HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-11-19MINUTES
ADJOURNED CITY COUNCIL MEETING
THURSDAY, November 19, 1981
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Wilson called the Adjourned Meeting of the Palm Desert City Council
to order at 7:00 p.m.
II.
Iv.
V.
VI.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Councilman lames E. McPherson
INVOCATION - Mayor Pro-Tem Alexis D. Newbrander
ROLL CALL
Present:
Councilman James E. McPherson
Mayor Pro-Tempore Alexis D. Newbrander
Councilman Romeo S. Puluqi
Councilman Walter H. Snyder
Mayor S. Roy Wilson
Also Present:
Martin J. Bouman, City Manager
Carlos L. Ortega, Assistant City Manager
Douglas Phillips, Deputy City Attorney
William Strausz, Agency Counsel
Ramon Diaz, Director of Environmental Services
Robert Hardy, Acting Director of Public Works
Paul Byers, Director of Finance
AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS
None
CONSENT CALENDAR
A. MINUTES of the Adjourned Meeting of the City Council of November 5,
1981.
Rec: Approve as presented.
B. MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of the City Council of November 12,
1981.
Rec: Approve as presented.
C. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Demand
Nos. 82-044, 82-045, 82-051.
Rec: Approve as presented.
D. STATEMENT OF CASH TRANSACTIONS FOR MONTH OF OCTOBER,
1981.
Rec: Receive and file.
E. LETTER OF PROTEST FROM MRS. MARGARET ZUR MUEHLEN
Relative to the Planning Commission Approval of the Construction of
13 Condominium Units on Ryway Place.
Rec: Receive and refer to Staff for response.
MINUTES
ADJOURNED CITY COUNCIL MEETING November 19, 1981
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * *
F. CITY OF PALM DESERT AUDIT REPORT FOR YEAR ENDED JUNE
30, 1981, AS PREPARED BY THOMAS, BYRNE & SMITH.
Rec: Receive and file.
Councilman Newbrander noted a correction on the Agenda in the spelling of
the name Zur Muehlen.
Upon motion by Newbrander, second by McPherson, the Consent Calendar was
unanimously approved as presented.
VII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - A
MRS. MARIAN HENDERSON, 7359 Pinyon Street, Palm Desert, read a letter
of complaint regarding the lack of progress being made in the beautification of
Highway 111 (said letter attached and made a part hereof as Exhibit "B").
Mayor Wilson noted that the trees had been planted this week.
Mrs. Henderson stated that without curbs, they could not proceed with the
planting of the median strips.
Mr. Hardy responded that preliminary drawings have been submitted to
Caltrans, and as soon as the City receives their approval, it will negotiate for
the necessary engineering work.
Mrs. Henderson expressed concern that the work would not be completed
before the seasonal residents arrive and prior to the Bob Hope Classic.
Mayor Wilson responded that staff has been assigned a No. 1 priority, that of
putting together the flood control plans for this hearing. However, he
indicated the beautification program will be given immediate attention once
the flood control project procedure is completed.
MR. DEAN COLE, 72-740 Highway 111, Palm Desert, stated the committee
was told the plans were imminent, and now they find they are still in the
preliminary stages.
VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF ASSESSMENTS ON PROPERTY
OWNERS FOR ABATEMENT OF WEEDS AND OTHER NUISANCES.
Mayor Wilson declared the Public Hearing Open and called on Staff for a
report.
Mr. Bouman stated this was routine action required by Council whereby
property owners who have not responded to weed abatement require-
ments are assessed for costs incurred by the City in completing the
work. He noted several parties listed on the resolution had paid and
stated these would be omitted prior to signature of the resolution.
Mayor Wilson invited input relating to this item, and none was offered. He
declared the Public Hearing Closed.
Upon motion by Snyder, second by McPherson, Resolution No. 81-146 was
unanimously adopted as amended.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Councilman Snyder moved to adjourn the City Council meeting to a Joint
Public Hearing with the Redevelopment Agency, following the Call to Order and Consent
-2-
MINUTES
ADJOURNED CITY COUNCIL MEETING
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
November 19, 1981
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Calendar of the Redevelopment Agency Agency. Councilman Puluqi seconded the motion.
