HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001 - MINUTES - 7/18/2001 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JULY 18, 2001
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 18, 2001, 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
Andrew Green, Church of St. Paul In The Desert
REPORT OF POSTING OF AGENDA: City Clerk reported that the agenda was posted in
accordance with Council procedures on July 13, 2001.
REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY ON MATTERS DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION (All
Entities) - See items on Page 8 of agenda this date.
PRESENTATIONS: Swearing In of 3 New Police Officers
' HOUSING AUTHORITY: INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY: FINANCING
AUTHORITY: - No Business
Mayor convened in Joint Session as Community Redevelopment Agency and the City
Council.
COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. NEW MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT, LLC.
Recommendation: That the Agency approve a Disposition and Development
Agreement with Palm Springs New Millennium Development, LLC to provide a
land write-down to facilitate the development of the Star Canyon Resort located
on South Palm Canyon Drive, Merged Project Area #1; and that the Council
concur.
Director of Redevelopment recommended that the Agency open the Public
Hearing and continue it to September 5, 2001.
Mayor requested a brief staff report before opening the hearing.
Director of Redevelopment reviewed the staff report; no further report was given.
Mayor declared the hearing open; there being no appearances, Mayor continued
the hearing to September 5, 2001.
I
Council Minutes
7-18-01,Page 2
B. SALE OF PROPERTY— 22.21 ACRE NEAR SUNRISE WAY AND SAN RAFAEL
Recommendation: That the Council approve the sale of a, city-owned 22.21-acre
parcel near Sunrise Way and San Rafael Road to the Community
Redevelopment Agency; and that the Agency accept said sale and purchase.
Director of Redevelopment reviewed the staff report; no further report was given.
Mayor declared the hearing open; there being no appearances, the hearing was
closed.
City Council Resolution 20105 and Community Redevelopment Agency
Resolution 1139 as recommended were presented; after which, it was moved by
Hodges, seconded by Oden, and unanimously carried, that R20105 and R1139
be adopted.
Mayor declared the meeting adjourned for the purpose of convening as the Community
Redevelopment Agency, after which, members convened as the City Council.
CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Rose Therrien, no address given, stated that Wayne McKinney has been serving food to
poor and homeless people for years; that his character should not be assassinated, but
supported; and that the offer on the table regarding the campus on Vista Chino is not a
solution, as it would take 3 years to fruition.
Dr. Wayne McKinney, President of Well in the Desert, stated that every suggested site
has been rejected; that it is very hard for people to handle the potential of
disappointment and being shot down; that the dog park is on Airport property, but the
City facilitated that endeavor; that the Task Force has not accomplished anything, and
that the chances of the Task Force raising millions of dollars in 3 years is unlikely.
Allen Killfoile, no address given, asked the Council where they would take a shower in
Palm Springs if they were homeless; and that the City can spend $50K for sculptures,
but not do anything for the homeless.
Richard Schaefer, Yorba Rd., stated that the low-income housing planned for San
Rafael and Indian is a bad thing; that property owners in the area don't want this; and
they are concerned that it would lower property values.
Howard Lapham, Palm Springs, questioned whether progress or regression is wanted;
that neighborhood groups are trying to cause grid lock on council and the issues; and
that he compliments the Council, City Manager and staff.
Nancy Stuart, Palm Springs, stated she commends the Council for the June 27, 2001
action to extend the term regarding negotiating Convention Center bond rates; that to
lower payments and take out cash is a decision that would benefit the City and business;
that citizens have returned four of the councilmembers to office one or more times; and
that Council consensus, not referendum, is the best possible solution for citizens.
Todd Ashton, no address given, stated that, by choice, all members came on the City
Council to make a better city; that he chose to be a part of this community; that Dr.
McKinney feeds those who also chose to be here; that we have many choices to make,
Council Minutes
7-18-01,Page 3
and Dr. McKinney's choice is to feed these people; that they need a decent place to eat;
and that all kinds of people make a better place for everybody.
CONSENT AGENDA:
Review by City Manager of Consent Items to be clarified.
1. Approval of Minutes of April 18, June 6, 13, 18, 20 & 27, 2001.
2. MO 6881 accepting two sets of blown-glass sculptures by Chihuly, Inc., located
at the Palm Springs International Airport for final payment of$50,000.
3. MO 6882 approving an agreement with Gensler for architectural design for the
replacement of airport boarding gates 1, 2 & 3 hold rooms located at the Palm
Springs International Airport for$262,000. A4382.
4. MO 6883 accepting and approving the funding approval agreement with the U.S.
Dept of HUD for fiscal year 2001-02 CDBG program for $645,000. A4383.
5. MO 6884 awarding contract with Contreras Construction Co., for library parking
lot improvements for $189,422.50. CP00-29, A4384.
