HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/2/2000 - STAFF REPORTS (6) CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JULY 5, 2000
A Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, was called to
order by Mayor Kleindienst, in the Council Chamber, 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way, on
Wednesday, July 5, 2000, at 5:30 p.m., at which time, the City Attorney announced items
to be discussed in Closed Session, and at 7:00 p.m., the meeting was convened in open
session.
ROLL CALL: Present: Councilmembers Jones, Hodges, Oden, Reller-Spurgin, and
Mayor Kleindienst
Absent: None
The meeting was opened with the Salute to the Flag, and an invocation by Reverend
Richard Drasen-New Thought Center-Religious Science
REPORT OF POSTING OF AGENDA: City Clerk reported that the agenda was posted in
accordance with Council procedures on June 30, 2000.
REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY ON MATTERS DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION (All
Entities) - See items on Page 5 of agenda this date.
PRESENTATIONS: Certificate of Commendation-Michelle Cirone
HOUSING AUTHORITY: INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY: FINANCING
AUTHORITY: COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - No Business
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Comments on matters not on the agenda:
Keith McCormick handed out an article for the upcoming annual motorbike event
and added that there has been a combined investment of approximately $95,000;
that in the past the event was co-partnered; that this year the Council has chosen
an out-of-towner to put on the event; that his group is now being asked to pay
that promoter to have his annual auction sanctioned; that his event has been
held for the past several years; that many local people are hired to help with the
event; that the new promoter is from out of town and will be importing its help and
added that it was not right for the approval to be given to the new promoter.
Bob Arzano, 111 Vintage Auto, stated that his company did manage the auction
last year; that to use an out-of-towner for the same time frame is unfair; that the
event that the Council approved does in fact coincide with the annual auction that
is held each year and added that it is not right.
Wendie Busig-Kohn, 591 N. Belardo, reviewed various upcoming events and
added that there is a problem in the City concerning use of drugs; that there are
some alternatives that could be offered to deter the use and added that those
options will be continued to be presented at each upcoming Council meeting.
Council Minutes
07-05-00,Page 2
Bob Varner, Rancho Mirage, endorsed Councilmember Ron Oden for Congress
and gave his opinion concerning the differences in political parties.
Comment regarding Item 5:
William Kopeel stated that item 5 should not be acted on; that the matter
concerned approving a grant that was slated to demolish the Ralph's Grocery
Store; that the matter has not come to the Council for designation as an historic
site; that an EIR and CEQA needs to be done on the site; that if the Council
approves the matter it will in fact be approving a project that has not yet been
presented to the public and urged the matter be postponed until after a public
hearing.
APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA: Items 1 thru 8.
It was moved by Reller-Spurgin, seconded by Oden and unanimously carried,
that items 1 through 8, excluding 5, be adopted.
CONSENT AGENDA:
Review by City Manager of Consent Items to be clarified.
1. MO 6646 approving agreement with Palm Springs Life Magazine for
advertisement in the Palm Springs Desert Resorts Group Destination Planner
2000-01 for$12,000. A4239.
2. MO 6647 approving agreement with Doug Wall Construction for the remodeling
of Airport main terminal restrooms for$149,632, CP00-11. A4240.
3. Res 19818 approving the City of Palm Springs' proportionate share of the
renewal of the Whitewater NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit for $18,500.
4. MO 6648 approving agreement with Sierra Pacific Electrical Contracting for
construction of a traffic signal at the intersection of Farrell Drive and Tamarisk
Road for $134,740, CP97-36. A4241.
5. See Extended Consent Agenda below.
6. Res 19819 ratifying authorization of expenditures for emergency repairs and
clean up at 538 North Palm Canyon Drive, Palm Canyon Theatre for $50,000.
Hodges Abstain.
7. MO 6649 approving purchase order to Desert View Arborists for palm tree
trimming at various locations throughout the City on a unit price basis of$16 per
tree for removal of seedpods and fronds for$46,960.
