rem for do landscaped medlar bland,
hrhtsive M ftft pocimta, per CSiy of Palm Springs Standard Dawlag Na
200. r•
35. Cbosa&ct a 14 foot whk pd od median bland tbom Ste RAMON ROAD EAST
at AVE NIDABVBidTA ink to the WEST PROPERTY IAVB.Provide a
left tom pocket on die NORTH AND SOUTH aides of do RAMON ROAD
BAST at EL PLACER Intersection. The now width*0 be 4*ct wick. The
bogth of&a torn pockets sited be dese®ioed pa Csifwm Highway Design
Mmtal Sr.405 and be Waved by the Ciq Bogioea.
36. Ccostetax a 104M long by 12-lbot aids btu arm oat an a pottbn of do parcel
I and 2 ftamagm. The ocmfiguramm shall be alg r, A by die Ciq Bogioea in
cocimdm with&mLbe Tamit. C:ooM S=Lbe Tamil for deub tegar Us:
bur stop 5nmilmdandaw requiterems.
37. All broken or,off gads CURB , OUTIER AND AC PAVEMENT shell be
repdwdorteplacedalongetcea rePrope4 geafttotheprepary.
38 Remove and replace esbdog pavement with a mhdumn pavement saxion M 5
inch sail eft ooaacle pavement over 4 inch sggregale base w1h a n*d mm
subgade,.of 24 Inches at 95% ahattm omtpaction,:.OR.STA Bull edge of
P >o' to clan aavaak edge of et li ft pavaanant along the emirs
"• r .�..g ri.q. :. r:
.. t:• wet '•�:..
:
12 MmbmOwmCiWdPaIM SOW StandadDmig No. 110ad
347:*'-Tw pOMM tec6an AM be deaigoed,oft oR• valoM b9 a Hcomd
SOTS E and dettmkbed to to Chy Brgioca For appeoval.
39. Ceuemuct a 6 twh curb and sow, 29 teat bob►Was of c mtdine slogs do
endaN R 1 8 , wbh a 35 Foot=dim curb Hamm at tie NOKrMM1'AND
NOR'MM.ft axma tithe Rdmm Rod East and EL Phca htEwba ed at
do SOUTHWWr AND SOUTRUff oomaI ofdo Ahpott C=v Drive and
El Phioa btimmdm per Cky dPabn 4*0 spud Drawhtg M.M.
39L ComhM an 8.foot wide hndecapd, deed arcdian glad 4 tam bosh sides of
aumdioe as speclW by do Chy Ec*ew gmm RamonRoad Eat JO ro
40 tbec'mum.d tie soud<side of the drivmW approach hvo Lot 3. Provide a
amter tam hP- 10 Feet wide,ns)og do"ydbw sftft from the nurse and of
• themedianieRdrodeiosewacdonwidtAirpatQemeDrive.
40. The difmM approach fee parcel 3 d mB be co mmoed in mm&=wbh Chy
OfPdm Spdopa Smdad Dm*No.201 adbavemioium wi t,of24 Feet.
41. Coneliaot a mh>lanm 8 Foe wbb sidewalk bound do amb alas bolt ebbs of
6edne 8mouse is aoomdmce veldt Chy of Palm4dep Stsodad Dawlog
210.
• 'i[ .
42. Castnr t a arb ramp meatus amens CMM&Slate Acoea b ty e- I i at
tie mudw"ad SUB& a comers of do Ahput Cbnme Drive and El Phow
b Wncdmpa Chy dPahn Spr W Std.Dws.Nos.212 and 212A.
43. Commuct pavement wbh a mWo pavement sectom d 3 fwh aqAak conm to
pavement oar 6 b*agpegate bare whh a mh&i sobgmde of 24 hiches at
95% tdadve ampxdon, OR ccjmd, Fmm edge of pmpad gaft m edge of
P 8 8 tte emhe Lnatage Ea aooasdaooe Mite Chy ofptdm Springs
Staodud Dmft No. 110 and 310. The par ement acdtoa dial be designed,
� by'a beaded Sills Bogiocw and mbndmed to do Chy B�mea
s_o c
AHIPM7'CWNTRRMMffOr"An-MVA7RlCt' =r Spf@&3d"
44. .Compact a 6 foch anb ad.go m. 20 Feet NORTH ad SOUTH of cgnmdi e
wbh a 35 tbot resin cub te' st the SW Cmw of dr Aveabh Bm to and
AhpodCam Drive brteesectlaapwOW dPalm4dop Smiled Drawing No.
200. �-
45. 'The ddveway ap wwh Fos pined 3 d mH be canshrraed in a000rdom wbh Chy
ofPa&4dW Smdud Drawing No.201 ad bavembdrmm wbbh of24 feet.
a.16 = .... 1 % -A-. .
46. C o6d t a mhdmsm 5 Foot wide abbwalk:i v iud tie amb abag bole ddes of
dwdimd hkurohneswI& ClWOfFft4dogaShmdudDmft No.210.
47. Cdehuct paremmt whh a midmsm pavemem roctloe d3 brrh asphalt concrete
pavement ova 6 hilt agg<egue base Mitt a mWr;6 m s tads d 24 hrbm at
/40
e..
ra
y- D9 a 7i 1 G ifli Cef. �MII 7Tii iRiiQL
gra
s tp
x � I x fill
v
Q pg. g8
$ f Ir
Fill 11,
g �
uer
rr
I A �
gig
cep
Ibis ddwdsy is pembted In the laat(m proposed on do PrdftahmV dev hVmar
peon,wbh do find dedga of the ddvmw iacaepouft a aigatOcaot ymdsped 4*&
Chop' Idl d to niltigaoe poICIlli y hzmrdOm bR tam mDmnmb in and Got of dds
d h=W-'.7be find dedga of dw ddv M and'port Chop"maMm doll be wvbwed
and appoaved is With do Find vOVelapIDOot Psm.