6. MO 6885 approving the consent to assignment of Maritime Trust/Foreign Trade
Zone Solutions to Ernst & Young relating to the foreign trade zone major
modification application for$15,000. A4350.
' 7. MO 6886 approving the consent to assignment of Maritime Trust/Foreign Trade
Zone Solutions to Ernst & Young relating to the foreign trade activation for
$12,500. A4342.
8. MO 6887 approving extension of purchase order agreement for water treatment
chemicals from Nalco Chemical at prices set by State contract for fiscal year
2001-02, not to exceed $60,000.
9. MO 6888 approving sole source purchase order agreement with Johnson Power
Systems for caterpillar engine repair parts for one year, July 18, 2001 through
June 30, 2002 for$100,000.
10. MO 6889 approving final Amendment 12 to A3298 with Robert Bein, William
Frost & Associates for $3,590 for a final Phase 3 total of $105,790 for a total of
all phases for engineering services related to the Mid Valley Parkway of
$1,099,681. CP99-13.
11, MO 6890 approving the cooperative purchase from Ramsey Street Ford for one
2001 police patrol unit via Riverside County's police vehicle contract for
$22,802.90.
12. MO ----- approving purchase order with Dell Computer Corporation for the
purchase of 14 Dell Optiplex personal computers for$20,635.70. Withdrawn.
13. MO 6891 approving reimbursement of $222,000 to Palm Springs Disposal
Services, per amendment #4, for a CNG-Powered food waste vehicle; and Res
20106 amending fiscal year 2000-01 budget for same.
Council Minutes
7-18-01,Page 4
14. Res 20107 and 20108 approving Payroll Warrants and Claims & Demands.
Note abstentions, if any:
Councilmember Warrant# Payee Particular Nature of Conflict
Reller-Spurgin 966519 Spurgin Spouse
966644
EXTENDED CONSENT AGENDA:
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
15. ANNUAL MAINTENANCE DISTRICTS - 2001-02 ASSESSMENTS
Recommendation: That the Council approve annual maiintenance costs for the
following districts: Street Lighting Maintenance Districts (SLMD) 1, 2, 3 and 4; and
Parkways Maintenance Districts 6 (A, B, C), 7, 8 and 9; and approve the Fixed
Charges Report for same.
City Manager reviewed the staff report; no further report was given.
Mayor declared the hearing open; there being no appearances, the hearing was
closed.
Resolutions 20109, 20110, 20111, 20112, 20113, 20114, 20115, and 20116 as
recommended were presented; after which, it was moved by Reller-Spurgin,
seconded by Oden, and unanimously carried that R20109-20116 be adopted.
16. PUBLIC NUISANCE ABATEMENTS
Recommendation: That the Council confirm the report of proceedings and
accounting for 17 public nuisance abatements and recordation of liens against
the title of each property.
Director of Planning & Building reviewed the staff report and stated that the
administrative charges are based on staff time, City Attorney time, and actual
abatement cost.
Mayor requested more information on the vacant lot in Desert Park Estates, Lot
64.
Mayor declared the hearing open.
Carol Ann Hayes, 284 Morongo Rd., stated that she receiver,) the Notice 10 days
ago for the $187.00 abatement cost; that she and her husband cleaned up
everything by themselves; that there has been progress made and assured that it
would all be finished; and asked for a fee waiver of administrative costs.
Jamaica Steinlechner, 1610 E. Tamarisk Road, stated she had family illness and
personal issues; that she talked to the Planning Dept. regarding a hardship; that
the case was dismissed at trial; and that she assumed she was absolved from
charges of$4,574.
Willie Holland, 4020 El Dorado, Lot 64,1in answer to the Mayor's request on Lot
64, stated that he disagrees with the policy the City has of putting all the charges
as a lien on property for one year; that this could cause someone to lose their
Council Minutes
7-18-01,Page 5
home for non-payment of taxes, that there is no aid for the people; that after 5
years, the property can be sold; that he would like the policy to be a straight lien
that stays on the property until sold; and that the current policy causes injustice
to people in low income areas.
City Attorney stated that if there is positive response to the first Notice, no
administrative costs are charged; however, further Notices cause administrative
costs.
There being no further appearances, the hearing was closed.
Councilmember Oden questioned how property owners are notified of a nuisance
problem.
Director of Planning & Building stated that there are several ways to advise
property owners of the nuisance; however, most items are brought to the
attention of the Planning Department by complaints from neighbors.
City Manager stated that neighbors are not shy when other neighbors have trash,
old cars, etc. in yards; and the City's philosophy is to deal aggressively with
nuisance abatement.
Councilmember Oden questioned if Planning staff has to go back to the property
once it has been boarded up.
