HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/28/1981 - MINUTES CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
OCTOBER 28, 1981
An Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council was called to
order by Mayor Doyle, in the Council Chamber, 3200 Tahquitz-
McCallum Way, on Wednesday, October 28, 1981 , at 7:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL : Present: Councilmembers Beirich, Field, Rose,
Ortner and Mayor Doyle
Absent: None
The meeting was opened with the salute to the Flag.
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY : No business
PUBLIC HEARINGS : None
PUBLIC COMMENTS :
a) Allen Perrier, 225 S. Civic Drive, on behalf or'
two clients, commented on proposed drainage fees,
stating that when the fee was established for
one drainage area in March, he did not think the
Council knew of the 1967 requirements; that he
did not see evidence of any emergency situation
to justify action prior to meeting those conditions;
that the 1967 plan, with its conditions, is part
of the General Plan and until it is amended, there
should not be anything done contrary to it; (114)
that to suggest that the cost benefit
analysis is not done before starting the program,
is to delude oneself; that if the drainage program
is to proceed, it should be a matter of an assess-
ment district, and approved by the voters ; and the
only thing he could conclude from the report that
related to significant damage, related to a garage
having been washed out.
b) Lonnie Henning, Vice-President Cochise Airlines,
stated that the Airport Use Agreement contains
language which they believe to be possibly
discriminatory, i .e. , Article IX, and a matter
of re-regulation; and requested that the item (51 )
be continued.
c) Chris Hickey, attorney representing City Cab,
indicated that letters have been submitted to the
City Clerk from concerned citizens and merchants
in support of a split-franchise ; that the Hotel (143)
Committee of the Chamber has sent the Chamber Board
a recommendation that it recommend a split-franchise;
that the Chamber's Executive Director personally
supports that concept; that the Transportation
Committee of the Chamber has indicated it would
like to undertake a study of cab service, and make
results thereof available to the Council - such a
study would necessitate a one-month delay by the
Council ; and that, during that interim period, Vie
suggested the Council grant an interim franchise
to Desert Cab and City Cab. He stated that a split-
franchise would preclude any inconvenience to the
public should one or the other company not be able
to perform.
of rr l i
Council Minutes
10-28-81 Page 2
PUBLIC COMMENTS (Continued)
c) Arthur Block, attorney representing Shalizi-Malikyar,
taxicab applicant, stated that if an exclusive
license were granted to his client, the Council (143)
would have one person responsible to it, where
other applicants have dual roles (provide service
in other communities) and he believed the competitive
factor would foster better service throughout the
desert; that his client's rates are less which would
be an advantage to the public; and that his client
has the background and experience of operating a
business.
d) William Brottingham, representing Desert Cab Co. ,
urged approving the taxicab license agreement as
recommended by staff; that economics and the considera- (143)
tions of operating a taxicab business are factors
against the consideration of a split-franchise; that
responsibility of the operator is vis-a-vis its
performance over a period of time, as dictated by
the license agreement; that single-dispatching may
sound good, but problems can develop with multiple
licensees; and that the company has demonstrated it
can perform, in that it provided service during
emergency periods.
LEGISLATIVE ACTION:
1 . TAXICAB LICENSE AGREEMENT
Transportation Director highlighted recommendation, as
presented at the last meeting, noting that supplemental
information was presented at the last study session,
in his report dated October 26, 1981 ; and stated that
staff supports its previous recommendation to award
an exclusive license agreement to Desert Cab Co.
(143)
In answer to question by Council , Transportation Director
stated that the number of cabs would increase from 8 to
14 by January 1 , 1982; that the operator must provide
15 daily shifts in-season, and fewer off-season; that
with 14 vehicles, up to 24 shifts can be provided, with
substantial reserve for maintenance and backup vehicles ;
that there is no intent that there would be less than
15 shifts provided in Palm Springs, in-season; that the
operator does make trips out-of-town, and it would be
good .business practice to secure a return fare, however,
the operator must meet performance criteria of the
agreement, i .e. , respond to 85% of all calls within 15
minutes; that with the number of vehicles and shifts
proposed, it is reasonable that the operator will be
able to do so.
Councilman Rose stated that weighing the applications
becomes a question of subjective evaluation; that his
weighted evaluation resulted in a conclusion different
from staff recommendation; that he gave additional weight
to Desert Cab for stepping in when the other company
failed, however, found its financial statement weak;
that the financial statement of Shalizi-Malikyar was
much stronger, and finds that company to be the highest
ranked of the applicants ; that he supports the concept
of two licensees, which will better serve the public;
q�-•l
Council Minutes
10-28-81 Page 3
1 . TAXICAB LICENSE AGREEMENT (Continued)
that he preferred having the licensee based in Palm
Springs ; and that he would support a split license
agreement between either Shalizi-Malikyar/Desert Cab
or Shalizi-Malikyar/City Cab.
