Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-02-09 Study Session - Energy Dept Parking Shuttle Visitor Center CITY Of Pfill DESERT 41 , • 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE Q 0 wn �97 PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 • ' � � TEL: 760 346-06t. 40 3/- O/ Y : FAX: 760 340-0574 94R"00/ 6nr) ,�. infaC�palm-desert.org NOTICE OF STUDY SESSION OF THE PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Palm Desert City Council will convene Thursday, February 9, 2012, at 2:00 p.m. in the Administrative Conference Room of the Palm Desert Civic Center, 73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, California 92260, for the purpose of conducting a Study Session. Said Study Session will be held in order to discuss status of the Energy Department, Parking Shuttle, and Visitor Center. R CHELLE D. KLASSE , CITY CLERK CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA February 3, 2012 NO ACTIONS WILL BE TAKEN AT THE STUDY SESSION. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY SESSION IS INFORMATION ONLY. aw,IIIgIO dl t!(1(IfD 1 VII ........... CITY OF PALM DESERT 11 I lc !1 ) PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT %6,4 INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM To: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmember's From: John Wohlmuth, City Manager Date: February 9, 2012 Subject: Information relating to future of Shopper Hopper, Visitor Center, and Energy Program As you know, over the past several weeks we have been learning the cumulative effects of the elimination of the City's Redevelopment Agency. I have estimated the total exposure to the general fund to be 1.2 million dollars for the balance of this fiscal year (5 month analysis attached). There is no doubt that future reorganization of the City will be necessary. I am confident that our staff will find new and innovative ways to approach this challenge. The estimated cost of eliminating RDA for the full fiscal year 2012/2013 is 2.88 million dollars (excluding Housing). I have begun the process of reviewing services and programs provided by the Redevelopment Agency and have identified three programs for immediate review: 1. El Paseo Courtesy Carts 2. City Visitor Center 3. Energy Program Detailed analyses of each program have been prepared and are attached to this memo. I have reviewed each report and have summarized my recommendations below. El Paseo Courtesy Carts: As reported, this program was created due to a heavy concentration of businesses in and around the Presidents Plaza area. Several of the high intense uses that caused the congestion have relocated which has alleviated many of the parking concerns. While the Courtesy Carts are a nice amenity, there is a heavy cost associated which will need to be picked up by the general fund. My recommendation is to eliminate this service at the conclusion of the El Paseo season or after Fashion Week (April 1, 2012). City Council Study Ses.. .1 Memorandum February 9, 2012 City Visitor Center: My recommendation would be to begin negotiations with the Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce for the duration of our lease on El Paseo and then relocate the Visitor Center to the Henderson Building in the Chamber of Commerce space. While there are some initial obstacles (i.e. current lease) this option could save a substantial amount in overhead and staffing costs in the long run. The report indicates several proposals for potential short term costs savings which can be discussed with the Chamber. Whether contracting with the Chamber or maintaining the operation with City staff, we should reduce the hours of operation to 5 days a week with perhaps reduced hours (i.e. 10 am to 5 pm vs. 9 am to 5 pm currently). Energy Department: The City has been very forward thinking in this department for many years. I do believe that it is in the City's best interest to keep an energy department, however, some reorganization can be utilized to maximize efficiency. The report from Martin Alvarez indicates some proposed staff sharing alternatives with a proposal to reduce operations costs for FY 2012/13. I believe Martin's approach will keep visibility of our Energy Department while minimizing the impact to the general fund. N M. WOHLMUTH y Manager JMW:RS Attachments (as noted) r ..