Director of Planning & Building stated that most go back more than once; that
' some property owners board up on their own; that the City does it only if property
owners have not responded; that emergency abatements are very rare, and are
only done if there is an immediate threat to public health, safety, and welfare.
Mayor questioned the issue of hardship on the Tamarisk property.
Director of Planning & Building stated that the hardship issues should have been
conveyed to the Planning Department immediately, when it may have been
possible to do something at that time.
Mayor stated that for the last five years, the City has been very aggressive in
dealing with recapturing the neighborhoods; that property ownership requires
come degree of responsibility; that the City has stayed the course; that there is
no cost for complying with the first Notice; and that we shouldn't be spending
taxpayers money for what the property owner should be paying.
Councilmember Hodges concurred with the Mayor, and added that she felt
concern for the Tamarisk property owner; that it was unfortunate that the City
was not notified, however, court costs were already incurred, and taxpayers
should not have to cover the expense.
Resolutions 20117, 20118, 20119, 20120, 20121, 20122, 20123, 20124, 20125,
20126, 20127, 20128, 20129, 20130, 20131, 20132 and 20133 as recommended
' were presented, after which, it was moved by Reller-Spurgin, seconded by Oden,
and unanimously carried that R20117-20133 be adopted.
Council Minutes
7-18-01,Page 6
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:
17. SEWER SERVICE PROVISION AND CHARGES
Recommendation: That the Council approve providing sewer to the South Palm
Canyon properties located outside the City limits, south of Acanto Drive and east
of the southerly extension of South Palm Canyon Drive and consider reduction of
the connection fee in place of $4,816 per unit for properties outside the City
limits.
City Engineer reviewed the staff report, and stated that staff recommends
providing sewer to the South Palm Canyon properties.
Councilmember Hodges stated that the report is extremely brief; and asked
which developer is planning to build 400 new dwelling units.
City Engineer stated that there is no specific developer at this time, and the
request of the Tribal Planning Director is to allow the sewer service to incur when
development is proposed.
Councilmember Hodges stated that she would be more comfortable if we could
annex the property into the City of Palm Springs.
Tom Davis, Tribal Planning Director, stated that the annexation issue in the area
has been considered, however it is trust land and all allottees would have to be in
concurrence with annexation, as would the Bureau of Indian Affairs as trustees;
that they would like to build the road, put in the sewer line; and pay for it all; that
they want to get this issue resolved and will do their best to discourage septic
systems in this area; that it would be best to have this a part of the City, however
the logistics of doing so is almost impossible at this time; that they are going to
put in the infrastructure, at their cost; and that they would like to hook into the
City's system, and if necessary, will collect the fees and make sure the funds get
transmitted in the proper manner.
Councilmember Reller-Spurgin stated we have talked about this area before, and
there are other areas that we would like to annex that already take advantage of
our police and fire, and that annexation would be ideal.
Mayor asked Tribal Planning Director what the pressing issue is at the present
time.
Mr. Davis stated that there is no pressing issue; if they can't get permission to
connect to the sewer, they will plumb for it, have a dry system, and move on.
They need to build this road and don't want to build the road and then have to
tear it up for sewer lines at a later date.
Councilmember Jones stated he has no problem with this request and feels the
request is reasonable, and asked if there'are two issues to vote on.
Council Minutes
7-18-01, Page 7
City Attorney stated that one issue is whether the Council is willing to allow the
' hook up to the sewer, and the second issue is how much would the charge be for
allowing the hook-up. If the council was to choose not to charge the double fee,
the Council should address the direction to be taken regarding the City's policy,
adopted by resolution, on double fees. The policy should be clarified, or possibly
the Council may want to rescind the policy altogether, regarding connections
outside the City, because we could go back to just a standard fee. Some
direction is needed for future situations and how you would apply this policy.
Councilmember Oden stated his understanding that City Attorney is saying that
it's OK to approve the resolution to connect, but some policy decision would be
necessary before the Council acts on the second portion.
City Attorney stated the City has current policy, adopted by Resolution, and
unless the Council wants to change the policy for everyone, direction is needed
on how to justify individual situations.
Councilmember Jones questioned if there is likelihood of more requests for
connections outside the City.
City Engineer stated that this type of request is rare, although, this is the second
request in two months.
Mayor stated that recently the Council allowed a Cathedral City business to
connect to the sewer system, however, the owner agreed to the double fee.
' Councilmember Oden stated that significant issues have been brought up that
were not addressed in the staff report, and that some options should have been
included in the report.
Councilmember Hodges expressed her disappointment that the issue of the road
has been worked on for 5 years; that it would have been nice to have worked
together on the project; that there is not enough information in the staff report on
which to make a decision; that this is a major issue; and that she is not in a
position to vote on this tonight, and would not support a vote on this issue at this
time.
It was moved by Councilmember Jones to adopt the resolution to approve the
sewer connection and charge the double fees. Motion died for lack of a second.
