HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-05-25 Supplemental Packet 2
CITY OF PALM DESERT
CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
Date: May 25, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
From: Anthony J. Mejia, City Clerk
Subject: City Council Meeting of May 25, 2023
Below you will find questions received from the Mayor or Councilmembers and answers provided by
City staff regarding tonight’s City Council meeting:
ITEM 2A: REQUEST FOR DIRECTION REGARDING RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE
2023 BROKER’S REPORT
Q1: Have developers specified which casual dining restaurants have reversed their interest
in Palm Desert? Were they all restaurants with a planned drive-thru?
A1: Panera, Raising Canes, and Salad to Go have all reversed their interest in Palm Desert.
Q2: Has there been a discussion of ARC creating objective standards for retail as they do
with housing?
A2: ARC has not had a discussion on objective standards for retail.
ITEM 2B: REQUEST FOR DIRECTION REGARDING DISTRICTING OPTIONS
Q1: Please provide a map depicting areas of population growth over the next 5 years in the
northern part of the City?
A1: Please see the attached map.
Q2: What do Elections Code Sections 21620, 21625, 21630, and Government Code Section
34886 say? Can a link for each be provided?
A2: Please see below:
Elections Code § 21620:
(a) This article applies to a charter city that elects members of the city’s legislative body by
districts or from districts, as defined in Section 34871 of the Government Code.
(b) This article shall not be interpreted to limit the discretionary remedial authority of any
federal or state court.
05/25/2023 Question & Answer Memo
Page 2 of 2
Elections Code § 21625:
(a) After redistricting or districting pursuant to Section 21621 or 21623, a council shall not
adopt new council district boundaries until after the next federal decennial census, except
under the following circumstances:
(1) A court orders the council to redistrict.
(2) The council is settling a legal claim that its council district boundaries violate the United
States Constitution, the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. Sec. 10301 et
seq.), or this article.
(3) The boundaries of the city change by the addition of territory pursuant to Section 21623
or by the subtraction of territory.
(b) This section does not prohibit a council from adopting council districts between federal
decennial censuses if the council is adopting council districts for the first time, including
when a city adopts council districts for the purpose of transitioning from electing its council
members in at-large elections to elections by districts or from districts.
(c) This section does not apply to a charter city that has adopted different rules for mid-cycle
redistricting in its city charter.
Elections Code § 21630:
If a council assigns the responsibility to recommend or to adopt new district boundaries to a
hybrid or independent redistricting commission as defined in Section 23000, the charter city
remains subject to the redistricting deadlines, requirements, and restrictions that apply to the
council under this article, unless otherwise exempted by law. A redistricting commission
described in this section may perform the duties required of a city council under this article.
Government Code § 34886:
Notwithstanding Section 34871 or any other law, the legislative body of a city may adopt an
ordinance that requires the members of the legislative body to be elected by district or by
district with an elective mayor, as described in subdivisions (a) and (c) of Section 34871,
without being required to submit the ordinance to the voters for approval. An ordinance
adopted pursuant to this section shall comply with the requirements and criteria of Section
21601 or 21621 of the Elections Code, as applicable, and include a declaration that the
change in the method of electing members of the legislative body is being made in furtherance
of the purposes of the California Voting Rights Act of 2001 (Chapter 1.5 (commencing with
Section 14025) of Division 14 of the Elections Code).