�'�:ti CITY OF PALM DESERT 11/1 FINANCE DEPARTMENT .:<•�?=,�y°�.•• INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: JOHN M. WOHLMUTH, CITY MANAGER FROM: PAUL S. GIBSON, FINANCE DIRECTOR gi'l/ DATE: FEBRUARY 6, 2012 SUBJECT: RDA BUDGET TRANSFERS AND ADJUSTMENTS As a result of the dissolution of Redevelopment, staff proposes the following transfers to the General Fund and adjustments to the Redevelopment Agency budget: Remaining Budget 1. Courtesy Cart Program $177,900 2. Energy Management Payroll 84,077 Energy Management Program 83,025 167,102 3. Visitor Center Payroll / PIO 88,860 4. Economic Development Program 45,423 5. Staffing of Redevelopment (February—June 2012) Salary 466,987 Benefits 188,498 Program Costs 67,453 722,938 Grand Total $1,202.223 Currently, the above-listed expenses are represented in Fund 850, and action is required by Council in the near future to appropriate these funds to the General Fund. There is still some uncertainty as to whether the successor agency will be reimbursed for these expenses, and it is likely the General Fund will ultimately cover these costs. If you require any additional information, feel free to contact me. Thank you. PSG:nmo , CITY OF PALM DESERT r -T'���'4-� OFFICE OF ENERGY MANAGEMENT MEMORANDUM To: John M. Wohlmuth, City Manager From: Martin Alvarez, Redevelopment Manager Date: February 6, 2011 Subject: Office of Energy Management As of February 1, 2012, the Office of Energy Management's administration budget has been transferred to the General Fund. The current staffing consists of one full-time Technician and 50% of the Energy Manager's position. Both positions handle the various energy related programs including the Set To Save program, Palm Desert Energy Partnership coordination, the Energy Independence Program and coordination with the Sustainability Committee. Set To Save Program / Palm Desert Energy Partnership: In December of 2010, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) granted $6.9 million to the Palm Desert Energy Partnership (i.e. Set To Save Program) and approved an extension of the Set To Save Programs until December 31, 2012. The CPUC funding is used for Set To Save rebates, incentives, marketing, and administration. The City's commitment to the Energy Partnership / CPUC is the continued staffing of the Office of Energy Management through the end of the Set To Save program. Staff works with our utility partners on a weekly basis to develop strategies to raise community awareness of the Set To Save programs and the opportunities to save money and energy. Staff handles daily phone inquiries on the One Stop Shop Pool Pump Program, Free Residential Energy Surveys, Quality Installation Air Conditioning Rebate, and other commercial and residential Set To Save rebates. Recommendation/Option: In order to minimize impacts to the General Fund, staff recommends that phone and counter inquiries for the Set To Save Program be coordinated by 20% of a full-time employee in the Technician classification and the Energy Manager can continue to coordinate with the Palm Desert Energy Partnership to fulfill the commitments of the Set To Save Program through the end of the term. Energy Independence Program: The City of Palm Desert has committed up to $15M to the Energy Independence Program (EIP). To date, approximately $6.0M in loan funds have been issued. The EIP continues to receive applications, however at a slower intake. In 2010, the EIP funded G.\rda\Martin Alvarez\20121Memos\EnergyStafling.doc . w , 59 energy projects (5 per month). After the July 2010 FHFA statements were released, which questioned the seniority position of our liens, EIP applications were significantly reduced. In 2011, staff funded 25 energy loans (2 per month). Staff continues to receive telephone and counter inquires for the EIP. In addition, the Energy Technician conducts annual visual verification inspections required by the EIP Guidelines for all projects completed after 2010. The City Council has also committed significant legal resources to the EIP. In 2010, the City filed a lawsuit against the FHFA road blocks. Our legal counsel awaits the final ruling from the District Court and anticipates a preliminary hearing date in June 2012. If the court rules to invalidate FHFA's statements, applications could regain momentum and rise to the 2010 levels (60/year). If the District