City Attorney stated that it appears there is the need for more thorough staff
reporting; that the Council supports the idea of providing sewer service in this
area; that there is a need to figure out a way for annexation to take place; that
the fee issue needs to be worked on, that the ramification for treating this
applicant differently than others should be explored, and that possibly, a joint
approach with the tribe would be beneficial on these issues.
Councilmember Oden stated that standardization is important; sewer
' connections may encourage annexation; and that there may be some
circumstances for exceptions.
Mayor stated that some want to pay for services, such as fire and police, but
don't want to join the city; that the Council has been unwilling to let people pick
Council Minutes
7-18-01,Page 8
and choose; and that he is reluctant to move forward on this issue without further
study and discussion; and asked if the Council's pleasure is to bring this back.
Council consensus is for staff to restudy the item with alternative options, and
bring forward ideas for changing the policy.
18. ANNUAL RESERVATION OF UNAPPROPRIATED FUND BALANCES
Recommendation: That the Council appropriate into reserves the unappropriated
fund balances in designated City Operating and Capital Project Funds for future
operations or projects.
Director of Finance reviewed the staff report; no further report was given.
Resolution 20134 as recommended was presented, after which, it was moved by
Oden, seconded by Reller-Spurgin, and unanimously carried, that R20134 be
adopted.
19. 2000-01 APPROPRIATION LIMIT
Recommendation: That the Council approve establishing an appropriations limits
for the 2001-02 fiscal year in accordance with Article XIIIB of the California
Constitution.
Director of Finance reviewed the staff report; no further report was given.
Resolution 20135 as recommended was presented, after which, it was moved by
Reller-Spurgin, seconded by Oden, and unanimously carried, that R20135 be
adopted.
20. RESOLUTION OF CONVENIENCE & NECESSITY-2796 NIPC
Recommendation: That the Council approve a Resolution of Convenience and
Necessity requested by Sobhy G. Yousef for an existing service; station with retail
sales located at 2796 North Palm Canyon Drive, RGA, C1 zone, Section 3.
Director of Planning and Building reviewed the staff report;; no further report was
given.
Councilmember Oden stated this business owner has two service stations in
Palm Springs in the North Palm Canyon area; and that he has invested in our
community, which greatly improved a property that was a dilapidated eyesore.
Councilmember Hodges expressed her concern about the number of businesses
selling liquor in Palm Springs; and indicated she feels that maybe the community
is being over saturated with liquor stores.
Director of Planning & Building stated that the purpose of this resolution coming
to Council is that the community is over saturated with this type of establishment,
therefore a Resolution of Convenience and Necessity is required.
City Manager stated that this is an important item to be considered for the
general plan update.
Council Minutes
7-18-01,Page 9
Councilmember Reller-Spurgin stated that she does not lend her name to
convenience and necessity for the purchase of liquor, and therefore, would be
voting no on this item.
' Mayor stated that he is typically very supportive of these requests; however, he is
apprehensive of alcohol sales in remote areas of the City, which makes law
enforcement a little more difficult in some instances.
Resolution 20136 was presented; after which, it was moved by Oden, seconded
by Hodges and carried by the following vote that R20136 be adopted.
AYES: Hodges, Oden, and Jones
NO: Reller-Spurgin and Kleindienst
ABSENT: None.
21. COMPREHENSIVE FEE AMENDMENT
Recommendation: That the Council amend the Comprehensive Fee Schedule,
R19757, as amended, to increase Recreation Division program fees and rental
fees for the Pavilion, Leisure Center, Jaycee/Frey Building, Showmobile and
parks.
Director of Facilities reviewed the staff report; no further report was given.
Councilmember Hodges stated that she has no problem increasing the fees,
' except the Showmobile fee has jumped substantially; and asked the purpose of
the higher fee.
Director of Facilities stated that it is a bigger unit than the previous one, and the
costs are for transporting and set up of the unit, not for the vehicle charge alone;
that the fee to rent a similar size stage would be about 3 times the cost of our
fee; that the fee is not intended to gain revenue based on the cost of the
Showmobile, which was in excess of $100,000, but simply for the cost of
complete set up; and that there is no charge for the rental interdepartmentally.
Resolution 20137 as recommended was presented; after which, it was moved by
Reller-Spurgin, seconded by Oden, and carried unanimously that R20137 be
adopted.
22. DESERT MOON — 2150 NORTH PALM CANYON DRIVE
Recommendation: That the Council enter into an agreement with Jose E.
Guerrero, record owner, and Barton Charles Adrian and Deborah Jo Adrian, trust
deed beneficiaries to allow the rehabilitation of property known as the Desert
Moon, located at 2150 North Palm Canyon Drive until December 22, 2001; after
which, the City's right to demolish the property will be upheld. A4385.