Councilman Field stated that he was satisifed with
staff recommendation; that Desert Cab has performed
satisfactorily in the past. and based on constituent
reports, continues to do so now; that he did not
support a split-license; that he admired the applica-
tion of Shalizi-Malikyar; and that he believed Desert
Cab was deserving of the exclusive license agreement, CONT'D
Mayor stated that he has similar concerns as Councilman (143)
Rose; that the Council may be looking at starting with
8 cabs and increasing that number to 14 by the first
of the year, and he did not see that the company was
in a financial position to do that,-without a substantial
contribution by Mr. Jackshaw; that the expenditures
projected do not include some items normally associated
witht the business; and that he did not believe the right
funding was provided to support 14 cabs.
Mr. Jackshaw stated that he is prepared to provide a
cash infusion of $35,000.
Councilwoman Ortner stated that she could not support a
two license concept; that she felt the Shalizi-Malikyar
application was an excellent one, but did not believe
it was economically feasible to support two operators ;
and that with respect to its performace in the City,
she would support a license agreement for Desert Cab Co.
Councilman Beirich stated that he could not support
the Desert Cab application ; that in terms of financial
information, the Shalizi-Malikyar application has more
validity in projecting expenditures and the ability
to purchase the cabs, and is more financially secure;
and that in terms of rates, it offers a better advantage
to the public.
Mayor stated he would have preferred something in writing
with regard to Mr. Jackshaw's financial ability; that he
recognized the assistance Desert Cab has provided to the
City in past situations; that there are safeguards in
the agreement to determine whether the company is performing;
and that he would support approval , with understanding that
agreement provides that six additional cabs will be on
line by January 1 , 1982.
Resolution 14016, approving exclusive license agree ,
ment for Desert Cab, Inc. , effective November 1 ,
1981 , and providing for an ultimate 14 cabs, was
presented; after which, it was moved by Field, seconded
by Ortner, and carried by the following vote, that
Resolution 14016 be adopted:
AYES: Field, Ortner and Doyle
NOES: Beirich & Rose
ABSENT: None
In answer to question by Council , Transportation Director
explained inspection and certification of vehicles program
provided in the agreement.
Council Miniutes :
10-28-81 Page 4
2. DRAINAGE FEES
City Manager stated that he believed the questions posed
by the community, Tribal Council , attorneys, and engineers
have been responded to, and it was helpful to have delayed
the decision, but he believed there was sufficient informa-
tion for the Council to make its decision; that one con-
tention is to wait longer before imposing the fee, based
somewhat on completion of the revised master plan; that
the master plan was adopted, which is subject to review
and potential revisions, but to delay any actions on
any general plan process would be to totally stop important
City development issues across-the-board; that the revised (114)
plan will not change the basic premise under which the
staff now operates, i .e. , new development will increase
an already bad situation and only new dollars or no growth
will reduce it; that more water is generated now than was
anticipated in 1967; that, although there may be some
smaller lines, the cost of the project is not expected
to decrease, or at least not substantially, and if it
did, any excess in the fee would be refunded; that there
would be an opportunity for everyone to fully review and
make judgement whether the revised plan is appropriate;
that only about 40% of the cost of the plan will be
captured by fees, but will go a long way in solving some
of the problems that will occur as growth continues;
that VTN has recommended drainage fees in many communities,
with full recognition that it will not cover all cost
involved, but those dollars could be spent beneficially;
that the drainage fee is the only source of funding,
although there are complementary sources, e.g. , possible loans
to the various zones from the General Fund, however,
there probably would not be any large amounts of General
Funds available (noting that the City will be spending
approximately $500,000 on the Tahquitz project for
Mesquite and Sunny Dunes improvements) and the possibility
of an assessment district; that it is not automatic that
an assessment district would be looked upon favorably by
the voters; that he recommended imposing the fee on new
development, with focus on lessening the intensifying
impact of new development, and the assessment district
to address curing present deficiencies, but not to delay
imposing the fee until election issues are resolved; that
cost benefit analysis will be done as long as that is a
requirement of the master plan; that it is a paperwork
requirement, and no reason can be found for doing it; that
it cannot be found where such a requirement has ever been
incorporated into a drainage plan in other Communities; that
VTN has never recommended such a requirement in its studies;
that at the appropriate time, staff will recommend its
deletion, but until that occurs, it will be complied with;
that the problem is how to accomodate growth; and that he
believed the drainage fee is appropriate and more preferred,
rather than an arbitrary curtailment of development.