4. Cm No.75.0TWM 2S2nPM 28W wd the urbiteamd appmvad of phase Oat
developmm foi'did be vaW for a period of two(1)yam Exbm sm Of time MIW be
Food by'ftPkmft Cbmosdm%mdemoBIttatlanotpodame.
e �4NI !..
S. 7110 mppeal-perlod-for ds mppliadon s 15 aleadar days from de drro of V*ct
appmvad-Pe®ib will mtbe inuedmatil the appendpedodhas cmdmb&
6- The fdnd d;dgmeu psm dnU bt wbmhted fm aorar I I whh Section 9401.00 of the
Zoning Ord[mote. Fund development plans shall blade site pims;boil ft dendom
floae per.mofl>lam!st&W.a rtvsed p dbfimey lrodeaPe plan and
PM !hr prose Om devdopmeu, sodsape mod falBation pbm for lhtme phases of
devedopmmt(4t such thm ft we ). ededa ftbdig plum. sign p qpm,
man ID0°11 11 tom, die acw4actlaM pmMly dYdpment staadmds and
Other such doamteals as rtgdred by the Pknmbig Calm,Fbd dnelop nM ph=
sbaU.be A mbted wAfo two 0)y=of the Qq'ComcU gWOwl of Me pre b&W
t dhWct-
6a- Ifidniont iudeala mod paddog setiracb fbr de pra)ect m comblshed u Mom (as
mmadfivampapaul ibis);
Rtimon Road-25 fea ftaels)••
33hd(ddrt lots)
,41gw(ko¢e Ddee-10 feet
: W,
Bf Fscei-10 fen
Aveaida Bae>lm-10 feet
�'1>�t0t�(apt Westpmpetty 1[ro oflob 1 and 8)-5 fen
westpao"]rise of lM l sad S-25 fca
"- Or WJW.10 btafae Witb UM flow and taober delivedes,to do satds&ction of
mt Dhectoraf Plaooh�g mad .
6b. lfinimm tadldioy mbacb for dw pmjact are es ed as lblbws(as maw=from
d>iromly>itoej. ... o•
ib ono..Rg dzW fen
i+vl1'•\ '•i' r4.
AhportCameDd"-20fha
lUtertl
Ps •.: ,
C2Q•� ,. .1 r•w•,t}.••• tu
Aveatda Bvellta-20 fin
IntedaPC%*M y If=(CUP NICK propaty go of Lob 1 and 8)-S fad
. Ire- Y
• 1
ftI is.
i
t
Ch
co
CID
g
ra
g [f
Hill 11
p sr
Ie
Phil
� � l W � R .
Ir s w � �
w00Wiii ' nQ � ' � � .S s� �. `•� a �i �•• • �i 8 1{e@$�y � � � '�.���}}}iiie QO��.
tl M � e ��SS "�� NA�i g � a •i � •
Ilia � � 00 � iiii
fit p
wk
. g t �
: � a re
g
� -allx
N
g g. ti t
qa
od
ago
g s
fig
tg
a 6 at e s
P.R
� ��
let � s�
s
..
IL
Ila gay
Ab� � �� 9
.� lip, 14
g
�� A
mnpk4 lboftwhow sips=m. a.
Torn EGGEBRAATEN
COUNTRY CLUB BLtSngM PARK ATTORNEY AT LAw NE 760-772 4292
LM
77%4A COUNTRY CLUB DR.,SUITE 191 PHONE-
760-772-429
PA DESERT,CA 92211 E-MAIL•Toni
Eggeaol.eo,n
January 31,2000
Mr.James K. Kawahara
PRESTON, GATES&ELLIS,LLLP
725 South Figueroa Street,Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90017
RE: TUMF Appeal by Geopetro,LLC
Dear Mr.Kawahara:
An appeal to CVAG of the TUMF assessment has been received. However,the appeal to
CVAG is not complete until the assessment that is the subject of the appeal has been
paid.
Initially,you suggested that your client pay the TUMF to a third party escrow holder until
the issue was resolved. On CVAG's behalf, I rejected that proposal because it is
inconsistent with CVAG's appeal procedures applicable to all appellants. Alternatively,
you suggested the funds be paid under protest to Palm Springs, to be held in a separate,
interest-bearing account by Palm Springs until the issue was resolved. You now report,
however,that Palm Springs'staff states that they are obligated to transfer such collections
to CVAG within a short period of time of receipt.Palm Springs will only hold the funds
if CVAG will give written authority for a procedure,again, inconsistent with CVAG's
appeal procedures.
As I indicated on the telephone, I believe that it is poor government policy to create
exceptions to procedures that are intended to apply evenly to all appellants. By requiring
the TUMF be paid before the appeal,it shifts the burden to the appellant to adjudicate the
validity of the assessment. The most significant leverage that the jurisdictions have when
it comes to collecting TUMF is the fact that a permit will not issue. If exceptions are
made that allows the permit to issue prior to the payment of TUMF,which would be the
case if an appellant were able to avoid the payment pending appeal, the agency would
suffer a risk of collection that the policy was intended to avoid. An exception also opens
the door to a challenge by a later appellant who is denied a similar exception.
r"N121D�
Mr.James Kawahara
January 31,2000
Page 2
Your position is that,if the appeal to CVAG is unsuccessful, an appeal to the Tribal
Council will be the final recourse for resolution of the matter. Further,that if Palm
Springs were to hold the fitrds,it would make the refund upon the Tribal Council's
finding that TUMF was not required in this instance,
On my part, the appeal is not even before CVAG such that I have researched the issue of
the Tribal Council's jurisdiction,or whether there are other or further avenues of appeal,
in any depth. Accordingly,I am.unwilling to suggest an exception to the appeal
procedures that may foreclose'any legal option with respect to collection of the TUMF. It
is entirely possible that,as a matter of comity, CVAG will give effect to the Tribal
Council's decision without even exploring its legal alternatives. However,those are
policy decisions to be made by CVAG's governing body,not its general counsel.