Director of Planning and Building reviewed the staff report; and stated that there
are two revisions to the original agreement in the packets; one is that the City's
' legal, administrative, and abatement costs, which amount to $45,000, have been
contested and developer would like the ability to review the City Attorney billings,
but agrees to pay the actual cost, which will be within the $37,000 to $45,000
range; that this issue went to court and the City won on appeal; that the second
Council Minutes
7-18-01,Page 10
revision is adjusting the start and completion dates, due to the time it took to get
the report finished, therefore, the completion date will be January 25, 2002.
Councilmember Oden stated that this property is in the Recapture the
Neighborhood Program, and the City has been working with the abatement
issues to encourage the owners to comply with the regulations and improve their
property; and that this property owner is able to complete this project in a timely
fashion, with provisions listed.
Councilmember Reller-Spurgin stated that the Council has talked about this a
long time, and has made allowances; that she has compromised her vote to
allow this man to go forward, but that she will not compromise the $45,000 in
costs; and that she feels that no break should be given on what the actual
expenditures have been.
Councilmember Oden stated that the review would determiine the actual costs to
be paid, not to reduce the amount.
City Attorney stated this is correct, the actual amount of the costs will be paid by
the owner.
Councilmember Hodges stated she will not support this action; that the property
has needed a lot of work for a long time; that the Council has given the property
owners at least 4 years to fix up the property; and in the time it took going
through court and appeal, they could have already completed the rehabilitation.
Mayor stated that the Council has worked for a number of years on the nuisance
issues for the City and neighborhoods; that he feels we should stay the course
and raise the structure; and that this relates to the fairness issue of how to apply
one standard to one, and not to another.
Councilmember Hodges questioned the ramification if the project is not
completed by January 25, 2002.
City Attorney stated that if the deadline is missed, there are several remedies
that can be pursued, one of which is to complete the rehabilitation work or
demolish the property, with the property owners being liable for all the costs.
City Manager stated that the owner has come to the DOGS meeting and given
his commitment to rehabilitate the property; and that he has been informed that
the City Council will not be interested in any more delays.
Councilmember Hodges questioned the time frame on his obligation to pay the
current $45,000 in costs.
City Attorney stated the payment is due at this time.
Minute Order 6892 as recommended was presented; after which, it was moved
by Oden, seconded by Jones, and carried'by the following vote that MO6892 be
adopted.
AYES: Jones, Oden, and Reller-Spurgin
NO: Hodges and Kleindienst
ABSENT: None
Council Minutes
7-18-01,Page 11
23. ORDINANCE FOR SECOND READING &ADOPTION (Intro 6-6-01)
' City Clerk read Title of Ordinance as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,
AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT BETWEEN THE BOARD OF
ADMINISTRATION OF THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES'
RETIREMENT SYSTEM AND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM
SPRINGS
after which; it was moved by Reller-Spurgin, seconded by Oden, and carried by
the following vote that further reading be waived and Ordinance 1599 be
adopted.
AYES: Oden, Reller-Spurgin and Kleindienst
NO: Hodges and Jones
ABSENT: None
24. SIMAT, HELLIESEN & EICHNER, INC.
Recommendation: That the Council adopt the SH&E Strategic Marketing Plan
for the Palm Springs International Airport dated July 2, 2001 as the airport's
official marketing plan and approve Amendment #1 to A4334 with SH&E for on-
call marketing services for $89,000; and allocate $15,000 of airport marketing
funds to the Greater Palm Springs Convention and Visitors Authority.
' Assistant City Manager-Special Projects reviewed the staff report; no further
report given.
City Manager stated that this level of expenditure was not anticipated, nor would
be supported, in the next year.
Mayor stated that he had attended a CVA meeting and the discussion arose
regarding the subsidy to American Airlines; that he asked for CVA direction on
how they want to deal with the subsidy in the future; that the concern is that
without the American Airlines annual year-round service to Palm Springs, it may
adversely affect the conventions and groups that schedule their events during the
summer months; and that the CVA wants the subsidy to continue, however, there
are three questions to be answered by them: how much should the subsidy be,
where will the money come from, and who gets the subsidy.
Councilmember Hodges questioned the funding allocation.
Assistant City Manager— Special Projects stated that the funding comes from the
Airport marketing budget; that the funds must be used for Airport related uses;
and that no funds are from the general fund.
Councilmember Hodges stated that SH&E are the experts in this field; that this is
' why the survey was done, that SH&E stated it would be wise to slowly get out of
this subsidy; and that she would support their recommendations.
Councilmember Oden stated that he would be interested in what the CVA is
planning and what their report will advise; that he thinks SH&E gave good
information, however there are those locally that know they rely on the
Council Minutes
7-18-01, Page 12
conventions and without them they would be hurt financially; and that it may be
possible for the industry to take some action on this issue and invest in the
subsidy.