Court rules in favor or the FHFA, EIP applications may continue to be submitted at the current pace (2/month). Recommendation/Option: To address the staffing levels for the EIP, staff recommends that both telephone and counter EIP inquires be coordinated by 20% of a full-time employee in the Technician classification. Intake of EIP applications and processing requires additional staffing resources, even at the current intake pace. EIP application processing can be coordinated by 20% of a full-time employee in the Technician classification, 10% of the Senior Financial Analyst and the Energy Manager. Staff recommends that the annual visual verification inspections be conducted by the City's Building Inspectors. Below is a summary of the current Energy Management budget for Fiscal Year 11/12, proposed reductions for the remaining fiscal year and proposed budget for FY 12/13. Energy Management Administration Adjustment Remaining Proposed Description FY 11/12 FY 11/12 FY 12/13 Energy Manager (50%) $87,461 $87,461 $87,461 50%Allocated to Energy Technician $114,965 $45,986 $45,986 40% Allocated to Energy Office Supplies $250 $100 $250 Professional Services $50,000 $4,400 $10,800 Title Report Fees EIP Mileage Reimbursement $1,000 $200 $500 EIP/PACE Meetings Conferences/Seminars $1,500 $0 $0 Local Meetings $500 $0 $500 Contractor Meetings Advertising Promotional $10,000 $1,000 $1,000 EIP Brochures Printing / Duplicating $1,000 $200 $500 Dues $21,000 $5,000 $5,000 Aspen Accord Dues Telephones $500 $0 $500 Postage & Freight $1,000 $200 $500 Capital Budget $2,200 $0 $0 $291,376 $144,547 $152,997 If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. cc: Justin McCarthy, Assistant City Manager G:\rda\Martin Alvarez\2012\Memos\EnergyStaffing.doc CITY OF PALM DESERT ft �'1 I Redevelopment Agency •''4' Ammo,': MEMORANDUM To: John Wohlmuth, City Manager CC: Justin McCarthy, ACM Redevelopment From: Ruth Ann Moore, Economic Development Manager Date: January 19, 2012 Contents: Attachment A — Grey 2011/2012 Schedule Attachment B — Green 2012/2013 Proposed Schedule Attachment C — Blue Proposed Schedule for Remainder of 2011/2012 Attachment D — Conditions of Approval Subject: Courtesy Cart Program The El Paseo Courtesy Cart Program has been funded through the Redevelopment Agency. With the need to now fund that program through the General Fund, the following is an overview of the program, review of the 2007 proposed parking structures and a program modification for your consideration. Background The El Paseo Courtesy Cart Program began operation in September of 2004 with one cart; five days per week. In the following two years, two additional carts were added and the service was extended to seven days per week. The program currently operates from Labor Day weekend through July 4th weekend (Attachment A—Grey), seven days per week with the following budget: • Regular Operations $158,000 Daily running 2-3 carts totaling 6,077 hours @ $26.00/hour • Special Event Hours $ 5,000 Evening street-wide events totaling 170 hours @ $28.00/hour • Yearly Maintenance $ 10,000 Total 2011/2012 Budget $173,000 The program has been well received by merchants and customers alike with strong ridership consistently averaging between 49,000 and 51,000 rides each year. Many cities have inquired about the program for their shopping districts including cities in California, G:IRDAVRUTH ANN MOOREIWORD DATAIEL PASEO COURTESY SHUTTLEICART OPERATING PROPOSAL.DOC Washington, Oregon, and Illinois. The carts have been highlighted in local media, in national and international websites, and magazines that featured Fashion Week on El Paseo. The El Paseo Business Improvement District features the program in all its advertising including magazine, radio, websites, and the street-wide directories. During the City's parking study in 2007, it was determined that overall parking in the district is adequate for current requirements. Unfortunately, parking is not evenly disbursed throughout the mile-long district. Parking is heavily weighted in the center of the district but does not fulfill current requirements for areas to the east (Presidents' Plazas I & II) or the future requirements to the west (President's Plaza III). Design and cost estimates for building parking structures in these public parking areas were performed. Due to the existing property