Council Minutes
07-05-00,Page 3
8. Res 19820 and 19821 approving Payroll Warrants and Claims & Demands.
Note abstentions, if any:
Councilmember Warrant# Payee Particular Nature of Conflict
Reller-Spurgin 954923 Spouse
Hodges 954719 DWA Client of Employer
954720 DWA
954748 Foster
954751 G&M
954877 Preferred Plumbing
EXTENDED CONSENT AGENDA:
5. CALIFORNIA INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD DECONSTRUCTION
GRANT
Recommendation: That the Council approve submittal of an application to the
California Integrated Waste Management Board for a Deconstruction Grant for
$100,000.
Councilmember Oden questioned if there were specific sites the grant was being
applied for.
Director of Redevelopment stated that when the grant is applied for, specific sites
must be named; that when the application was written the projects were Desert
Fashion Plaza, Rudnick Building and Ralphs; that as the application was completed
projects have been dropped from the grant; that Desert Fashion Plaza was taken out
as was the Rudnick Building; that the timetable for the grant is tight; that in fact the
Planning Commission did on this date deny the Ralph's project; and that although the
Resolution before the Council is generic, the grant must be specific.
Motion to deny the Resolution was presented by Oden, seconded by Hodges; and
tabled due to lack of vote.
Councilmember Hodges stated that the timing for the matter is inappropriate.
Mayor Kleindienst questioned if the application could be modified to remove the Frey
Building.
Recycling Coordinator stated that if the Council desired to remove the request, staff
would comply.
Mayor questioned if the grant was given on an annual cycle.
Council Minutes
07-05-00, Page 4
Recycling Coordinator stated that this was the first time the grant was offered by the
State and that it is not clear whether it would be offered again.
Director of Redevelopment stated that while the application could be modified by
Friday staff would need direction as to which building to request the funding for.
Mayor stated the funds could be requested to assist in the demolition of the Rudnick
Building.
Director of Redevelopment stated that staff would not recommend using this funding
for the Rudnick Building; that the time frame for allocation of the funds would not
coincide with the urgency of the demolition of the building; and suggested modifying
the grant to designate the Desert Fashion Plaza.
Councilmember Reller-Spurgin stated that there is no proposed project for the Desert
Fashion Plaza.
Director of Redevelopment stated that it is a point well taken; that when the process
started for the application there were projects that could use the grant; that things
have changed and that is may not be viable to request the grant at this time.
Consensus of Council to receive and file the report.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
9. TTM28087-EL DORADO PALM SPRINGS LIMITED
Recommendation: That the Council approve Tentative Tract Map 28087 to
subdivide the existing 377 space El Dorado Mobile Country Club for
condominium purposes, subject to conditions.
Director of Planning & Building reviewed the staff report and conditions of
approval.
Deputy City Attorney stated that counsel did recommend the staff
recommendation; that there are many legal positions that have been taken by the
parties involved in this matter; that one of the issues for Council consideration is
the scope and limits of the authority of conditions and the appropriateness and
legality of the Tenant Impact Report (TIR); that there is significant disagreement
between both parties; that both parties have interpreted the precise language of
the subdivision map act; that the extension of time for the conversion is in fact
extra statutory; that both parties did work together to include the language of
16A; that the major disagreements between the parties are: disclosure of the
sales price, selection of the appraiser, and the structure of the purchase; that the
date of transition from the City's rent control to the State map act has caused
discomfort for the tenants; that increments of increase would actually occur over
a period of five years for those that would be affected; that the date of conversion
has caused disagreement; that each side desires equity and fair treatment; that
Council Minutes
07-05-00, Page 5
when the matter was discussed at the Planning Commission level, it was felt that
the two sides were approaching agreement; that since that time, the parties are
further apart; that there are approximately 11 issues of disagreement; that the
legal position of counsel is that the resolution presented for approval represents
the maximum legal discretion for the Council and that counsel would recommend
approval with stated conditions.
City Attorney stated that both parties did concur that each would be limited to '/2
hour of presentation; and that there would be designated speakers; and that after
the full allocated time expired, there would be no other requests for speaking.
Mayor questioned if the applicant and tenants agreed to the proposal.
Sue Loftin representing owner/applicant concurred.
Charles Prawdzik representing tenants concurred.