In closing it is my opinion that the appeal by Geopetro,LLC should be handled in the
same manner as all other appeals to CVAG. This appellant is as much able to avail itself
of challenge to the TUMF assessment, as well as policies and procedures for collection of
the assessment,as is any other appellant.
Sincerely,
Toni Egg en
Attorney at Law
CC: Corky Larson,Executive Director
TE✓cp
Preston I Gatesl Ellis up
jamesk@ presto n gates.coas
(213) 217-4337
February 14,2000 RF�CF:TVED
�Fg 1 7 CUUU
Ms. Patricia A. Larson
Executive Director
Coachella Valley Association of Governments
73-710 Fred Waring Drive
Suite 200
Patin Desert,CA 92260
Re: Appeal of TUMF by Geopetro,LLC
Dear Ms.Larson:
I am writing on behalf of Geopetro,LLC and its owner Mr.Damon Prieto in response to
your letter dated February 4,2000. Furthermore,I understand that the TUMF appeal has been
pulled from the agenda of the Technical Advisory Committee(TAC)meeting last Friday,
because the TUMF has not yet been paid to the City of Palm Springs.
On behalf of Geopetro,LLC and W. Prieto, I accept the representations that you have
made in your letter to the effect that the Coachella Valley Association of Governments
("CVAG")will refund the TUMF payment plus interest which may have accrued upon receiving
such direction from the Tribal Council of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. I have
been authorized to inform you that subject to the agreed upon conditions,Geopetro,LLC will
pay the TUMF to the City of Palm Springs no later than February 28,2000.
Please contact me at(213)217-4337,if you have any questions or concems.
Sincerely,
J es K I{awahara
JI{K;jkk
cc: Richard Milanovich,Agua Caliente Tribal Chairman
Art Bunce,Tribal Attorney
Tom Davis,Tribal Planing Director
KM1aD'ADOpp�L206W 2141QOODOPM
A LAW FIRM I A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING OTHER LIMITED LIABILITY ENTITIES tee `�(1 17
L—�tStU� �
723 SOUTH"OUENCA STREET SUITE 2100 LOS ANGELES,CA 90017.3421 TEL:(2131 624-2395 FAX:12131 624.5924 www.prestonptes.com
Anchorage Coeur d'Alene Hong Kang Los Angeles Oranp County Pala Alto Portland San Frannsm Seattle Spokane Washington.OC
Apr.-06-00 09:17A COachrallaVallrayAssocOfGOV 760 340 5949 P.02
MEMORANDUM OF MERSTANYIING
This Memorandum ofUnderstanding("MOU')is made and entered into on this 1 day
of_ j~��r , 1998, by and between the Coachella Valley Association of Governments
("CVAG')and the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians("Ague Caliente").
WHEREAS, CVAG was established for the purpose of coordinating and improving local
governments'response to common issues impacting on the Riverside County desert area;
WHEREAS,the territory of several sovereign Indian nations He within the Riverside County
desert area,all of which are impacted by the area-wide and regional concern common to CVAG
member jurisdictions;
WHEREAS,the CVAG member jurisdictions recognize that Indian Tribes located within
the Riverside County desert area can contribute to and benefit from participation in the inter.
governmental forum..that CVAG offers;
WHEREAS, however, CVAG is a public entity organized by virtue of a joint powers
agreement entered into on or about November 1973 and thereafter amended from time to time(the
"Joint Powers Agreement") that defines CVAG's authority and provides the method by which
CVAG shall exercise that authority;
WHEREAS,further,CVAG may act only upon a majority vote of the parties to the Joint
Powers Agreement as provided therein,and any actions not so approved would be outside CVAG's
lawful authority and subject to avoidance by a court of competent jurisdiction;
WHEREAS,pit to Government Code Section 6500 et seq. an Indian nation may not
be a party to a joint powers agreement but a joint powers agency may contract with an Indian nation
I�lo9
t•�{ul�l1_!_--
Apr-06-00 09: 17A ccachollaValloyAssccOf'Gov 760 340 5949 P-03
in a manner consistent with the terms of the agency's governing documents;
WHEREAS, accordingly, the parties wish to memorialize their intent to accommodate
participation in CVAO by the Ague.Caliente Tribe to the fullest extent possible under CVAG's
governing documents and the laws of the state of California pursuant to which CVAG is organized;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein
contained,the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. Tribal Participation
The Agus,Caliente Tribe shall be entitled to participation in CVAO in a similar man=as
is provided every CVAG member jurisdiction. Said tribal participation shall include representation
on the General Assembly and Executive Committee,including the exercise of voting rights with the
understanding that the tams of the Joint Powers Agreement shall del w the manner of voting
necessary to adopt any motion,resolution,or order or to otherwise authorize any action on behalf
of CVAG.
Additionally,tribal participation may include appointment to any other CVAG committee
or legislative body in the same manner as is currently employed for determining membership of
CVAG committees and legislative bodies.