structures, utilities and accessibility requirements by fire & safety, the proposed construction would not only demolish existing parking but create little additional parking for the cost as indicated in the following: President's Plaza I 423 existing spaces Lonanaw.E flCtOM-LOO.sq IWN..,) _ 11111 I • Ebt STE K41 i141IntetnationaI P>rking PRESIDENT'S PLAZA PARKING STRUCTURE SHEET Dear' .ob........,...,v,m .A., OPTION 2-EAST SITE A102E Proposed structure — 285 spaces at a total cost of$7,443,360 New structure would destroy 229 existing spaces Net spaces gained — 56 Cost per net new stall - $132,917 G:IRDAIRUTH ANN MOOREIWORD DATAIEL PASEO COURTESY SHUTTLEICART OPERATING PROPOSAL.DOC President's Plaza II 422 existing spaces ini isi Feili"Ism PRESIDENT'S PLAZA PARKING STRUCTURE SHEET - •-•^- +— OPTION 2s- WEST SITE Al O1W Proposed structure — 321 spaces at a total cost of $6,037,920 New structure would destroy 192 existing spaces Net spaces gained — 129 Cost per net new stall $53,782 President's Plaza III 560 existing spaces �' S 1 4 F S. 1 ) 1 _ .. rHAl1 rHA8E2 _ . 9 I s Inl.rn»Uunrl 1 Iti.klnc PRESIDENTS PLAZA PARKING STRUCTURE SHEET -• r�:, 1��»»w��^ »»« OPTION 2- WEST SITE A1.OIW Proposed structure — 665 spaces at a total cost of$15,846,624 New structure would destroy 367 existing spaces Net spaces gained — 298 Cost per net new stall $53,177 G:IRDAIRUTH ANN MOOREIWORD DATAIEL PASEO COURTESY SHUTTLEICART OPERATING PROPOSAL.DOC ' a From these totals it was clear that adding 483 new parking spaces at a cost of over $29 million was impractical and not a good use of funds. The solution of moving people throughout the mile-long shopping district is the El Paseo Courtesy Cart Program. The shuttles allow customers to move to multiple locations without a need to move their vehicle in order to continue shopping. Customers spend more time in the district to fulfill their shopping and dining needs while the use of the Courtesy Carts reduces both traffic and greenhouse gases by encouraging shoppers to park in one place. Taking the estimated cost of $29 million for new structures, the El Paseo Courtesy Cart program could operate for over 100 years for the same amount of money. Therefore, it was more practical to use funds for the cart program rather than build parking structures to support the economic vitality of the shopping district. Program Modification In consideration of funding for the program in the future, should City Council want to continue the cart program, the following is an option to reduce operating hours while still providing the most service while needed in season. Monthly ridership numbers have been counted since the program's inception. Averaging monthly ridership from the ten fully operational months of the past five year indicates an average yearly ridership of 49,372. As indicated in the graph below 40,312 riders or 81% of the ridership occurs from November through May. After review of the ridership per week with the operator of the program, a majority of the weekly ridership occurs between Wednesday and Sunday. 5 Yr Average Ridership '07 - '11 8000 7000 6000 so0o 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec G:IRDAIRUTH ANN MOOREIWORD DATAIEL PASEO COURTESY SHUTTLEICART OPERATING PROPOSAL.DOC The operator indicated that the use of three carts was more beneficial than operating two carts, therefore, staff proposes operating November through Memorial Day in May (Attachment B — Green), each week from Wednesday through Sunday, and operating three carts during the busiest months from January through April with the following results: • Regular Operations $ 80,750 Daily running 2-3 carts totaling 3,104 hours @ $26.00/hour • Special Event Hours $ 4,000 Evening street-wide events totaling 140 hours @ $28.00/hour • Yearly Maintenance $ 10,000 Total 2012/2013 Budget $ 94,750 Savings between the current and proposed schedules $ 78,250 Within the operations contract, there is a provision that allows for the reduction of operations at anytime. Should authorization to begin this new proposal occur on February 1, 2012, the operations for the remainder of the 2011/2012 budget would be reduced by 1,176 hours or $30,576 (Attachment C — Blue). The current vehicles have operated beyond all expectations and the purchase of new vehicles is required. There are funds ($75,000) available through a condition placed