Mayor requested the designation of speakers.
Ms. Loftin stated that Richard Close and she would represent the owner
applicant and be the designated speakers.
Mr. Prawdzik stated that Doug Cultice, Milton Flack, Don Lincoln and himself
would be the designed speakers for the tenants.
Mayor questioned the audience if all were in agreement with the process for the
public hearing.
Several audience members objected to not being able to express their views
during the public hearing.
After discussion amongst the public, audience members withdrew their request to
speak and it was agreed the aforementioned would represent both sides.
Mayor declared the hearing open.
Sue Loftin, representing owner/applicant stated that the approval process is in
fact appropriate action under the subdivision map act; that the matter was
discussed at the Planning Commission level, and the recommendations have
been incorporated for action tonight; that there have been letters submitted to the
Council within the past few days that should be considered a part of the record;
that she is requesting that all materials presented to the Planning Commission
likewise be a part of the Council's record; that it seemed that agreement had
been reached; but that today other items have arisen to move the parties apart;
that all procedures and policies have been complied with by the owner; that the
availability of such action is allowed under State Law; that a TIR was done; that
allegations have been made against the park owner that are untrue; that the
owner has volunteered to extend the date for purchase to allow the tenants a
Council Minutes
07-05-00, Page 6
longer period to review the materials; that the Law governs the amount of
increase that can be put into effect according to levels of income; that the
subdivision map act actually better protects those that are of low income; that the
owner has made concessions that he was not required to make; that the value of
the lots is to be determined by an independent appraiser; that with all the
conditions that are being set in place, once the approval is granted and the
appraisal approved by the Department of Real Estate, the actual implementation
of any increase could be 5 to 6 years; that CC&R's, by-laws and an operating
agreement have been drafted; that all those documents have been provided for
review; and that the position of the Tenant Impact Report is in compliance with
the law.
Richard Close, representing owner/applicant, stated this process has been
continuing for seven years; that Mr. Goldstein has diligently pursued the process
for conversion during that time; that all rules have been complied with; that the
owner has been pressured to make concessions, and has made them; that he
agreed to extending the time frame for selling the lots at fair market value; that
the low income tenants would be protected by State Law; that the sales price of
the lots is based on fair market value; that the longer the issue takes, the higher
the fair market value will be; that the Council is encouraged to work with the City
Attorney to determine the correct action to take; that the matter, if not acted on,
will end up with litigation between the City and the owner; that an end is in sight
for the process and that the process presented is in full compliance with State
law.
Milton Flack, representing El Dorado Tenants, stated that he is the President of
the Homeowners Association; that there have been letters submitted to the
Council that should be considered a part of the record; that many of the mobile
homes in the park are over 26 years old and cannot be moved; that there is no
option for those owners; that this is a senior community; that it is comprised of
affordable housing; that the tenants are in danger of losing that affordable
housing; that the rumor is that the average sales price for the lots will be
$62,500; that the price has not been disclosed; that no one really knows; that the
homeowners oppose the Planning Commission's recommendation; that the
residents do not want conversion of the park; that it is unaffordable and will
displace residents; that the residents need protection and a fair manner in which
to determine future rents.
Douglas Cultice, representing El Dorado Tenants, stated that he is the Vice-
President of the Homeowners Association; that the agreement between the two
parties is not close; that in the agreement the transition for selling the lots is not
comfortable; that the tenants that purchased mobile homes after September 30,
1999 have no rights under the TIR; that the agreement as presented is not a
good agreement; that the estimated sales price is $50 - $75,000 per lot; that it is
unaffordable; that the residents that live in the park are of low and moderate
income; that the rent increases will place the rent for the lots at $600 - $700 per
Council Minutes
07-05-00,Page 7
month; that the rent will not be affordable; that it is a nice park; that the tenants
do not deserve a loss in equity; that the sales in the park have virtually stopped;
that the residents do not ask for much from the City, but are requesting protection
from economic displacement.
Charles Prawdzik, representing El Dorado Tenants, stated that the economic,
social and physical well-being of the tenants is at stake; and introduced Don
Lincoln.