Council Minutes
10-28-81 Page 5
2 . DRAINAGE FEES (Continued)
In answer to questions by Council , City Manager stated
that the basic premise is that new growth intensifies
the problem, and imposing the fee and then building
the facilities is looking to address future impact
and not to provide protection for the existing City;
that the last five major rains have not approached
a 10-year storm, but if they did, there would have been
an especially large amount of damage; that findings are
based on future possibility of damage and fact that the
City Engineer is stating that a dangerous situation
exists and it will only be exacerbated by future growth;
that there is no rationale in the record as to why the
CBA requirement was made in 1967; that there is no guarantee
that 100% of the system will be constructed, but the
importance is that much protection can be provided by
building a percentage of the system, and other sources will
have be relied on for funding completion; that the process CONT'D
allows beginning to focus on the most severe situation (114)
impacted by new development; and that all fees collected
will be allocated to a trust account for each zone, with
each account separately accruing interest.
Councilman Beirich stated that perhaps the Council was
thinking something different, in 1967, when it referred
to flood control as opposed to drainage, and perhaps the
use of the terms is not appropriate, e.g. , the 1967 action
referred to using Federal funds for major drainage
facilities, which, today, is what is being done for
the Tahquitz project; that that plan to accumulate funds,
along with on-site retention to reduce drainage require-
ments, make sense and he could support moving ahead with
the recommendation, recognizing that it would not solve
the problem immediately, but, hopefully, would do so in
the long run.
Councilman Rose stated that reading the 1967 action is
not helpful in trying to understand its meaning; that
the former Director of Community Development indicai,ed
to him that the Tribal Council probably had a great deal
to do with the requirement, and developers were not
keen on the idea and others felt that a cost would be
imposed that they probably would not like to see occur;
that he was satisfied with the recommendation, and
did not agree with the view held by Mr. Perrier, or
the discussion by the Tribal Council at the last study
session regarding cost; that development will disproportionately
increase the problem; that it will be a disservice to the
community as more new development occurs without paying
the fee, and it might be necessary to look at curtailing
development, which is not an appropriate direction to
take; that the fee may not be exact, but he did not
believe it would be far off; that the Council will be
showing an enlightened leadership attitude in taking this
action; and that it could be a 1; years before the issue
is before the voters, which will not serve to help the
people who will need it.
Mayor stated that he agrees with the comments which have
been made by Councilmembers, and believed the Council
would bear the liability for inaction that might result
in damage to the community; and that the issue could
be dragged-out, but he did not believe it should be
prolonged.
3 ' �
Council Minutes
10-28-81 Page 6
2. DRAINAGE FEES (Continued)
Following discussion, Resolution 14017, amending the
Comprehensive Fee Schedule, as recommended, was presented; CONT'D
after which, it was moved by Rose, seconded by Beirich, (114)
and unanimously carried, that Resolution 14017 be adopted.
3. CULTURAL CENTER
City Manager reported that a fundamental change in the
final Laventhol report is that the facility could not be
built without relying on private or public funding;
and since the original assumption was that the City would
not be directly involved, it would be appropriate for
the City to pull the issue into some form where a yes or
no decision can be made in the not too distant future.
He recommended that a cultural center task force be
appointed to evaluate issues relating to possible
construction of a cultural center and provide recommenda- ( 139)
tions to the Council whether it should participate in
and facilitate construction of such a facility,.
Councilwoman Ortner stated she was in favor of the
committee, and felt it should consist of 15 members;
that she believed it was a sensitive issue and one
which required a broad cross-representation ,of the
community; that she did not believe a large sized
committee would be detrimental to decision making;
and that she believed there would be criticism for
not having enough members.
Councilman Rose stated that he would like to see the
committee consist of those who are in the best position
to make a recommendation and who are sensitive to the
feelings of the community; that with a large group,
discussion tends to get lengthy and repetitive,; and
that he would favor a committeeof 7 members.
Councilman Field stated that he supports the concept
of a task force, and that one of the main issues is the
fact that the report indicates that by 1989, the pro-
jected total income would be $287,000 before fixed
charges, yet fixed charges could be up to $6 mullion
for building and loans.
Mayor stated that he did not think the task force would
resolve all of the issues, but address the essence of
the facility and whether it has merits; and that if
the matter is then further pursued, it would be appropriate
to consider a larger committee to represent the thinking
of the community. He stated that he views membership
on the task force as representatives from the financial
and hotel communities, as well as those in support of
the facility and those who are not as convinced as to
its merit.