Motion carried unanimously.
JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY.
B. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO
THE PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT PLAN.
Chairman Wilson noted that he would preside as Mayor. Mayor Wilson
declared the Public Hearing Open and asked for the Staff Report.
Del Claussen, Deputy City Clerk, stated that notices of the Joint Public
Hearing were published and mailed as provided by law.
Mr. Ortega reviewed the following studies that had been made:
1. Master Drainage Plan for the City of Palm Desert.
2. Whitewater River Basin Study by U. S. Army Corps of Engineers.
3. Flood Insurance Study, City of Palm Desert.
4. Flood Insurance Study, City of Indian Wells.
5. Preliminary Investigation of Assessment Proceedings for Flood Hazard
Correction for the City of Palm Desert.
6. The Bechtel Plan.
Mr. Ortega presented the following Staff Report, a copy of which was before
the City Council and the Agency:
"Each of you has before you the proposed Amendment to the Redevelopment
Plan for Project Area No. 1 and the Redevelopment Plan, which I shall
hereafter refer to as the Redevelopment Plan, as amended. You also have
before you a resolution of the Planning Commission and a resolution of the
Project Area Committee approving the proposed Amendment to the
Redevelopment Plan and recommending the approval and adoption by the City
Council.
The City Council and Redevelopment Agency have been presented over the
last several months with various documents which demonstrate that the
territory to be added to Project Area No. 1 of the Agency by this proposed
Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan is a blighted area within the meaning
of that term under the Community Redevelopment Law." (Mr. Ortega then set
before the Council all the reports and information which they had received and
were about to receive and briefly described or summarized each report.)
Mr. Ortega continued: "As can be seen from these documents, the territory to
be added to the Project Area is characterized by properties which suffer from
economic dislocation, deterioration, and disuse because of the existence of
lots and other areas which are subject to being submerged by water and by the
existence of inadequate public improvements and public facilities which
cannot be remedied by private or governmental action without redevelopment.
For example, Mr. Lowell Weeks, Chief Engineer of the Coachella Valley Water
district has reported to the Fiscal Review Committee formed in connection
with the subject proposed Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan that certain
territory within the territory to be added to Project Area No. 1 will not be
developed without these flood control improvements. Also, certain members
of the Board of Supervisors of Riverside County, at their regular meeting of
November 17, 1981, noted that these flood control improvements were
necessary for development and also necessary to protect and preserve the
public health and safety in the area." (Mr. Ortega referred again to documents
which show the area's vulnerability to flooding.)
"As can also be determined from the various reports before the City Council
and Redevelopment Agency this evening, other blighting characteristics of the
-3-
MINUTES
ADJOURNED CITY COUNCIL MEETING November 19, 1981
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * #
territory to be added to Project Area No. 1 include the laying out of lots in
disregard of the contours and other topography or physical characteristics of
the ground and surrounding conditions. For example, all subdivisions built with
the subject territory without provisions for flood control.
As can also be determined from these documents, blighting characteristics
cause a reduction of or a lack of proper utilization of the territory to be added
to Project Area No. 1 to such an extent that it constitutes a serious physical,
social, and economic burden on the City of Palm Desert, the City of Indian
Wells, and the County of Riverside which cannot be reasonably expected to be
reversed or alleviated by private enterprise acting alone. Again, I point out to
the City Council and Redevelopment Agency the comments of Mr. Weeks.
Furthermore, the Villages of Bella Vista and the development of Ironwood are
two major developments which have been stymied by inadequate flood control
facilities.
These documents which have been presented to the City Council and the
Redevelopment Agency over the Last several months and again this evening
demonstrate that the Project Area is a blighted area, the redevelopment of
which is necessary to effectuate the public purpose declared in the Community
Redevelopment Law.
The Redevelopment Plan, as amended, will provide for the redevelopment of
the territory to be added to Project Area No. 1 in conformance with the
Community Redevelopment Law and the interest of the public peace, health,
safety and welfare, by providing public improvements in the form of flood
control facilities which, in turn, will alleviate a substantial hindrance to
development in the area.