Don Lincoln, representing El Dorado Tenants, stated that the issue is what
provisions apply to this proposed subdivision; that the subdivision is not
proposed by the residents; that it is not approved by the residents; that is being
brought forward by the park owner; that the Government Code which the owner
is citing is to allow mobile home owners to convert to subdivisions; that the
reason for this allowance is for the tenants to assume residential ownership; that
there are cases such as Donahue vs. Santa Paula that determine when the MAP
act supersedes the City's rent control; that in that case the City was ruled
incorrect in its position; that the key to the Act is residential ownership; and that
in this case the guidelines set forth in Government Code Section 66427.5 are not
being met.
Charles Prawdzik stated that the Council has heard from the applicant; that
according to the presentation by the applicant's representatives, the proposal is
in compliance with Government Code Section 66427, when in fact it is not; that it
is the tenants position that at the time of the filing of the Tentative Map, an offer
should be made to the residents for purchase options; that the purchase price
has not yet been disclosed, resulting in noncompliance; that the residents have
been told that the rents will be disclosed after conversion of the park, which is not
in compliance with the Act; that there is a cut off date of September, 1999; that
there is no statute to allow any cutoff date; and questioned the purpose of
excluding anyone and what rights are being given to the tenants; that the
alternative for the tenants if they do not agree is to pick up their mobile homes
and leave; that reality does not allow that; that the Council should deny the
request due to insufficiency of compliance with the law and under the conditions
present vis a vis the Donahue case; that the tenants have cited case law; that the
applicant/owner has not; that the Courts fully support the tenant position; that the
law is clear that the purchase price must be disclosed prior to the application;
and that this has not been complied with.
Ms. Loftin, representing applicant/owner, stated that the Santa Paula case being
presented is not stipulating the facts; that only after the conversion does the
disclosure take place; that the appraisal needs to be done, then an offer made to
the tenants; that the timing is clear; that not only has the applicant complied with
the Law but has in fact made concessions beyond what was required; and read
Government Code Section 66427.1.
Council Minutes
07-05-00,Page 8
Mr. Lincoln presented a copy of the Donahue vs. City of Santa Paula for review;
and added that it is simply written and simply argued; that he trusts the Council's
intelligence to make a determination and added that both briefs, all Planning
Commission records and any other submissions should be included in the City
Council's record of proceedings.
Ms. Loftin stated that although Mr. Lincoln is the City Attorney for Union City, the
case that he cited is not the same as what is being represented before the
Council at this hearing; that in the other case the park was being sold to a non-
profit organization, not the residents; that the facts need to be considered; that in
her opinion by the time all appraisals are in, the park owners and the residents
may be somewhat disappointed in the price; that the conversion rates are fixed
for as long as one lives in the park; and that the applicant/owner would request
the Council approve the Tract Map with conditions as established by City Staff
and Planning Commission.
There being no further appearances the hearing was closed.
Councilmember Hodges questioned if the September 1999 deadline is in the TIR.
Deputy City Attorney stated that the date was based on approval of agreement,
and that the date is flexible; that there date is established by deadline of the
process; that the Council could impose a condition to be established based on
the eligibility of the Tenant Impact Report; that the date could be based on the
final report of the real estate appraiser, or on approval of tonight's action, that
none of those positions are unreasonable; that the agreement between the
parties included language for indemnification; that while it is not a concern of the
City, it does prevent unofficial efforts to undermine the terms and conditions of
settlement; that all signatories to the agreement will be held to the
indemnification and held harmless, and the allowance works both ways; and that
this type of language is typical in settlement agreements.
Councilmember Hodges stated that there is no mention of relocation expenses.
Deputy City Attorney stated that there is nothing to compel relocation expenses,
either the party has the right to purchase or rent; that the rate of rental will not
reach market value for a period of 5 to 6 years; and that there is no legality that
requires relocation expenses, unless both parties would agree.
Councilmember Hodges stated that there is some concern with the ability of the
tenant to purchase the lots, or the ability to pay increased rent rates; that the only
option for those tenants is to walk away; and that currently the tenants are
protected under the City's rent control.