It was moved by Beirich, seconded by Rose, and carried by
the following vote, that a seven member task force be
appointed, for the purposes as recommended:
AYES: Beirich, Field, Rose & Doyle
NO; Ortner
ABSENT: None
vl 3a�
Council Minutes
10-28-81 Page 7
4. C.U.P. CASE 5.0090 - DRAGICEVICH (CDN Zoning Introduced 10-14-81 )
City Clerk read title of Ordinance 1151 , as follows :
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE ZONING MAP BY (78)
REZONING, CERTAIN PROPERTY AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF EAST PALM CANYON DRIVE AND BOGIE
ROAD FOR SHOPPING CENTER PURPOSES, FROM R-3
TO C-D-N, SECTIONS 29 & 30, T4S, R5E.
It was moved by Beirich, seconded by Ortner, and unani-
mously carried, that further reading be waived, and
that Ordinance 1151 be adopted.
CONSENT AGENDA:
5. Resolution 14018 approving Tentative Tract Map 17392 for (137)
property on Cantina Way, west of South Palm Canyon Drive,
14 units, Hacker/W. Coble.
6. Minute Order 3009 awarding purchase of a new forklift to (84 &
Inland Empire Tractors, Inc. in amount of $18,393; and 61 )
and Resolution 14018-A, amending the budget to appropriate
additional funds in amount of $3,893.
7. Minute Order 3010 awarding purchase of 5 new light-utility
pickup trucks to Pomona Valley Datsun, in amount of (84)
$36,669.64.
8. Minute Order 3011 awarding contract to Massey Sand & Rock
Co. , for construction of sewer main in Bogie Road, Mesquite (128)
Avenue, and Vella Road, in amount of $632,517.
9. Resolution 14019 encouraging the Board of Supervisors to
adopt legislation implementing the 2¢ tax increase associated (123)
with SB 215, Transportation Funding Bill of 1981 .
10. Resolution 14020 and 14021 approving payroll warrants. (86)
11 . . Resolution 14022 approving 12-month time extension for
Tentative Tract Map 14009 for property on the NE corner of (137)
Amado Road and Hermosa Drive, 58 units, ASL/Friedman Dunphy
Assoc.
It was moved by Rose, seconded by Ortner, and unanimously
carried, that Resolutions 14018 through 14022 and Minute
Orders 3009 through 3011 be adopted; Beirich abstaining
on Resolution 14022.
12. AIRPORT USE & SECURITY AGREEMENTS - COGNISE AIRLINES
(see also Public Comments Item b)
It was moved by Beirich, seconded by Rose, and unanimously
carried, that consideration of above agreements be continued (51 )
to November 4, 1981 , pending response to concern raised by
Mr. Henning of Cochise Airlines.
13. TRACT 17642-1 - AFCOM - FINAL MAP
Resolution 14023 approving Final Tract Map 17642-1 for
property at Sunrise Way and San Rafael Drive, Section (137)
35, was presented; after which, it was moved by Beirich,
seconded by Field, and unanimously carried, that
Resolution 14023 be adopted.
Council Minutes
10-28-81 Page 8
REPORTS & REQUESTS
14. CITY COUNCIL reports or requests
a) Mayor reported that by a 6-1 vote, the SunLine Board
agreed to assume operation of the Sun Surrey, based
on conditions that the operationbe predicated upon (133)
securing SB 620 Riverside County Transportation Com-
mission grant; that separate records be maintained
regarding the operation, in order to evaluate whether
performance was in keeping with that which was pre-
sented by its staff and agreed to by it; that if
it became apparent that the system was not being
patronized to the degree that it was sensible, or
further continuance would be detrimental , or impose
expenditure of funds, the system would be discontinued;
and that the grant application to RCTC contain
language as to such conditions.
Councilman Field requested copy of the Board's
action.
b) Councilwoman Ortner requested that staff investigate
obnoxious odors emitting from the Desert Inn Fashion
Plaza - appears to be grease from the restaurant.
c) Councilwoman Ortner requested information as to the
possibility of providing night lighting at Ruth (109)
Hardy Park Tennis Courts, two nights per week.
d) In answer to question by Councilman Beirich, City
Manager stated that the Tennis Center concessionaire (117)
agreement should be before the Community Services
Commission at its next meeting, and thereafter to
the Council for consideration.
15. PUBL.IC reports or requests -• None
16. STAFF reports or requests - None
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business at 9 p.m. , Mayor declared
the meeting adjourned.
9
1
JUDII•H SUMICH
City Clerk