on a commercial development at the southwest corner of El Paseo and Sage to be used to purchase new carts with any remaining funds to be used for operations (reference Attachment D). Should City Council wish to continue the Courtesy Cart program, staff will put the cart purchase out to bid in anticipation of using new carts in fiscal year 2012/2013. G:IRDAIRUTH ANN MOOREIWORD DATAIEL PASEO COURTESY SHUTTLEICART OPERATING PROPOSAL.DOC 201112012 SCHEDULE OF OPERATION Attachment A September October December Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo h - Cart day mo hrs No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day m . No. Days hrs day mo CC1 M-SN 8 30 240 CC1 M-SN 8 31 248 CC1 M-SN 8 29 232 CC1 M-SN 8 30 240 CC2 M-SN 8 30 240 CC2 M-SN 8 31 248 CC2 M-SN 8 29 232 CC2 M-SN 8 30 240 CC3 W-SN 0 22 0 CC3 W-ST 8 18 144 CC3 W-ST+1 SN 8 17 136 CC3 W-SN 8 22 176 82 480 80 640 75 600 82 656 January February March April Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo CC1 M-SN 8 31 248 CC1 M-SN 8 29 232 CC1 M-SN 8 31 248 CC1 M-SN 8 30 240 CC2 M-SN 8 31 248 CC2 M-SN 8 29 232 CC2 M-SN 8 31 248 CC2 M-SN 8 30 240 CC3 W-SN 8 21 168 CC3 W-SN 8 21 168 CC3 W-SN 8 23 184 CC3 W-SN 8 21 168 83 664 79 632 85 680 81 648 k, May June July August Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo CC1 M-SN 8 31 248 CC1 M-SN 8 30 240 CC1 M-SN 8 4 32 CC1 ST-SN 0 0 0 CC2 M-SN 8 31 248 CC2 M-SN 8 30 240 CC2 M-SN 0 0 0 CC2 M-SN 0 0 0 CC3 W-ST 8 16 128 CC3 W-ST 0 0 0 CC3 W-ST 0 0 0 CC3 W-SN 0 0 0 78 624 60 480 4 32 0 0 ¶ONTHS OF OPERATION M-SN=Monday thru Sunday TOTAL HOURS/YEAR 6,136 Month No.of Carts W-ST=Wed thru Saturday September 2 W-SN=Wed thru Sunday October 3 ST-SN=Saturday thru Sunday November 3 *off on Thanksgiving Day December 3 *off on Christmas Day January 3 February 3 March 3 April 3 May 3 June 2 July 1 (thru July 4th) August 0G:\rda\Robin McCormick\Courtesy Cart\CC Schedule of Operation-Update 2011-12 FISCAL YR 2012.13 SCHEDULE OF OPERATION Attachment B September October November December Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo CC1 0 0 0 CC1 0 0 0 CC1 W-SN 8 21 168 CC1 W-SN 8 23 184 CC2 0 0 0 CC2 0 0 0 CC2 W-SN 8 21 168 CC2 W-SN 8 23 184 CC3 0 0 0 CC3 0 0 0 CC3 W-SN 0 0 0 CC3 W-SN 0 23 0 0 0 42 336 69 368 January February March April Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo CC1 W-SN 8 22 176 CC1 W-SN 8 21 168 CC1 W-SN 8 23 184 CC1 W-SN 8 20 160 CC2 W-SN 8 22 176 CC2 W-SN 8 21 168 CC2 W-SN 8 23 184 CC2 W-SN 8 20 160 CC3 W-SN 8 22 176 CC3 W-SN 8 21 168 CC3 W-SN 8 23 184 CC3 W-SN 8 20 160 66 528 63 504 69 552 60 480 May June July August Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo . No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo CC1 W-SN 8 21 168 CC1 0 0 0 CC1 0 0 0 CC1 0 0 0 CC2 W-SN 8 21 168 CC2 0 0 0 CC2 0 0 0 CC2 0 0 0 CC3 CC3 0 0 0 CC3 0 0 0 CC3 0 0 0 42 336 0 0 0 f (— DNTHS OF OPERATION TOTAL HOURS/YEAR 3,104 Month No.of Carts September 0 W-SN=Wed thru Sunday October 0 . November 2 *off on Thanksgiving Day December 2 *plus Christmas Day January 3 *plus Martin Luther King Day 'February 3 *plus President's Day March 3 April 3 May 2 *plus Labor Day June 0 • July 0 • August 0 G:\rda\Robin McCormick\Courtesy Cart\CC Schedule of Operation-2012-13 PROPOSED SCHEDULE- REMAINDER OF 2011/2012 SCHEDULE OF OPERATION Attachment C September October November December Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo CC1 0 0 0 CC1 0 0 0 CC1 0 0 0 CC1 0 0 0 CC2 0 0 0 CC2 0 0 0 CC2 0 0 0 CC2 0 0 0 CC3 0 0 0 CC3 0 0 0 CC3 0 0 0 CC3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 January February March April Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo CC1 0 0 0 CC1 W-SN 8 22 176 CC1 W-SN 8 23 184 CC1 W-SN 8 21 168 CC2 0 0 0 CC2 W-SN 8 22 176 CC2 W-SN 8 23 184 CC2 W-SN 8 21 168 CC3 0 0 0 CC3 W-SN 8 22 176 CC3 W-SN 8 23 184 CC3 W-SN 8 21 168 0 66 528 69 552 63 504 May June July August Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs Cart day mo hrs No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo No. Days hrs day mo CC1 W-SN 8 21 168 CC1 0 0 0 CC1 M-SN 0 4 0 CC1 0 0 0 CC2 W-SN 8 21 168 CC2 0 0 0 CC2 M-SN 0 0 0 CC2 0 0 0 CC3 0 CC3 0 0 0 CC3 W-ST 0 0 0 CC3 0 0 0 42 336 0 0 0 MONTHS OF OPERATION TOTAL HOURSIYEAR 1,920 Month No.of Carts September 0 W-SN=Wed thru Sunday October 0 November 0 December 0 January 0 February 3 *plus