Council Minutes
07-05-00, Page 9
Deputy City Attorney stated that there are mechanisms, one to include in the
settlement agreement a delayed conversion for 18 months, and to require an
appraiser that is acceptable to both parties; that then the four year phase-in will
allow non low income residents to have time to find alternative housing or find
financing and would prevent an artificial low sale for the tenants.
Councilmember Hodges questioned if someone bought the lot are they required
to buy the home on the lot.
Ms. Loftin stated that in the CC & R when the resident sells the coach the owner
sells the lot; that it is a package deal with the tenant estimating the home value
and the landowner estimating the market price for the land.
Councilmember Oden stated that this is a difficult decision; that he feels strongly
about the landowner's rights and about the tenants protection; that the Council
has been dealing with issues concerning El Dorado for years; that the
negotiations for the sale have been going on for seven years and it is difficult to
understand why this cannot be worked out; that the people being effected are in
their 70's and 80's; and it does not make for an easy decision; that the expenses
for these people are high, with medicine and the like, and that by the time they
take care of themselves they are poor.
Councilmember Reller-Spurgin stated that one cannot envision agreeing to buy a
car or a home without knowing the price; that it is not difficult to understand why
people are resisting when they do not know the cost; that while the issue is
difficult, it really comes down to the price and how much is it.
Councilmember Jones concurred with the Councilmembers and encouraged the
parties to be fair-minded and work out an agreement.
Mayor Kleindienst questioned the range of estimated sales prices.
Ms. Loftin stated that the estimate would be somewhere around an average of
$60,000.
Mayor Kleindienst stated that the value is an estimate; that under the California
Business and Professions Code the owner cannot be compelled to disclose the
proposed condominium lots sales price at the tentative tract map stage; and
questioned the time allowed for the tenants to review the matter.
Deputy City Attorney stated that the owner did agree to 18 months for the tenants
to review the materials.
Mayor Kleindienst questioned the breakdown of current rent.
Deputy City Attorney stated that the average is $381.73 in current rent.
Council Minutes
07-05-00, Page 10
Mr. Cultice stated that the homes were selling prior to the disclosure; that the
range was $27,000 to $50,000; and that since disclosure of the pending sale, the
prices have dropped to $20,000 to $30,000.
Motion to deny the Resolution based on not offering meaningful protection from
the impacts of conversion was presented; after which, it was moved by Oden,
seconded by Hodges, and carried by the following vote that the Resolution be
denied, and that staff be directed to reformulate a new Resolution with findings
for denial of the Tract Map.
AYES: Hodges, Jones, Oden and Reller-Spurgin
NO: Kleindienst
COUNCIL COMMENTS/ANNOUNCEMENTS/INTERAGENCY REPORTS:
Councilmembers reported on various civic and community organizational
meetings and events which they attended, subsequent to the last regular
meeting, and announced upcoming events of community interest.
LEGISLATIVE ACTION:
10. PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE
Recommendation: That the Council readopt the Palm Springs Municipal Code,
reformatted and recodified, which includes the Zoning Ordinance, per City
Charter.
City Clerk read Title of Ordinance as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING
THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE
after which, it was moved by Hodges, seconded by Reller-Spurgin, and
unanimously carried, that further reading be waived and the Ordinance be
introduced for first reading.
11. MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT-SPEED ZONES-MESQUITE AVENUE
Recommendation: That the Council amend the Municipal Code to establish
speed limits on Mesquite Avenue from Gene Autry Trail to the east City limits.
City Engineer reviewed the staff report and in response to questions by Council
stated that the exact location would be from Gene Autry Trail east to the City
limits.
Councilmember Oden stated that the location of the Youth Center on Mesquite is
an area that should be monitored; and that cars travel at a high rate of speed on
that stretch.
Council Minutes
07-05-00,Page 11
Mayor stated that this is a similar case as that of the airport loop road; and that
the limits are being raised due to violators of the law.
City Engineer stated that the limit is being proposed based on 85% of the traffic
flow.