The tribal representative to the Executive Committee shall be a current member of the Tribal
Council. A second member of the Tribal Council shall be designated as an alternate tribal
representative to the Executive Committee. The names ofthe tribal representative and alternate shall
be on file with the Executive Committee. The alternate tribal representative shall assume all rights
aM dudes of the absem tribal representative. Said tribal representatives shall be appointed by and
2 ��Il�
Apr-06-00 09:27A CoachallaVallayAssocO'PGov 760 340 6949 P.04
serve at the pleasure of the Tnbal Council and may be removed at any time,with or without cause,
at the sole discretion of the Tribal Council.
The tribe shall be entitled to five representatives on the General Assembly,each of whom
must be a current member of the Tribal Council.
Tribal representatives shall comply with all conflict of interest provisions adopted by CVAG
in the same manner as the representatives of the signatories to the Joint Powers Agreement.
2. Tribal Contributions
Ague Caliente shall be obligated to contribute to CVAG's budget on an amoral basis and in
the same manner as the CVAG member jurisdictions,except that the tribe's contribution shall be
calculated by reference and shall be equal to the lowest contribution assessed any single CVAG
member jurisdiction.
In the event that this MOu is terminated in any manner, CVAG shall reium within a
reasonable time of any request therefor a portion of the corresponding annual contribution of 57,130
(or the lowest amount paid by any single CVAG member)prorated by reference to the number of
months of tabal participation m that current fiscal year. CVAG shall have no obligation to retum
any annual contribution or portion thereof for any fiscal year prior to the year in which the tribe's
participation was terminated
3. Condition of Tribal Participation on TUMF Matters
Tribal Participation,as provided herein,on any matter related to the collection,expenditure
or administration of Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee(TUMF)monies shall be conditioned
on the Tribe's support and collection of TUbfff.
3 /AAt
Apr-06-00 09:27A CoachollaValloyAssocOfGov 760 340 5949 P_05
4. Term
This MOU shall be effective on the first date written above provided that an authorized and
duly empowered representative of each party hereto has executed the MOU as provided below.
Thereafter,this MOU shall conumne m effect until terminated by either party pursuant to 45 days
written notice.
5. Miscellaneods
Notice Any notice to be givenpursueatto this MOU shall be given by deposit in any United
States Post Office,registered or certified,postage prepaid,addressed to the parties at the addresses
set out lute. Said notices shall be deemed to have been received by the party to whom the same is
addressed at the expiration of saventy-two(72)hours after deposit of the same in the United States
Post Office for transmission by registered or certified mail as aforesaid
If to CVAG:
Patricia Larson
Executive Director
Coachella Valley Association of Governments
73-710 Fred Waring Drive,Suite 200
Palm Desert,CA 92260
If to Ague Calieme Band of Cahuilla Indians:
Richard Milanovich,Tribal Chairman
Agua CaHente Band of Cabuilla Indians
600 East Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs,CA 92262
4 ' ' now
Apr-06-00 09:17A CoachallaValloyAssocofGov 760 340 5949 p.O6
Modification This MOU may not be modified except by written agreement executed by
duly empowered and authorized representatives of all parties.
Aqua Calieato Band of Cahums Indian
By:
Richard Milanovich,Tn'bai Chairman
Coachella Valley Association of Coveraments
By:
Mari Glassman.Chair
Attest by,
Patricia A.Larson,Executive Director
P. OOl
APR. -14' OOIFRII 11:41 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS TELL 760 3:1 8360
FAX
To: Z eeol
Phone: 3314-/10? 7
Fax:
From: Angela LaFrance
City.of Palm Springs
lis
Building Department
Fax: 760)322-8360
Phone: 760) 323-8242 Ext. 8719
Pages .9 (Including cover)
------------ --------------------------------------------
Please reply
For information only
Per your request
Comments:
I
I� ��y
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
JOINT MEETING OF THE PALM SPRINGS CITY COUNCIL
AND
THE TRIBAL COUNCIL OF THE
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS
Case No. 5.0789-PD 252-TTM 28907
GeoPetro, LLC
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California
and the Tribal Council of the Ague Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians will hold a public
hearing at a joint meeting on July 20, 2000, which begins at 6:00 p.m., in the Council
Chambers, City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way.
An appeal has been submitted by GeoPtro LLC, a company formed by its majority,
controlling owner, Damon Prieto. Mr. Prieto is a Tribal Member of the Ague Caliente
Band of Cahuilla Indians. The appellant has appealed the following:
1. The°refusar of the Department of Planning and Building, Building Division, to
grant a building permit for previously approved ARCO am/pm mini-market(phase
one, Planned Development District 252) until the appellant pays the
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee(TUMF).
This appeal and public hearing will be conducted in accordance with the Land Use
Contract between the Tribal Council of the Ague Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and
the City of Palm Springs.
An opportunity will be given for all interested parties to be heard.
For information, please contact the City Planning Department, (760) 323-8245, or the
Tribal Council office, (760) 325-3400.
Dated: July 06, 2000
(CHARD M. LANOVICH P (CIA SANDERS
Tribal Council Chairman City Clerk
PUBLISHED: Desert Sun
July 10, 2000
VICINITY MAP
N.T.S.