I VICINITY MAP
Boca C h i ca
T
r
l
Dinah
S
h
o
r
e
D
r
V
a
r
ne
r
R
dMonterey
Marketplace
Shepherd LnDi
nah
S
h
ore DrGateway
DrFra nk Sin atr a D r
G e rald Ford D r
PortolaAveVa
rne
r
R
d
Monterey AveMonterey AveSuncrest
Country Club
Marriott's
Shadow Ridge
Desert Willow
Hov l ey Ln W
Country Club
D
r
Portola Ave
Chaparral
Country Club
Monterey
Country Club
Ivey Ranch
Country Club
38th Ave
Cow boy
D
r
Var ner Rd
Va
rn
e
r
R
d
Gera ld
F
o
rd Dr
Ta
m
a
r
isk
R
o
w
Dr
Ivey Ranch
Country Club
Classic Club
Golf Course
Avondale
Country Club
Palm Valley
Country Club
Desert Falls
Country Club
CSU San
Bernardino-Palm
Desert
Coachella Vly
Natl Wildlife
Refuge
4 2 nd A v e
R un n i n g S p r ings Dr
CarlottaDrEldoradoDrCookStCook St
Coun t ry
C
l
u
b
D
r
Hovl e y
L
n
E
H ov l e y Ln E
Hov l ey
L
n
E
Indian Ridge
Country Club
The Lakes
Country Club
Oasis Club DrPalm Desert
Country
1 2
3
456
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
1415
16
17 18
19
20
Loma Linda University, UC Riverside, City of Palm Desert, County of
Riverside, California State Parks, Esri, HERE, Garmin, SafeGraph,
GeoTechnologies, Inc, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau of Land Management, EPA,
NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, Copyright nearmap 2015
Residential Project Status - May 2023
Approved
Under
Construction
Units: 2,925 / Projected Pop. 6,201
Units: 1,683 / Projected Pop. 3,568
Map ID Project Name Residential Type Status Unit Count Population
1 Urban Crossings Multi-family Approved 176 373
2 Sage Single-family Under Construction 111 235
3 Palm Villas Multi-family Approved 241 511
4 Millennium Apartments Multi-family Under Construction 330 700
5 Vitalia Apartments Multi-family Under Construction 269 570
6 Santa Barbara Condominiums SIngle-family Approved 32 68
7 Montage Single-family Under Construction 63 134
8 University Park Lennar Single-family Under Construction 196 416
9 Gerald Ford Apartments Multi-family Under Construction 150 318
10
Frank Sinta Drive/Portola Avenue
Apartments Multi-family Approved 394 835
11 Dolce Single-family Under Construction 159 337
12 Bravo Garden Apartments Multi-family Approved 388 823
13 Refuge Specific Plan Single-family Approved 700 1484
14 University Park Apartments Multi-family Approved 336 712
15 University Park Phase Four Multi-family Approved 183 388
16 University Park Phase Two Single-family Under Construction 169 358
17 University Park Phase One SIngle-family Under Construction 236 500
18 University Park Phase Three SIngle-family Approved 145 307
19 Monterey Ridge Multi-family Approved 247 524
20 Desert Surf Villas Single-family Approved 83 176
4,608
9,769Projected Population (2.12 persons per unit)
Total Units
From:Grace Garner
To:CouncilMeeting Comments
Subject:Item 2B - District Elections
Date:Thursday, May 25, 2023 9:34:41 AM
Attachments:Outlook-4nhlkdqj.png
Mayor Kelly and Council Members:
I am writing to share my experience in the districting process in Palm Springs as a member of
the California Votings Rights Working Group that assisted in the creation of the districts and as
a Council Member that represents the only majority BIPOC district in Palm Springs.
As a member of the Working Group I met with hundreds of residents at dozens of meetings
held across Palm Springs. We heard over and over that residents did not always feel heard and
wanted to feel they had more of a say in who was elected to serve on City Council. They
wanted to feel connected to their elected official. We compiled all of this information and
presented our recommendations to the then City Council which included recommendations
on how to further break down barriers in running for public office.
Prior to the creation of districts in Palm Springs there was not adequate representation from
across the city and the council often consisted of members that lived near each other and
many had similar community connections. Now, almost four years later, we see a shift in not
only who runs, but who wins. When I ran in 2019 I did not have the same connections as my
future colleagues. However, I knew my community and the residents of district 1 agreed.
Since my election, I have assisted dozens of Spanish speaking residents with obtaining
services, including refunding over $2,000 in sewer overcharge to a resident that had been
fighting for her money for years. Residents stop me at the library, the parks, the store to say
hello or ask for assistance. I have strong relationships and connections with every area of my
district. I can do this because of districts. Without districts it is easy to hear only the loudest
voices. Districts allow us to be more focused in our work and come together collectively as a
council and report back what we are hearing and then make the best decision for the city as a
whole.
I hope you will seriously consider creating 5 districts in Palm Desert to allow for greater
representation throughout the City. I think you will find it not only beneficial to the residents
but also to future council members.
Please contact me if you'd like to discuss further.
Sincerely,
2B Supp-46
Grace Elena Garner
<!--[if !vml]--><!--[endif]--> Grace Elena Garner, Esq.
MAYOR / ALCALDESA
City of Palm Springs Tel: (760) 322-8200
3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Fax:(760) 323-8207
Palm Springs, CA 92262 TDD: (760) 864-9527
www.palmspringsca.gov grace.garner@palmspringsca.gov
2B Supp-47
From:Michael Milan
To:CouncilMeeting Comments
Subject:May 25, 2023 Palm Desert City Council Meeting Public Comment | Item 2B
Date:Thursday, May 25, 2023 9:56:09 AM
Attachments:ACLU Desert Chapter Logo.png
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members,
The American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California (ACLU SoCal) Desert Chapter
wishes to express our strong support for a move to five city council districts which would
benefit our Palm Desert residents.