Resolution 20138 as recommended was presented; after which, it was moved by
Hodges, seconded by Jones, and carried unanimously that R20138 be adopted.
ADDITIONAL LEGISLATIVE ITEMS:
25. NOVEMBER 6, 2001 BALLOT MEASURES
City Manager stated that this issue is in reference to the consideration of the
Convention Center refinancing, which is a complicated issue, and there are many
ways to look at this issue; that the Council does not have the staff report because
of the complexity of this issue; therefore, it will be fully explained to the Council;
that on June 27, 2001, Council passed the second reading of Ordinance 1597,
authorizing the refinancing of the Convention Center bonds; that Ordinances
can be challenged, and it appears that is happening now, which would have a
significant financial impact on this issue; that staff felt it was important to have a
discussion on this tonight, because it would more than likely cause a loss of the
very favorable interest rates of today if Council waited for a vote of the people in
March; that at a minimum, the refinancing would lower our debt payment, and
could help finance the issue of more parking downtown; and that this is a very
complex issue and that staff has put together some scenarios for discussion
tonight, if Council so desires.
Councilmember Hodges stated that she told staff that she was not interested in 1
discussing this issue tonight.
Councilmember Oden questioned the portion to be discussed.
Mayor stated that he would like to make an opening comment; that at the end of
the week, in preparation for the agenda, he was asked to attend a conference
call with the City Attorney and others, on how to move forward on this issue; that
he stated he wanted to afford the Council every opportunity to discuss every
option available; and that the documents could be prepared and brought to the
body to let them decide if they want to discuss this or not; and that he has not
spoken with council members on this matter, only with senior staff.
City Attorney stated that financial analysis is ongoing; that this issue is
complicated; and questioned if the Council wanted to proceed.
Councilmember Reller-Spurgin stated that people do not understand what is
going on; that Councilmember Jones sent a letter to supporters outlining
refinancing of the Convention Center and using the proceeds for capital projects;
that she felt this wasn't the whole truth, because the Council was figuring out how
to deal with the parking problem, and the proceeds would be well spent on the
parking structure; that she voted on June 27, 2001, in the best interest of the
City, and would do so again if asked; and that she feels there is a trust issue,
which frustrates and disappoints her.
Councilmember Oden stated that obviously what the staff report involves is the
fact that we are going to lose money, and lose a very unique opportunity to do
something that we desperately need in our City; that we took that vote because
Council Minutes
7-18-01,Page 13
we were acting in the best interest of the City; that after sitting on this Council for
6 years, there were times when he was the only person who believed the way he
' did about an issue, and everyone else voted a different way, but never did he
think that since the Council did not agree with him that he would set out to
undermine the government, it never did cross his mind; that when he was
elected, it was to represent all the people of this city, not just special groups; that
it is his responsibility to represent all the people; that he believes in our
government, in our country and our referendum process; that the referendum
process is a very significant process established by our government to allow
people to have a voice; that he disagrees with this referendum, thinks it is wrong
and thinks a lot of people have been told untruths, half truths and given just
general misinformation; that the people who are doing this are going to be
responsible for what it's going to cost our city; that whether he agrees with the
referendum or not, he's not going to take action to undermine that process; that
this process has been initiated, the people believed that the information was
correct when they signed the petitions; that for the Council to take action now
would say that the Council did something wrong, and the Council did nothing
wrong; that he will not vote to rescind the ordinance; and that this is our
community's opportunity to say we believe in our Council, and that the right thing
was done for the community.
Councilmember Jones responded to Councilmember Reller-Spurgin's comments
regarding leaving the parking issue out of his letter; he stated it probably would
have been easier to get signatures if he had mentioned it, as he doesn't know
very many people that support a multi-level parking structure downtown, which
would urbanize the area; that if he knew Councilmember Reller-Spurgin wanted
' the parking issue in the letter, he would have included it; that there was no intent
on his part in leaving it out; that he represents the people who elected him; that
he has a different philosophy than the other Council members; that he agrees
with the refinancing of the Convention Center to take advantage of lower
payments and lower debt service; that he agrees there are capital improvements
that need to be done; that he is a financial conservative, with different viewpoints;
and that he believes the referendum is the right thing to do for the long term, not
just today.