A1.E.0 R[7,
F&M
5PRIN65
INiERNAfIONAI-
fANQ 17 CANYON WAY Awoff
pt?OxCT
_ PAR150 o LOCATION
ROAn
� v
I?AMON ROAD
.Ait
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE NO. 5,0789 - PVM DESCRIPTION ApKA oFffwFU5& or ff
APPLICANT aoPEfRO LLC ML19INCA VIV151ON fO GW A PULPING PERMIf FOR A
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ARCO AM/PM MINI-MARKET C PA5E ONE)
LML APPELLANT PAY5 n MNSPORf WN UNIFORM WICAfION
FM (fUMF)I
OFp�
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING u et N
STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) TKO 0Q
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE)
I,the undersigned,say: I am and was at all times herein mentioned, a citizen of the
United States and employed in the County of Riverside, over the age of eighteen
years,and not a party to the within action or proceeding;that my business address is
3200 E.Tahquitz Canyon Drive,Palm Springs,California;that on the 10th day of July,
2000 1 served the within (NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING) on PLANNING
COMMISSION CASE NO. 5.0789 - PD 252 - TTM 28907 Goo Petro, LLC. An
appeal has been submitted by GeoPetro, LLC, a company formed by Its
majority,controlling owner,Damon Prieto. Mr.Prieto is a Tribal Member of the
Agua Cailente Band of Cahuilla Indians. The appellant has appealed the
following:The"refusal'of the Department of Planning and Building,Building
Division, to grant a building permit for previously approved ARCO am/pm
mini-market (phase one, Planned Development District 252) until the
appellant pays the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee(TUMF).on persons
contained in Exhibit W attached hereto in said action or proceeding by depositing a
true copy thereof,enclosed in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid,
in a mailbox, sub-post office,substation or mail chute,or other like facility, regularly
maintained by the Government of the United States in the City of Palm Springs,
California, addressed to the list of persons or firms indicated on Metroscan and
certified by the ClWs Planning Technician.
I hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
0
JUDITH A. NICH 1-
Dated at Palm Springs, California, this 10th day of July. 2000.
�OF PALM
-N City of Palm Springs
i Depaccmenc of Planning&Building
+ , �4 Planning Division
roaana 0
10 Fp3200 Tahquia Canyon Way•Palm SPnngs,Calinosma 92262
RN�P TEU(760)323.8245•FAX(760)322-8360•TDD(760)86"527
July 7, 2000
I, Michele Rambo, Planning Technician for the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that the
Information contained on the attached labels is the most current available on MetroScan as of
today,July 7, 2000, at 1:30 PM.
Michele Rambo
Planning Technician
Post Office Box 2743 0 Palm Springs, California 92263-2743
EXV ', 6 T "r—)
677 280 024 67PSpmtZngs,
9 677280030
Usa 677 rings City Of Palm gsPO Box 749 P43 PO Bo 3Sacramento,CA 95812 CA 92263 P Springs CA 92263
677 280 031 677 280 036 677 280 037
City Of P 'ngs Henry&Herta Fox Heber Teerlink
PO 743 Family Fox 400 S El Cielo Rd
m Springs,CA 92263 103 Mission Hills Dr Palm Springs,CA 92262
Rancho Mirage,CA 92270
677 281 001 677 281002 677 281 003
Frederick Buehl Walter Childers&Mickey Childers Michael Norris
6542 Ocean Crest Dr#D204 23633 Del Cerro Cir 435 E Avenida Olancha
Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 Canoga Park,CA 91304 Palm Springs,CA 92264
677 281 004 677 281 005 677 281 006
Douglas&Carol Johnson John Peter Lang&Janet Marie Lang Bob Davis
474 Bradshaw Ln#4 476 Bradshaw Ln#5 480 Bradshaw Ln
Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92262
677 281007 677281008 677 281009
Donald Ryals Norma Bercena Andrew William French
482 Bradshaw Ln#7 2450 Rio Branca Dr Jo Macofsky-French
Palm Springs,CA 92262 Hacienda Heigbts,CA 91745 3585 Lathrop Ave
Simi Valley,CA 93063
677 281 010 677 281011 677 281 012
Solomon&Catherine Edelman Sherry Alderman Victor Weatherly
69411 Ramon Rd#587 475 Bradshaw Ln#11 477 Bradshaw Ln#12
Cathedral City,CA 92234 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92262
677 281013 677 281014 677 281015
1 Love You Ps Suzanne Long Bonita Lynn Tylor
861 S Oak Park Rd 483 Bradshaw Ln#14 464 Bradshaw Ln#15
Covina,CA 91724 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92262
677 281 016 677 281 017 677 281 018
Jan Christopher Schwartz Nicholas Loiacono Jeffrey Chatham&Thomas Chatham
456 Bradshaw Ln#16 7171 Buffalo Speedway#1016 2628 3Rd St
Palm Springs,CA 92262 Houston,TX 77025 Santa Monica,CA 90405
677 281019 677 281020 677 281 021
Patrick&Debra Craddick Aram&Margarita Keusayan Katrina Jones Warden
4739 Newville PI 1017 Seal Way 1735 Ridgeview Cir
Riverside,CA 92509 Seal Beach,CA 90740 Palm Springs,CA 92264
677 281 022 677 281023 677 281024
David Hagberg&David Hagberg Margie Aguirre Ruth Taylor
16321 Pacific Coast Hwy#155 457 Bradshaw Ln#23 195 Creek Rd#34
