Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/31/2001 - STAFF REPORTS (2) Jim Jones P. O. Box 8294 Palm Springs, CA 92263 Phone (760) 327-6801 Fax (760) 327-8274 Cell (760) 333-1747 General Counsel Luisa Menchaca Fair Political Practices Commission 428 J street, Suite 620 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear General Counsel Luisa Menchaca: At the October 24, 2001 meeting of the Palm Springs City Council Mr. Steve Payne appeared and read the public statement which I have enclosed. He concluded by saying he had referred his charges to the FPPC and demanded that I recuse myself from any future matter involving Mr. Payne, his partners or his business. This is pure fiction and I believe Mr. Payne is motivated by the fact that the City has a municipal election in two weeks. Although my term is not up, Mr. Payne is fearful that persons with political beliefs like mine who question the giveaway of taxpayer monies to developers without a good clear need will be elected. I think he is attempting to intimidate me and create a cloud over me to influence the election. I know that the FPPC process is often used this way to create election controversy. I request that the FPPC investigate this matter as soon as possible and publish its conclusions as speedily as possible. I have not seen Mr. Payne's complaint to the FPPC but judging from his public statement, there is much he has not told you. I have no financial interest in Mr. Payne's project nor his business associates. In addition, I own no property and have no business in any proximity to Mr. Payne's property. The nearest property I have is over ''/: mile away. I know that the FPPC governs financial interests and since mine are hot affected by Mr. Payne's project that should be the end of it. However since Mr. Payne is attempting to smear my good name, I would like to tell you some other facts. Mr. Payne has previously received almost $200,000 of assistance from the agency and was asking for$200,000 more to expand his facility. The present owner participation agreement did not require a public hearing. I called Mr. Payne to obtain information and to find out what his need was for the money since the staff report did not fully explain it. Mr. Payne told me he could do the project without the public assistance. I told him that I had trouble supporting giving away taxpayer money to an obviously successful developer who told me that he could built his project without our help. I don't think my attempt to get information or my position on public assistance is improper. Mr. Payne obviously feels that Council Members who do not believe in public giveaways should be recused from considering his project. Mr. Payne has now asked that his project be delayed so he can generate information which obviously was not available when the project was first considered last `l. week. If my questions had no merit, would he have asked for delay? However delay at this point has not altered Mr. Payne's statement, repeated publicly, that he can build the project without public assistance. Mr. Payne's tactic is to cloud the issue by attacking me. I value my name and would very much appreciate the FPPC's immediate and public rejection of this complaint, which clearly has no substance, thus removing any influence Mr. Payne's charges can have on our election. In addition, I want to know if you think a Council Member who does not believe in the giveaway of taxpayer funds should be recused from considering giveaways to developers, if you can please comment on that . Finally I want to know if the Redevelopment Agency can give public assistance to a developer who is also a Planning Commissioner under 1090 of the government code? In addition Mr. Payne's architect Mr. Chris Mills who is a Candidate for the City Council, was Chairman of the Planning Commission when the project was considered by the Planning Commission, although Mr. Mills did not participate and is no longer on the Planning Commission. Does this create a problem under the section 1090, alleged by an attorney named James Markman in the enclosed letter? Your immediate attention to this request will be greatly appreciated. Jim Jones Palm Springs City Council Member 2 1533 CnAPARRAL ROAD,PALM SPRINGS,CA 92262 To: City of Palm Springs From: Desert Shadows III Subject: Request for Recusal by Agency Member Date: 10-23-01 I am writing this letter as the General Partner of the Desert Shadows III Lp a California Limited Partnership. I am requesting that on all matters concerning this Limited Partnership as well as all other entities in which I am an officer that Council Member Jim Jones recuse himself from any participation in any matters that come before him as either a City of Palm Springs Council Member or a Representative of the Redevelopment Agency of Palm Springs. On Wednesday October 16, 2001 at about 9:00am I received a phone call from Mr. Jones informing me that he would not support our request from the Redevelopment Agency for Tax Increment funds for offsite improvements for our project in Palm Springs. This phone call lasted for approximately twenty minutes during which time he told me that he would forward angry emails from individuals opposed, not only to assistance from the Redevelopment Agency, but also to our project. When I attempted to explain how the funds would be used he cut me off by saying, "I know how it works, and you don't need to explain it to me." The conversation ended with him asking me if the project would still be built without the money? I told him it would, but also that it would be a different project, because we would have to cut back in many areas. 