Mayor stated that he appreciates everyone's statements, viewpoints and feels
the frustration; that the referendum process is one way to challenge government;
that he is hearing a lot of concerns; that there are no guarantees in government
and what you decide today may not be appropriate tomorrow; that this is not
about emotions, mistrust, dissatisfaction or frustration; what's before the Council
is the same issue that they started with when this debate started months ago;
that there are a number of issues that concern the community regarding the
economics of Palm Springs, and one of them is the lack of parking in downtown;
that a subcommittee was asked to consider parking on Indian Ave. and discuss
options to be brought back for Council's determination; that there was a
cooperative effort to find a funding source for the parking problem; that
Councilmember Oden and he, with the assistance of staff, suggested that
refinancing bonds was one way to deliver some saving of cash and generate
some new funds; that options were presented that were in the best interest of
' Palm Springs; that the priority established was clear, which was refinancing the
bonds to deal with nothing else until the parking issue was solved; that what
occurred was the referendum; that there is no problem with an honest review of
what government is doing, however, there is an effort of a number of individuals
securing signatures on a petition and the cost is at the expense of the truth; that
it's the falsehoods that frighten him; that he can imagine the fear and mistrust
Council Minutes
7-18-01, Page 14
with wrong statements, and lies to scare residents into signing the petitions; that
if we do nothing, regardless of how it comes out in the spring, we lose, and all
the time and opportunity has been wasted, and there is no win for the
community; that this is not about us and we need to continue to find solutions for
the community and allow the staff to at least explain the alternative options; and
that if the Council is to work as a governing body, the debate is to be held here,
and decisions made here.
Councilmember Reller-Spurgin stated that she has thought a lot about this, and
the truth is that she can not allow her ego to get in the way of the City; and that
she does not have a problem with listening tonight.
Councilmember Hodges stated that she said earlier that she doesn't want to
discuss this issue; that the decision was made and it was the right decision; that
she does not believe that another decision tonight is a right decision, that the
Council already made the right decision; that she is very much supportive of the
referendum process; that it is a form of government that is needed by this
country; that regardless of how the signatures have been gathered, chances are
it will be a valid referendum; that she believes that any decision tonight is
inappropriate; that a decision was made, there is a referendum out there, it
needs to be certified, and if it is valid and legal, it will came back to the Council
so action can be taken to rescind the ordinance or put it on the ballot; that the
people going forward with the referendum have put the Council in this position;
that the referendum process needs to continue and come to whatever
conclusion; that trying to circumvent that process this evening is totally
inappropriate and totally goes against democracy; and that she will not support
talking about this issue tonight, and if it goes forward, she will leave the meeting.
Mayor thanked Councilmember Hodges and stated that he respects her decision.
Councilmember Oden stated that there is something already set into motion and
that is the referendum; that he would agree that it was done so under a lot of
misrepresentation; that there are over 2000 people who believe this is necessary;
that this is not about ego or personalities; that the petition signers have said, at
this point, "Stop"; that for the Council to continue this is wrong; that he doesn't
agree with the referendum, doesn't believe it should ever have started, and
knows it was done wrongly; and that if the Council entertains anything, it
undermines the entire process of government, and in the long run will cost us
More, therefore, he will not be participating in that discussion.
Mayor questioned what the consideration of Councilmember Jones was, and
whether he would like to hear options.
Councilmember Jones stated that he has no problem with hearing the options.
Councilmember Oden stated that the Council has discussed this; that this is
nothing new; that it was discussed and the Council disagreed, and that's OK; that
now there is something implemented because of the disagreement; that he thinks
our community expects more from us than this; and said, "Good Night."
Councilmembers Hodges and Oden left the meeting at 10:40 p.m.
Mayor stated that he regrets that two' members feel this way; however he
understands and respects their decision; and that he suggests the report be
discussed at this time.
Council Minutes
7-18-01, Page 15
City Attorney stated that staff is extremely distressed; that this is the worst
circumstance under which this could be discussed; that the intent was to ask if
the council wanted to discuss this; that actually the intent was to prevent this
situation; that he appreciates the Mayor's comments in terms of trying to think
this thing through; that he wishes that Members Hodges and Oden were here to
hear this; that this possible action is not to suggest that the Council made a
wrong decision; that the staff recommended the action the Council took on June
27; that staff felt it was the proper action and the right thing to do; that the issue
is that by the time the referendum and petitions come back to the City, are
counted, and put on the ballot, we are looking to a date in the future, possibly
March; and that the expectation of the financial advisor is that the City could lose
approximately $800,000, in present day dollars, to spend on capital
improvements; that taking this action was not to suggest that Council made the
wrong decision, but if the City rescinds the action, financing could go forward,
which appears to be economically sound and financially prudent; that if Council
waits until after the August recess, all the negative financial implications of
waiting to refinance will have already occurred; that the City has already lost
$300,000 in two weeks; that by waiting until after the process, another 6 weeks
would have passed; and with that preface, City Attorney stated that staff wasn't
trying to do anything wrong, and as a staff person, there is nothing you can do
that is worse than putting something in front of your Council that causes two
Councilmembers to walk out of the meeting.
Mayor stated that before Council begins the financial discussion, he would like to
get the timeline of getting the referendum on the ballot.