Presidents Day March 3 April 3 May 2 *plus Labor Day June 0 July 0 August 0 G:\rda\Robin McCormick\Courtesy Cart\CC Schedule-Update 2011-12 Rmndr Yr RESOLUTION NO. 07-75 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NOS. VAR 07-01 AND PP 07-08 Department of Community Development: 1. The development of the property shall conform substantially with exhibits on file with the Department of Community Development, as modified by the following conditions. The applicant shall construct a fourteen-foot six-inch (14'6") wide sidewalk along the property's frontage as shown on the project site plan. 2. The applicant shall submit to the City of Palm Desert an in-lieu parking fee in the amount of seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000) to apply towards either the purchase of an El Paseo Courtesy Cart and one-year of its operation, or the construction of a parking structure, at the sole discretion of the City. 3. Construction of a portion of said project shall commence within one year from the date of final approval unless an extension of time is granted; otherwise, said approval shall become null, void and of no effect whatsoever. 4. The development of the property described herein shall be subject to the restrictions and limitations set forth herein which are in addition to all municipal ordinances and state and federal statutes now in force, or which hereafter may be in force. 5. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall first obtain permits and/or clearance from the following agencies: Coachella Valley Water District Palm Desert Architectural Review Commission City Fire Marshal Public Works Department 6. Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies shall be presented to the Department of Building and Safety at the time of issuance of a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 7. Access to trash/service areas shall be placed so as not to conflict with parking areas. Said placement shall be approved by applicable waste company and Department of Community Development and shall include a recycling program. 8. Applicant agrees to maintain the landscaping required to be installed pursuant to these conditions. 9. All sidewalk plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Department of Public Works prior to final Architectural Review Commission submittal. 10. The project shall be subject to all applicable fees at time of issuance of building permits including, but not limited to, Art in Public Places, Fringe-Toed Lizard, TUMF, School Mitigation and Housing Mitigation fees. . • � �"'' � •: CITY OF PALM DESERT in i INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM b ��� h r To: John Wohlmuth, City Manager From: Donna Gomez, Visitor Center Manager Date: January 31, 2012 Subject: VISITOR CENTER MANAGEMENT OPTIONS In March 2011 staff sought proposals from outside agencies in order to analyze options related to the operation of the City's Visitor Center. Six proposals were received and a committee selected two proposals for further consideration. The attached financial analysis outlines both internal and external options for operating the Palm Desert Visitor Center. Included are the top two proposals received; Landmark and the Palm Desert Area Chamber of Commerce, as well as an option for reorganizing internally to create operational savings. Although innumerable options exists, staff has narrowed those for consideration. Ultimately the question is do we want to retain this operation in house or contract out for services. If the decision is to move forward with contracting for Visitor Center operations I would recommend the City consider the following points critical to the successful continuance of this service: • Adequate staffing including a supervisor and sufficient staff to cover hours of operation. Staffing should increase during seasonal highs. • Address any possible conflicts of interest with agencies other responsibilities • Adequate training of new employees should be incorporated into the transition program — resources, POS, inventory, buying, policies and procedures • Recommend supervisor possess retail experience • If maintain a volunteer program, strong supervision and ongoing training should occur • Hours of operation — change to 10 a.m. — 5 p.m. • At a minimum, close Sundays during the summer. Look at possibility of closing two days