Pacific Palisades,CA 90272 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Glen Mills,PA 19342
677 281 025 677 281 026 677 281 027
Diane Davis Edith Denison C Merle Duckett&Mary Suzanne Duc
20759 De Forest St 1355 Pam Dorado 1654 Campbell Ave
Woodland Hills,CA 91364 San Dimas,CA 91773 Thousand Oaks,CA 91360
677 281 028 677 281 029 677 281 030
Howard&Sally Brown Thomas Chatham William&Bernice Carson
43867 Nathan Dr 2628 3Rd St William Carson
Hemet,CA 92544 Santa Monica,CA 90405 1304 Lorraine Dr
Grand Rapids,MN 55744
677 281 031 677 281032 677 281 033
Rex Ressler&Bette Elaine Nissen James Marion Clark&Gayleen Clark James&Catherine Franklin
31900 Circle Dr 652 W Mariposa Ave 445 Bradshaw Ln#33
Laguna Beach,CA 92651 El Segundo,CA 90245 Palm Springs,CA 92262
677 281 034 677 281035 677 281 036
G B Miller Company Glenn Teshirogi&Machiko Teshirgi John&Constance Rush
1347 San Pablo Or 28913 Covecrest Dr 3300 Brace Canyon Rd
Lake San Marcos,CA 92069 Rancho Palos Verdes,CA 90275 Burbank,CA 91504
677 281037 677 281038 677 281039
Tuyet Mai Maxinilian&Elizabeth Fuhrmann Louis Cooper&Maxine Cooper
442 Bradshaw Ln#37 444 Bradshaw Ln#38 446 Bradshaw Ln#39
Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92262
677 281040 677 281041 677 281042
Theodore Merll&Stefan Markal Kenneth Dunn Steven Siler
448 Bradshaw Ln#40 452 Bradshaw Ln#41 1002 Pier Ave
Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Santa Monica,CA 90405
677 281 043 677 281 044 677 281 045
Pueblo Sands Home Owners Associatio Roland&Aurora Garcia William Jones
436 Bradshaw Ln#43 428 Bradshaw Ln 8803 Gilman Dr#A
Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92262 La Jolla,CA 92037
677 281 046 677 281047 677 281 048
Raymond&Twila Brooks James&Virginia Pritchard William Zamora&James Reid
436 Bradshaw Ln 22800 Whittier St 9505 Meadow Mesa Or
Palm Springs,CA 92262 Colton,CA 92324 Escondido,CA 92026
677 281049 677 281050 677 281051
Alfred Cottrell Kevin&Bruce Stewart Samuel&Sonia Wilkinson
1426 E Colton Ave PO Box 217 2811 Royal Ann Ln
Redlands,CA 92374 Bellingham,WA 98227 Concord,CA 94518
677 281 052 677 281 053 677 281 054
William&Codnie Bua Robert Rush Sr.&R R Sr. Ralph Mascaro
13915 Cameo Dr 1000 N Kenneth Rd 1802 2Nd Ave
Fontana,CA 92337 Burbank,CA 91504 Des Moines,IA 50314
677 281 055 677 281 056 677 281 057
Paul Vega&Consuelo Ball Jewell&Diane Fields Stanley&Rose Ann Curatolo
439 Bradshaw Ln 1440 E Racquet Club Rd 1595 Laurelwood Ave
Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Colton,CA 92324
677 281058 677 281 059 677 281 060
Thomas Henn&Betty Henn Michael&Jean Graffius Mona Liebling
He 1 Box 1064 2741 Carimont PI 419 Bradshaw Ln#60
Joshua Tree,CA 92252 Simi Valley,CA 93065 Palm Springs,CA 92262
677 281 061 677 281 062 677 281063
Leon Valencia&Nelly Valencia Robert Boelio Tyson Forrester
2236 Talmadge St 427 Bradshaw Ln#62 425 Bradshaw Ln#63
Los Angeles,CA 90027 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92262
677 281 064 677 281 065 677 281066
Curatolo Stanley S&Rose Ann 1989 Frank&Sue Piersall Jr. Andrew Chikos&Fred Burres
17 Park Mirage Ln 4861 Mount Almagosa Or 1145 Larrabee St#15
Rancho Mirage,CA 92270 San Diego,CA 92111 West Hollywood,CA 90069
677 281 067 677 281068 677 281 069
Stanley&Sheila Greenberg Meyers Donald I&Anne T 1991 Martin&Jose Luis Velazquez
Stanley Greenberg PO Box 5723 426 Bradshaw Ln#69
13637 Bayliss Rd Diamond Bar,CA 91765 Palm Springs,CA 92262
Los Angeles,CA 90049
677 281 070 677 281 071 677 281 072
Ignacio&Nora Angelica Austrian Luther Kenneth&Margaret Rose Renfr Walter Mccullough&Inez McCullough
424 Bradshaw Ln#70 Family Trust Renfroe 409 Bradshaw Ln#72
Palm Springs,CA 92262 975 N Oakland Ave Palm Springs,CA 92262
Pasadena,CA 91104
677 281 073 677 281 074 677 281 075
Jeri Fowle Tegan Brown Christopher&Brandy Quayle
407 Bradshaw Ln 538 Village Dr#4537 Charles&Ma Perkins
Palm Springs,CA 92262 Pagosa Springs,CO 81147 403 Bradshaw Ln#75
Palm Springs,CA 92262
677 281076 677 281077 677 281078
Steven Fiore Joel&Linda Ross David Pins.&Virginia Pina
1200 S Diamond Bar Blvd#205 PO Box 9575 23433 Robinbrook PI
Diamond Bar,CA 91765 Rancho Santa Fe,CA 92067 Diamond Bar,CA 91765
677 281 079 677 281 080 677 281 081
Timothy Roth Gudalupe Trelles Harriett Weiss
408 Bradshaw Ln 406 Bradshaw Ln#80 404 Bradshaw Ln
Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92262
677 281 082 677 281 083 677 281 084
M Jean Petersod William Ormsby Ronald Gruenke&Nancy Gruenke
15161 Marne Cir 5251 Veronica St 14092 Carfax Ave
Irvine,CA 92604 Los Angeles,CA 90008 Tustin,CA 92780
677 281 085
677490001�OClft U6$�COI �Dt 3 677490006
James E Brown Inc Usa 677 Usa 677
60 Langsdorf 0120 PO Box 2245 PO Q 245
Fullerton,CA 92831 Palm Springs,CA 92263 Palm Springs,CA 92263
677 490 008 677 490 009 677 490 013
Usa 677 Usa 677 Usa 677
PO Box 2245 PO 45 PO Box
Palm Spnn A 92263 m Spnngs,CA 92263 Pal prings,CA 92263
680 031 012 680 032 001 680 032 002
John Gerard&Gerard Edward Demiraiakian Gregg Mccarty