As an organization interested in community empowerment and protecting voter rights, we
know an expansion to five council districts would increases equity through greater
community empowerment and access and greater representation reflective of the City's
diversity.
We are happy to provide any support needed toward a successful transition to the new council
districts, in accordance with the California Voter Rights Act.
We are asking that the Palm Desert City Council provide necessary direction to City Staff to
move this forward.
We request that this email be recognized as a public comment during the May 25, 2023 City
Council meeting, and retained for the official record.
Respectfully,
Michael Milan, Desert Chapter President
on behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California
2B Supp-48
From:Donald Zeigler
To:CouncilMeeting Comments
Subject:District Election of City Council Members
Date:Thursday, May 25, 2023 10:21:30 AM
I am expressing my support for electing all 5 city council members from individual districts. The existing
system is very frustrating. As it is, any time I want to get involved in a city issue, I need to address my
concern to 4 separate council members with the hope that one might take an interest and respond. With
a specific council member representing my district, I can be assured that sending my concerns to that one
individual will get my issue presented to the city council and I can interface with that one individual to
know how the issue is proceeding. As things are now, it may look like I have 4 representatives, but
actually I don't have any.
Donald Zeigler
125 Chelsea Circle
Palm Desert CA 92260
2B Supp-49
2B Supp-50
2B Supp-51
From:City Hall Mail
To:CouncilMeeting Comments
Subject:FW: In Relation to Splitting the City into five Districts
Date:Thursday, May 25, 2023 12:37:16 PM
From: Ruth Hill <hilruth@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2023 12:36 PM
To: City Hall Mail <cityhall@palmdesert.gov>
Subject: In Relation to Splitting the City into five Districts
Dear Council Member,I believe splitting the City into 5 districts takes away my representation. I will only have one Council Member to address my concerns. With 5 Districts I can enlist the 4 other members if one member does not address my concerns. Also only having one council m
Dear Council Member,
I believe splitting the City into 5 districts takes away my representation. I will only have one Council Member to
address my concerns. With 5 Districts I can enlist the 4 other members if one member does not address my
concerns. Also only having one council member means the member does not address issues for the City as a Whole.
Five districts would mean that one person more than a tenth of all possible voters decides whether
someone is a council member. With 5 districts, none of us could influence any more than one council seat
every 4 years. This would drastically reduce the influence of all voters in our current District 2, who now
have four council members accountable to them.
I am against having 5 districts.
--
Ruth A Hill RN BSN MAT CHPN
760-851-5260
38681 Parker Ridge Way
Silence in the face of evil is itself evil.
2B Supp-52
From:SUZANE WILBUR
To:CouncilMeeting Comments
Subject:Support of 5 Districts for Palm Desert
Date:Thursday, May 25, 2023 12:38:46 PM
We support 5 Districts for Palm Desert. Currently, there are only two Districts in Palm Desert, and District 2 is very
spread out. We understand that the 4 Councilmembers of District 2 live near each other, and are not spread out
across the area that they represent.
We believe that Councilmembers should live in their Districts in close proximity to their constituents, so that they
can experience the same issues as their constituents. By having 5 Districts, the representatives will be more spread
out and better able to make decisions that affect the people that they represent.
Patrick and Suzane Wilbur
95 Camino Arroyo Place
Palm Desert, CA 92260
2B Supp-53
From:City Hall Mail
To:CouncilMeeting Comments
Subject:FW: In Relation to Splitting the City into 5 Districts
Date:Thursday, May 25, 2023 12:41:22 PM
From: Ruth Hill <hilruth@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2023 12:39 PM
To: City Hall Mail <cityhall@palmdesert.gov>
Subject: In Relation to Splitting the City into 5 Districts
Dear Mayor Kathline Kelly,Supporters of measure B say districts would give every area its spoke person. This attempts to fix what isn't broken. A core value of our city is equally resourcing all parts of the city. We plan for parks and good infrastructure like flood control t
Dear Mayor Kathline Kelly,
Supporters of measure B say districts would give every area its spoke person. This
attempts to fix what isn't broken. A core value of our city is equally resourcing all parts
of the city. We plan for parks and good infrastructure like flood control throughout the
city. We regularly engage residents in each part of the city's forums about local topics.
One spokesperson per district is not better than four accountable representatives.
I believe splitting the City into 5 districts takes away my representation. I will only have one
Council Member to address my concerns. With 5 Districts I can enlist the 4 other members if
one member does not address my concerns. Also only having one council member means the
member does not address issues for the City as a Whole.
Vote No on Districts
--
Ruth A Hill RN BSN MAT CHPN
760-851-5260
38681 Parker Ridge Way
Silence in the face of evil is itself evil.
2B Supp-54