per week year-round for further savings. • Implementation of any recommendations adopted by the City pertaining to the Landmark retail/merchandising study. PALM DESERT VISITOR CENTER OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION Remain As Is • Open 7-days per week, closed only major holidays • Hours of operation: 9 a.m. — 5 p.m. daily (staffed 8 a.m. — 5 p.m.) • Staffing includes manager, senior office assistant, and two office assistant's • Retail sales of approximately $120,000/year Total Budget: $584,000 Internal Restructuring This option includes creating new classifications within the city's existing salary and classification structure. It allows for a reduction in long term staffing and operational costs of the Visitor Center while maintaining control of daily operations. Full time and one part time employee would be utilized. This option would require hiring of new employees at the lower rate and consideration of status of existing Center employees. Total Budget: $238,754 Landmark Golf Landmark submitted a proposal that would maintain the Visitor Center in its current location and would operate with similar staffing and management methods at a cost savings. Total Budget: $285,967 Palm Desert Chamber The Chamber of Commerce presented a proposal for operating the Visitor Center that would provide for a substantial cost savings. Staff would recommend additional negotiation including the areas of staffing requirements. Total Budget: $246,505 Additional Consideration Staff initiated a dialogue with the property owners for the Visitor Center building. The current lease agreement allows for the closing of the Visitor Center on Sundays. Staff specifically requested consideration of allowing us to consider closing two days per week in order to address operational and staffing costs. Within this discussion, the property owner representative indicated a willingness to work with us in allowing a two day closure, with the condition that we agree to a landlord recapture right. This would give the landlord the right to recapture the location within 60 days if they had a suitable replacement tenant. If the City wished to consider this adjustment to the lease agreement it would make sense to contract with the Chamber of Commerce. If and when the landlord reclaimed the building, the Chamber could then relocate Visitor Center operations to their existing site (note PD Chamber#2 option on attached summary) at a substantial costs savings. With this option there would be a stronger focus on services as opposed to retail. Visitor Center Management & Operation - Summary of Proposals Internal Expenditure/Revenue Description Current Budget Restructuring Landmark P.D. Chamber P.D. Chamber#2 Payroll & Benefits 451,330.88 136,085.00 155,398.00 113,336.00 113,336.00 Management Fee - - 30,000.00 36,000.00 36,000.00 Total Payroll and Management Costs 451,330.88 136,085.00 185,398.00 149,336.00 149,336.00 Plus: Cities' Costs 116,900.00 76,500.00 76,500.00 76,500.00 41,500.00 (Utilities, Repair/Maint/Telep) Lease Payment 65,769.00 65,769.00 65,769.00 65,769.00 Other Costs 10,400.00 8,300.00 4,900.00 4,900.00 Cost of Goods Sold 70,000.00 70,000.00 70,000.00 70,000.00 30,000.00 Total Proposed Budget: 703,999.88 358,754.00 405,967.00 366,505.00 225,736.00 Estimated Retail Sales Revenue ($120,000.00) ($120,000.00) ($120,000.00) ($120,000.00) ($50,000.00) Total Net Budget: 583,999.88 238,754.00 285,967.00 246,505.00 175,736.00 ASSUMPTIONS: 1) Calculations reflect adjustments from original proposals to provide for a comparable comparison based on identical staffing levels and hours of operation 2) Cost of Goods Sold were made consistent across the board to provide for an accurate comparison ($70,000) 3) Estimated rent for FY 2012 is$65,769 and is to paid by RDA 4) Visitor Center Manager could potentially receive lateral transfer to Marketing Manager position 5) Manager would retain oversight of VC including policy direction, planning, forecasting & budgeting responsibilities 6) If contracted out, existing VC employees will fill positions at City Hall created through attrition 7) PD Chamber option#2 includes release from our existing lease and a reduction in sales due to less retail space at existing building 8) City cost reduction shown under PD Chamber#2 option is due to reduced building maintenance and utility costs