20533 Rancho La Floresta Rd 66287 Cahuilla Ave 520 S Desert View Dr
Covina,CA 91724 Desert Hot Springs,CA 92240 Palm Springs,CA 92264
680 032 003 680 032 0081 a r1 680 032 009
John&Marian Vargas Paul&Deena Brand Paul&Deqx9i<d
30590 Avenida Del Padre 3627 E 87h St 362ZAZM St
Cathedral City,CA 92234 Los Angeles,CA 90023Let-Angeles,CA 90023
680 033 001 680 033 002 680 033 003
William Biala&Wayne Leaver Calvin Larson Charles&Maeva Hoefnagels
502 S Highland Dr 520 S Highland Dr 540 S Highland Dr
Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264
680 033 004 680 033 009 680 033 010
Carolus Hoefnagels&Maeva Hoefnage Brian Glen Bean Charles Delio&Constance Delio
540 S Highland Dr#5 567 S Desert Way 81715 Us Highway 1110302
Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Indio,CA 92201
680 033 011 680 033 013 680 034 002
Amel&Jesus Esteban Marceline Arthur Dolores Iversen
Nelson PO Box 4248 PO Box 177
521 S Desert Way Palm Springs,CA 92263 Patin Springs,CA 92263
Palm Springs,CA 92264
680 034 003 680 034 004 680 034 009
H James&Elberta Knowlton James Barbem Gary Cohen
535 Mountain Vw 560 S Desert Way 2001 E Camino Parocala#D23
Palm Desert,CA 92261 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264
680 034 010 680034011 Ol3 i 014 680 034 013
Tim Radigan Brophy John&Carer Siebert John Siebert& tebert
11333 N 92Nd St#1128 300 E Arenas Rd 300:��
Scottsdale,AZ 85260 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Pal nngs,CA 92262
680 034 014 680 035 002 680 035 003
John Siebert&`Carol Si Hugh Partridge&Marlene Partridge Tim Brophy
300 E Arenas R 4 Karlisa Cv 540 S Mountain View Dr
Palm S ' ,CA 92262 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92264
680 035 004 680 035 015 680 035 016
Christine Hammond&Sylvia Zelnys John Harrison&Sharon Harrison Robert&Bonnie Mcmillan
552 S Mountain View Dr 255 N El Cielo Rd#676 PO Box 238
Palm Springs,CA 92264 Palm Springs,CA 92262 Morongo Valley,CA 92256
680 035 017 680 035 019,tf1.O 680 035 020
Sanford&Mary Alice Ziskind P S M C Pro Sher Pln P S M C Pro§bwinn
1043 E Suntan Ln 2246 Betty Ln 2246 B_aWll
Palm Springs,CA 92264 Beverly Hills,CA 90210 BaidlyHills,CA 90210
680 041 004 680 041006J pl l 680041007
Community Red meant Agency Of Jack Haddad Jeronimo&Refugio Martin
PO Box 2 2246 Betty Ln 3850 E Calle De Ricardo
Pal rings,CA 92263 Beverly Hills,CA 90210 Palm Springs,CA 92264
680 041008 680 041009101 D 680 041 010
Ronald Vanmeeteren Talmarka Partners Limited Partnership Talmarka Partners Limi Partnership
3800 E Calle De Ricardo 79301 Country Club Dr#101 79301 Coun r#10I
Palm Springs,CA 92264 Bermuda Dunes,CA 92201 Be5mIrmnes,CA 92201
680 041011 680 04l 0121013101`{ 680 041 013
Jack Haddad Johanna Pipes Family Partnership Johanna Pipes Family Pjanership
2246 Betty 7209 Rindge Ave 7209 Rindge
Bev rlls,CA 90210 Playa Del Rey,CA 90293 Playa ey,CA 90293
680 041014 680 042 008 680 042 009
Johanna Pipes Family Partnership A Eloise.Cohen Frances Neely
7209 Rindge A 3040 Prospect Ave 271 Hilltop Dr
Playa CA 90293 Rosemead,CA 91770 Chula Vista CA 91910
680 042 010 690 042 011 680 042 012
David&Trudy Marie Johnston Palm Springs Board Of Realtors David&Trudy Marie Jol arm
NO STREET NAM QOMBER 4045 E Ramon Rd NO STREET N r NUMBER
,CA D1E� C��EIv Palm Springs,CA 92264 ,CA
1
4aDieCss &10&0
680 042 013 680042 014 680 043 001
David&Trudy Marie JohnsMA David&Trudy Marie JohnstonBarry Fluster
NO STREET NA ER NO STREET N :�BLIR 407 N Crescent Heights Blvd
,CA ,CA Los Angeles,CA 90048
NL ,55 71Lj: N ass GI��
680 043 002 680 043 003 680 043 004
Brad Villers&Patricia Gregg George Holland Ernest Payne
78 Blair Ter NO STREET:N 1 PO Box 735
San Francisco,CA 94107 ,CA Palm Springs,CA 92263
/kDD(�s5 G► �
680 043 005 680 043 006 .680043007
Cary Klein Timcor Financial Corp Amado Salinas&Felipe.Salinas
5646 Camino Deville 11500 W Olympic Blvd#425 3761 E Camino San Miguel
Camarillo,CA 93012 Los Angeles,CA 90064 Palm Springs,CA 92264
680 043 008 80 043 009 tl
680 043 009 680 044 001 -
Virgil&Mavis Cowing Richard Evans Steven Reid
PO Box 1081 68269 Pasada Rd 3911 E Calle De Ricardo
Torrance,CA 90505 Cathedral City,CA 92234 Palm Springs,CA 92264
680 044 002 680 044 003 680 044 009
Hector Rodriguez&Maria Luz Rodrigu Esther Carrillo Richard Ev
PO Box 1351 3975 E Calle De Ricardo 68269 da Rd
Corona,CA 92878 Palm Springs,CA 92264 Catifedrall City,CA 92234
680 044 010
Michael&Mary Jean Brady
9715 27Th Ave N
Minneapolis,MN 55441
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
JOINT MEETING OF THE PALM SPRINGS CITY COUNCIL
AND
THE TRIBAL COUNCIL OF THE
AGUA CALIENTE BAND OF CAHUILLA INDIANS
Case No. 5.0789-PD 252-TTM 28907
GeoPetro, LLC
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California
and the Tribal Council of the Ague Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians will hold a public
hearing at a joint meeting on July 20, 2000, which begins at 6:00 p.m., in the Council
Chambers, City Hall, 3200 East Tahquitz Canyon Way.