1 started to explain and he indicated that it didn't matter. If the project could still be built, he wouldn't support our request for offsite assistance from the Redevelopment Agency. This phone call was both disappointing and intimidating, as my partner and I were to appear that night in front of the Redevelopment Agency, to request assistance. The situation only got worse when later that day a candidate for City Council, Jim Franklin, faxed out a press release to KM1R quoting (inaccurately) portions of the supposedly private conversation I had with Mr. Jones earlier that same day. I had no reason to ever suspect that my conversation with a Redevelopment Agency member was going to be passed on to a candidate for city council. I find the actions of Mr. Jones appalling and totally inappropriate considering he had made his decision prior to our presentation to the Agency. It is frightening that a City Councilman and Redevelopment Agency Member would not only decide on issues prior to their formal presentation, but also call an applicant to advise them of their decision. For either of these bodies to function ethically, a citizen must have faith that their elected representatives will give them and others a fair and public hearing. I have no other alternative than to not only ask for the recusal by Mr. Jones on any issue involving Desert Shadows III, but also on any other issues involving businesses hi which my partner and I are directly involved. Further, I have sent a copy this letter to the FPPC and asked them for their review and, if warranted, to take appropriate disciplinary action against Mr. Jones, so that others will not be subject to the same type of gross misuse of power that he displayed with us. Sincerely, ephen Payne eneral Partner DSI 111, Lp OcY-23-20U1 02:Oupm From-RICHARDS, WATSON 4 GERSHON 714 630 6230 T-243 p 002/004 F-610 RICHARDS, WATSON & GERSHON ATTORNEYS AT LAW CLENN R.wATFOn T.rETER PIERCE AFROF UWONAL CORPORATION RICHARO RICMA,[OB CawIN c.ADLRR AMY CREYC.ON OAR-Lb O,CIEPEP TBREFA PUCHNER 1 CIVIC CENTER CIRCLE nP16-t6GPl VTCVEN L.DORSEY OEBOOAH R.HAKMAN WILLAM L.IBAunZ WILLIAM F.CURLEY PI P.O, Box 1089 ---- MIYCHE4LE.APBOTT D.CPAIG Mq BREA, CALIFORNIA 976 Z-1059 AAN FOANCI9.O OFFICE CREOVRYW.9TEPANICIIr LYNH I.IOARA 2 4aCMELLE BRPWNE JgNGY E.COLEBON EWYE 91. A ) FOR'FOVR MONTO014 ERT 9TRUeTWILLI ,u .QUINN M.SARROW LISA POND FACSIMILE (7 1 4) 990.9230 PAN FRANCISCO,CALWORNIA 04104 CAROL W,LYNCH ROxANNG M.DIAA 1a 15)4R 1'B4V' CREOOR M.KONERT £LANA A.LOVER FACSIMILC(41PI A21-UAUG YHOMAS M.JIMBO CPArvDRA CEHRI SPENCER R09ERT C CEC.N UOBE"H.P•ITTMAN F .VIUK N.KAUPMANN ROY A.CLAAKE LOS ANGCLEB 11FICE GA-Y E.RANG ANN M.MAVRnv October 23, 2001 YHIRIY-EIGHTH FLCVR ctoer JOHNJ.HARRIS JAY F.GOLIVA A33 iOJ HHOPE STREET KEVIN 0.ENNIS ERIC m.ALPERETE Lop AN6CLE6,CAL,FORrvq 90vp I-14vn RODIN D ,ARRII PAULA CUTIERRE2 DA£ZA MICHAGL E6.ADA PETER K. IM t2t])6ZE-84" L.LBRENCGp WICNER pLE%ArypER hPeE FACIMILG(213)PatlbO',v EVEN R.Om AMY V.ALD£RFER p.TILOEN K,M TOM K.A. �— F"KIAT.ABAMJRA CARRIE H.ANN KAY."O.eVME ROUERT W.WA19ON OF COUNSEL PETER M.THOABON PATRICK K.BOSKD HARRY I GER.HON JAM-9 L.MARKMAN MARK E.MANPELL MARK L LAMKEN e11IG A.GTEeLE MATYHEW A.pOFYNOFI'" SAYRE WEAVER WILLIAM K KRAMER Jim C.GRAYBON sCOTT I.BAI.CR MARYHA M.ESCVTIA VIA FACSIMILE TO (760) 323-8207 AND U. S,MAIL David H. Ready, City Manager, City of Palm. Springs and Members of the Palm Springs City Council 3200 Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs,California 92262 Re: Desert Shadows Project—Proposed Redevelopment Agency payments for"infiastructure" Dear Mr.Ready and Members of the Council-- Mr.Frank Tyson has brought to my attention the fact that the Council is now considering funding the construction of"infrastructure"to support a 17-unit condominium project to be connected by a bridge to a nudist resort, all purportedly in conformance with the requirements of Health and Safety Code Section 33445. My clients believe that payments proposed actually are meant to defray some of the costs of the bridge itself. I believe this is the same project which we previously brought to your attention as to which a member of the Planning Commission is an architect designing the subject bridge. I believe we also suggested that the City Attorney be asked whether