City Clerk explained the timeline, and stated the last date that the Council could
get something on the ballot for the November election would be August 10, 2001.
City Attorney stated that the Council could put an advisory measure on the ballot,
and the meeting of August 1, 2001, would be the time to do that.
Director of Finance stated that given the fact that the proposed referendum could
qualify, and thus delay the proposed refinancing, there are two options that can
be offered; that one option would be to rescind the existing ordinance and adopt
a new ordinance, which was previously known as Option 1, to refinance the
existing bond, keeping the existing term and reducing the debt service payments,
with cumulative saving of 5.2M; if we wait until after the first of the year, even a '/.
% interest rise , reduces that $5.2 million to about $3.6 million, or on a present
value basis, about an $800,000 reduction; an ordinance adopted tonight would
require a second reading on the following council meeting on July 25'h, and would
have a 30-day referendum period, so we could probably do this bond issue by
mid-September.
Director of Finance stated the second option would be a variation of Option 1,
refinancing the existing Convention Center bonds, extending the term for 4 years,
and taking an average of about $600,000 savings per year over a 25 year period,
which also locks in something close to what the current interest rates are; and
' this could also be done by mid-September.
In addition, Director of Finance stated that both of these scenarios are
reasonable and doable, and would allow us at some point in the future, perhaps
as early as the November election, to put an option on these and take those
Council Minutes
7-18-01,Page 16
savings and have an advisory vote of the people, and then bond against those
savings.
Councilmember Reller-Spurgin stated that of the two options that have been
given us, they still don't give us the ready cash to deal with the parking problem.
City Attorney stated that even if we had no parking need, staff would still be
recommending doing this refinancing of the Convention Center bonds, because it
would be the right financial thing to do for the City; that the parking issue does
need to be solved, and it may still be possible to study the issue and come up
with more options.
Suzanne Harrell, financial advisor for the City, explained the issues of interest
rate variances, and how they affect the amount of savings in refinancing the
Convention Center bonds, that even if the parking issue was to be set aside, it
would still be prudent to refinance as soon as possible, to lock in the most
beneficial rates for the City, and afford greater savings.
Councilmember Jones questioned staff recommendation on the options offered.
City Attorney stated the staff advises rescinding Ordinance 1597, and introducing
for first reading the ordinance choosing 'Option 1, with the addition of 4 years to
the term; that when the previous ordinance disappears, there is no reason for a
referendum; that if the referendum went forward, the Council would be faced with
either rescinding Ordinance 1597, or putting it on the ballot; that this way, you are
simply complying with what the people want with this referendum, and it doesn't
have anything to do with undermining the democracy of the referendum process.
Mayor stated that he can't fully describe how awkward it feels to take action on
this issue with 40% of the Council missing; that he can clearly see the savings
the City can enjoy if Council takes this action; that this feels like both ends of the
stick are burning; that he knows that every day Council! doesn't move forward,
the City is losing an opportunity for prudent financial savings; and that he doesn't
feel comfortable in waiting for spring to determine the fate; of this financing.
Councilmember Reller-Spurgin stated that the difficulty is that the Council already
voted on staff's recommendation on June 27`h; that we can't work on emotion, we
have to work on logic, and we need to save money for the City; that she feels
uncomfortable rescinding the ordinance, knowing there are those who feel the
Council did something that was not in the best interest of the City.
Mayor questioned what the intent is for the use of the $600,000 savings.
Councilmember Reller-Spurgin stated that all the Council is doing is locking in
the savings with this action; and what can be done with the savings can be
determined at a later date.
B
Council Minutes
7-18-01, Page 17
Motion to read the Title of Ordinance for introduction was presented; after which
' it was unanimously carried that full reading be waived and the Title of the
Ordinance be introduced for first reading.
City Attorney read Title of Ordinance as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALMS SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A
SUPPLEMENTAL LEASE AGREEMENT NO. 3 RELATING TO THE CITY OF
PALM SPRINGS FINANCING AUTHORITY LEASE REVENUE REFUNDING
BONDS, 2001 SERIES A (CONVENTION CENTER PROJECT)
after which, it was moved by Reller-Spurgin, seconded by Jones, and carried by
the following vote that the Ordinance be introduced.
AYES: Members Jones, Reller-Spurgin, and Mayor Kleindienst
NO: None
ABSENT: Members Hodges and Oden
ADDED STARTERS: None
REPORTS & REQUESTS:
DEPARTMENT reports or requests
26. Treasurer's Investment Report as of May 31, 2001
CITY COUNCIL reports or request
PUBLIC reports or requests
STAFF reports or requests
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, Mayor declared the meeting adjourned.
BARBARA J. ITE
istant Citk d,+
PATRICIA A. SANDERS
City Clerk