City Clerk read Title of Ordinance as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING
SECTION 12.20,030 OF THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING
TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CERTAIN SPEED LIMIT ZONES
after which, it was moved by Oden, seconded by Reller-Spurgin and unanimously
carried, that further reading be waived; and it was further moved by Oden,
seconded by Reller-Spurgin and carried by the following vote that the Ordinance
be introduced for first reading.
AYES: Jones, Hodges, Oden and Reller-Spurgin
NO: Kleindienst
12. Cs 5.0730 CUP - MOUNTAIN FALLS GOLF PRESERVE
Recommendation: That the Council rescind previous approval of actions taken
regarding the Mountain Falls Golf Preserve project. (R19725 and R19726 and
Ordinance 1580).
City Attorney reviewed the staff report and added that a new scope for an
environmental impact report is being developed and that approval of the
recommendation is in compliance with order of the Court.
Resolution 19822 as recommended was presented; after which, it was moved by
Hodges, seconded by Jones and unanimously carried that R19822 be adopted.
City Clerk read Title of Ordinance as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,
REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 1580 CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION
OF PROPERTY LOCATED IN SECTION 10 FROM W-R-1-A (WATER COURSE
WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL — 20,000 SQ. FT. LOT SIZE) TO 0-20
(OPEN SPACE —20 ACRES MINIMUM LOT SIZE)
after which; it was moved by Hodges, seconded by Jones and unanimously
carried that further reading be waived, and the Ordinance be introduced for first
reading.
Council Minutes
07-05-00, Page 12
13. CITY'S INSURANCE RENEWAL
Recommendation: That the City approve the City's insurance renewals for
general liability, airport liability, aero squadron aircraft, all-risk property, boiler &
machinery, crime, earthquake/flood and workers' compensation excess
insurance, for a total premium of$319,163.
City Manager reviewed the staff report and added that the insurance premium is
a large amount of the risk budget; that in the past the policies were approached
in an ombudsman fashion; that there is a project savings of $49,700 over last
years package; that the market is competitive and that in the future he will be
more involved in the process to be sure of maximized savings.
Risk Manager stated that the renewals were needed effective July 1; that since
last year a major airport expansion was added to City property; that earthquake
and property rates have gone up in the market; that even with those increases
the City will experience a $49,700 overall savings in comparison to last year's
and in answer to questions by Council stated that some insurance is considered
second level while insurance such as property is considered primary.
Councilmember Reller-Spurgin stated that if the savings were approximately
$50,000, and AON charged the City $75,000 for agent costs, is not the result a
$25,000 loss to the City?
Risk Manager stated that the broker was paid $75,000; but that last year with the
premiums, commission and taxes, the difference in savings compared to this
year would be $11,510, and that includes a higher rate for the increase in
property.
Councilmember Reller-Spurgin stated when the matter was first presented to the
Council she did vote against the issue; that it would seem that a local agent could
do the job and at a lesser cost.
Mayor questioned if the airport reimburses the City for its insurance.
Risk Manager stated that the Enterprise Fund is billed for insurance costs.
Councilmember Jones stated that it would be good for the City Manager to
monitor the situation.
Councilmember Oden concurred.
Council Minutes
07-05-00, Page 13
Resolution 19823 as recommended was presented; after which, it was moved by
Hodges, seconded by Oden and carried by the following vote that R19823 be
adopted.
AYES: Hodges, Jones, Oden and Kleindienst
NO: Reller-Spurgin.
ADDITIONAL LEGISLATIVE ITEMS: None
ADDED STARTERS: None
REPORTS & REQUESTS:
CITY COUNCIL reports or requests
a) Councilmember Oden requested speed limit monitoring on Via Escuela;
and requested a report regarding the Hot Rod Weekend and how much
notice did staff receive regarding Mr. McCormick's event.
b) Councilmember Jones requested a public announcement regarding the
status of the fountain located at Francis Stevens Park.
DEPARTMENTAL reports or requests-Received for Filing.
14. City Manager/Executive Director filing of Project Area disclosure.
PUBLIC reports or requests - None
STAFF reports or requests - None
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, Mayor declared the meeting adjourned.
PATRICIA A. SANDERS
City Clerk