The Redevelopment Plan, as amended, provides for the allocation of tax
revenues to the Redevelopment agency from the territory to be added to the
Project Area No. 1 to pay the principal of and interest on indebtedness
incurred to finance the flood control project. The staff has prepared
projections of tax increment revenues which will be available to the Agency to
pay such indebtedness. These projections have been made available to the
City Council and Redevelopment Agency and confirmed by the Agency's
financial consultants, Birr, Wilson & company of San Francisco. As can be
seen from these projections, the adoption and carrying out of the Redevelop-
ment Plan is economically sound and feasible.
The carrying out of the Redevelopment Plan, as amended, and the construction
of the flood control project described in the Redevelopment Plan, as amended,
will, as shown by these various documents, promote the public peace, health,
safety, and welfare of the City of Palm Desert, the City of Indian Wells, and
the County of Riverside and will effectuate the purpose and policy of the
Community Redevelopment Law.
The proposed Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan provides for the
condemnation of real property where necessary for the provision of the flood
control facilities. (Mr. Ortega turned to Exhibits to show affected properties.)
The Redevelopment Plan, as amended, and the reports and information
submitted to the City Council pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section
33352 demonstrate that adequate provision has been made for payment for
property to be acquired as provided by law.
No person or family will be displaced from Project Area No. 1 as a result of
this Amendment. However, in the unlikely event that some unforeseen
circumstance requires relocation, the Agency has a feasible plan for the
relocation of any family or person which may be displaced from the territory
to be added to Project Area No. 1.
-4-
i
f
MINUTES
ADJOURNED CITY COUNCIL MEETING November 19, 1981
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The inclusion of any lands, buildings or improvements in the territory to be
added to Project Area No. 1 which may not be or which are not detrimental to
the public health, safety or welfare is necessary for the effective redevelop-
ment of the area of which they are a part and any such area included is
necessary for the effective redevelopment of the territory to be added to the
Project Area No. 1 and is not included for the purpose of obtaining the
allocation of tax revenues from such area without other substantial justifica-
tion for its inclusion.
As can be seen from the documents before you this evening, the elimination of
these blighting characteristics and the redevelopment of the territory to be
added to Project Area No. 1 by the construction of the subject flood control
facilities could not be reasonably expected to be accomplished by private
enterprise acting along without the aid and assistance of the Palm Desert
Redevelopment Agency.
The County of Riverside has approved a proposed Cooperative Agreement
between the City of Palm Desert, the Redevelopment Agency, and the County
which permits the County to retain a portion of tax revenues which would
otherwise be allocated to the Redevelopment Agency and thereby alleviating
any financial burden or detriment to any taxing agency deriving tax revenues
from the territory to be added to Project Area No. 1.
Based upon the reports and other information before you tonight, it is the
recommendation of the staff that the Redevelopment Agency and City Council
approve the proposed Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for Project Area
No. 1 of the Agency."
Mr. Ortega introduced letters in FAVOR of and in OPPOSITION to the Plan
(attached hereto and made a part of these Minutes as Exhibit "A".)
Such reports and other information and such letters were made a part of the
record of the hearing.
Mayor Wilson stated that the City Council and Redevelopment Agency would
at this point hear from any member of the public wishing to speak on the item.
MR. GEORGE RITTER, 73-899 Highway 111, Palm Desert, thanked everyone
who had participated in working out this Plan. He stated he was in favor and
that all would benefit in the long run.
MR. DAVID BOND, 44-532 San Pascual, Palm Desert, questioned if this was to
be a permanent expansion of the Redevelopment Agency in all its aspects or
limited to flood control. Mayor Wilson responded that this expansion area
would be limited to the flood control plan.
MR. BRUCE LLOYD, General Manager, Marrakesh, questioned if the plans for
raising monies for the project failed, would the taxes then be passed on to the
taxpayers. Mayor Wilson stated that this could not be passed on to the
taxpayer.