An appeal has been submitted by GeoPtro LLC, a company formed by its majority,
controlling owner, Damon Prieto. Mr. Prieto is a Tribal Member of the Ague Caliente
Band of Cahuilla Indians. The appellant has appealed the following:
1. The'refusal" of the Department of Planning and Building, Building Division, to
grant a building permit for previously approved ARCO am/pm mini-market(phase
one, Planned Development District 252) until the appellant pays the
Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF).
This appeal and public hearing will be conducted in accordance with the Land Use
Contract between the Tribal Council of the Ague Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians and
the City of Palm Springs.
An opportunity will be given for all Interested parties to be heard.
For information, please contact the City Planning Department, (760) 323-8245, or the
Tribal Council office, (760) 325-3400.
Dated: July 06, 2000
ICHARD M. MILANOVICH P ICIA SANDERS
Tribal Council Chairman City Clerk
PUBLISHED: Desert Sun
July 10, 2000
VICINITY MAP
N.T.S.
ALFJO FIR
FAUM
5PONG5
IN1 FFNArONAI.
WOU117 CANYON WAY AIPPOPf
13Aplsro o �OCA1"ON
pOAJ
� v
MON POAP
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CASE NO. 5,01e9 - FP252 DESCRIPTION AppF& OF1NFpFrusALof NF
APPLICANT GFOPF1 0 C PULPING PIV1510N fO 6W A DUII.PM FFpMIT Fop A
PpFVI0u51 Y APPFOVFP AMO AM/ FM MINI-MARKET(PNA5F ONE)
UNI1 AFPFL.AW FAY51NF lWN5POUA110N UNIFOU M1116AION
FFF (1UMF) ,
PROOF OF PUBLICATION This is space For County Clefk's Filing Stamp _
(2015.$.C.C.P)
) �
0 0�, I
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Riverside y
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of Proof of Publication of
the County aforesaid; i am over the age of eighteen -
years,and not a party to or interested in the
� sel
above-entitled matter.I am the principal clerk of a 's'Ir _''';:!.
L.
printer of the,DESERT SUN PUBLISHING
COM1(PANY a newspaper of general circulation, - 7, - `
printed and published in the cityof Palm Springs, , _ P '`'" =r'
,r,�,�:�_�
County of Riverside,and which newspaper has been Idr)1ICr I- I- �r eivev H msL mE city cotton
ell! Hu'; G-' hit �h:Inyc ^ lfornia and -ho
adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the III Ills[ Celli �In'� r�s c,ahem e Bend of on-
NIT,, Inch", I 'old c n bliclhee,iny at Is fom4
Superior Court of the County of Riverside,State of eleehna Li 1 1 d000, wh ell beis1,1 nt 6.00
� 'ham6es CLLy inu t Hn 3200
California under the date of March 24,1958.Case �'el 11n. nt I I s",I i - vJay
Number 191236; that the notice,of which the An sill"'e" � " -'"n'ued by Ce ylie LLc 9
coinomy 4 by i'; inalon;y conlrolliny own
annexed is a printed copy(set in type not smaller 'i oamo'I ' 11 of
the ,Mu"' r I "rid of Cffhudla Irdmns The
than non pariel,has been published in each regular 2ppelrst .:,I �� Ina followln'-
t ThP 'i m , 'of iP Depei to ienr 41 PlEinning
and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any ���.�P,ur�1�� 1 ur�islon, m grtr a ntndms
pelapproved WACO .It✓pm
supplement thereof on the following dates,to wit: "•� - P
J i n 1 [ ci II cl the Ir -i -��- I
lipn lL L. pee (Jf MIFF)
July loth l n� apP I-aunq r.tll oC ion-lui cd
m noro J. Pm Ldll(f Uss OJ✓L Fist bo-
_ tweet i t i i I n it o1 Ne ,aqua Uyillenlo
_____--._—__-_.__--.--------- Pend of i, 1 h_1 Inc and ills Gty o* Palm
51)i mcv
All in the year 2000
1 certify(or declare)under penalty of perjury that the �' 1
foregoing is true and correct.
loth
Dated at Palm Springs,California this----------day _
I
July
------- 2000 1l
l
Signature ,qu opprn 1 11 1 givan for all mteiasced par-
ries
Poi mfoun i I conianL Iha Cil/ Pl rnomg
IJenarfm^, I 1 ,e2,15, or IDS Tl ltiel Oouncll
s'fr,0 ( e
I]mod d •alp
l ��
sl l(ICIi wI „i 11
Trn,d C%� � � � �nn
/s/Pabnn°
]rqi Cbzi
PU3 JW i "l _