the City even agreeing to give an easement for the construction of the bridge would constitute a violation of California's conflict of interest laws, particularly Government Code Section 1090. if the Redevelopment Agency decides to partially fund the bridge project,that is yet another reason for the City Attorney to opine as to the implications of Government Code Section 1o90. In any event,what appears to be obvious to Mr. Tyson, as well as other concerned citizens, is that this is yet another example of the Council straining to not only approve but to fund a project for the benefit of Council cronies,whether developers or architects- I am informed that no substantial evidence was presented to support any of the findings required by v ",a— T Oc(-23-2001 02:6apm From-RICHARDS, WATSON A GERSHON 714 990 6230 i-243 P.003/004 F-610 RICHARDS, WATSON & G'ERSHON David H. Ready, City Manager, City of Palm Springs and Members of the Palms Springs City Council October 23, 2001 Page 2 Government Code Section 33445 to support Agency funding of publicly owned infrastructure required by the project Health and Safety Code Section 33445 contains many requirements obviously not met with respect to the subject project. First, it is questionable that one could snake a finding that the bridge or other infrastructure is a benefit to the project area or even the immediate neighborhood in which the project is located_ This project specifically benefits only the owner of the nudist resort and/or the 17 condominium units which obviously will be sold to people who wish to cross over the bridge to utilizc the facilities at the nudist resort. Does the Council really consider causing that to occur being a benefit to the redevelopment project area or even the immediate neigbborhood? Second, it apparently was admitted on the record by the owner of the project that the project could financially support the construction of the bridge and all other infrastructure. Accordingly,the Council cannot make a finding that there is no other reasonable means of financing the project available to the community. The means which should be used,namely, funding by the people who benefit froin it, apparently is available to the community. I also understand that, when this was stated on the record,the City Attorney said words to the effect that"I wish you had not said that_" This is particularly disturbing. Our view is that the staff ought to be unbiased and objective in respect to reviewing projects and making recommendations. Statements such as that attributed to the City Attorney would indicate that the staff is attempting to promote a project which does not meet legal criteria. It certainly would have been more appropriate for the City Attorney to indicate that since the project proponent has stated he could afford to build the project,including the bridge and other infrastructure,the Council could not legally proceed to approve redevelopment funding for any part of the project. It also has been related to me that no evidence was presented indicating that this project will eliminate any blighting condition. For the Agency to fund any infrastructure,a finding as to elimination of blight must be.made. The location of the condominium project is simply an undeveloped area which is in no way blighted. It cannot be said that the area cannot be expected to be developed through the utilization of private financing. Further,the condominium project obviously could be built without the bridge connecting it to the nudist resort_ In short.there is no evidence sustaining a finding of"elimination of blight." For that reason alone, the Agency cannot legally fund the project. Finally,Health and Safety Code Section 33445 may require that any public facility paid for by the Redevelopment Agency needs to be specifically identified in the subject redevelopment plan. If that is required in this instance, and the bridge or other project infrastructure is not identified as a potential public project,redevelopment funding cannot support the project. �/��.' act-23-20'01 02:69pm ,From-RICHARDS, WATSON A GERSHON 714 gg0 62a0 i-24a P.0041004 F-610 RICHARDS,WATSON & GERSHON David H,Ready, City Manager. City of Palau Springs and Members of the Palms Springs City Council October 23, 2001 Page 3 It would be refreshing for Mr.Tyson and my other clients who vigilantly keep track of Palm Springs affairs to find the Council and management reacting objectively and favorably to points in this letter so that the outcome is the withdrawal of any notion of the Redevelopment Agency funding a bridge which leads only from a few condominium units to a nudist resort or any other public facilities involved. Hopefully,that will be the end result of this particular process. Very truly yours. RICHARDS, WATSON& GERSHON James L. Markman JLM:sjk cc: Frank Tyson(Sent by Facsimile—760-325-8610; 8)8-995-8268) David Aleshire, City Attorney, City of Palm Springs (Sent by Facsimile—949-863-3350) a2244\0001\672615