MS. CAROL STEERE, Buena Circle, Palm Desert, questioned if the public
would be allowed to provide any input. Mayor Wilson reviewed the plans for
debris basins and the concrete lined channel. He stated that due to the tight
schedule, there would be no further input from the public on the Plan. He
stated that the Water District is the responsible agency and that the City is
merely trying to provide a method of funding.
MR. ROBERT ENSLOW, Vintage Properties, stated that since the Agency had
expanded to include that part of Indian Wells which included Vintage, they
would request a share of the potential revenues for reimbursement for monies
they have spent on flood control. He noted the developer has spent $5 Million
on flood control for their project.
- 5-
MINUTES
ADJOURNED CITY COUNCIL MEETING November 19, 1981
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * *
MS. FAITH LADLOW, Parosella, Palm Desert, stated that everyone should be
pleased with what the City is doing and questioned what effect this Plan would
have on the Federal Flood Insurance Program. Mr. Ortega responded that the
rates should be decreased.
MR. ROBERT FREE, 73-008 Willow, Palm Desert, requested clarification of
the financing. Mayor Wilson reviewed the various sources of revenue and
noted that with the implementation of flood control, all property values should
increase.
MS. ANNETTE COLLINS, 75-323 Palm Shadow Drive, Indian Wells, asked if
Indian Wells decides to start their own plan, could they use that area within
Indian Wells. Mr. Ortega replied that in that event and under Redevelopment
Law, Palm Desert would coordinate with Indian Wells to give them back their
property.
Mayor Wilson asked for any further testimony. There being none, he declared
the Joint Public Hearing Closed and asked for the vote.
Councilman Snyder moved to receive the public testimony noting written
testimony received prior to the Hearing and to overrule all oral and written objections.
Councilman Puluqi seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously by the City Council.
Member McPherson moved to receive the public testimony noting written
testimony received prior to the Hearing and to overrule all oral and written objections.
Member Newbrander seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously by the Redevelop-
ment Agency.
Councilman Newbrander moved to adjourn the City Council Meeting to
immediately following adjournment of the Redevelopment Agency Meeting. Councilman
Snyder seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mayor Wilson reconvened the City Council Meeting at 8:35 p.m.
IX. RESOLUTIONS
*
A. RESOLUTION NO. 81-147 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING
DECEMBER, 1981, TO BE "CRIME FIGHT BACK" MONTH IN THE
COACHELLA VALLEY.
Mr. Bouman stated this resolution was requested by CVAG, and he
recommended adoption by the Council.
Upon motion by Puluqi, second by McPherson, Resolution No. 81-147 was
unanimously adopted.
B. RESOLUTION NO. 81-148 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING AN
ADVANCE TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY TO PROVIDE FOR THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE
BEAUTIFICATION OF HIGHWAY 111.
Mr. Bouman stated this resolution would advance the money which the
Redevelopment Agency had just accepted by adoption of their Resolu-
tion No. 146.
Upon motion by McPherson, second by Puluqi, Resolution No. 81-148 was
unanimously adopted.
-6-
MINUTES
ADJOURNED CITY COUNCIL MEETING
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
X. REPORTS
November 19, 1981
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
A. REPORTS AND INFORMATION REQUIRED BY HEALTH & SAFETY
CODE SECTION 33352.
Mr. Strausz stated this report has been submitted to the City Council
by the Agency. Upon consideration of its contents, it would be in order
to approve, receive and file.
Mayor Wilson stated the Council has had the report in its possession and
has reviewed it.
Councilman McPherson moved to appprove, receive and file the report.
Councilman Newbrander seconded the motion; carried unanimously.
XI. ORDINANCES
For Introduction:
A. ORDINANCE NO. 268 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ISSUING A NON-
EXCLUSIVE LICENSE TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE AND MAINTAIN A
TELEVISION ANTENNA CABLE SERVICE. (Continued from Meeting of
October 22, 1981.)
Mr. Bouman stated he had been advised by the consultant, Howard Gan,
to recommend a continuance of this item to the meeting of December
3rd and to set a Public Hearing on the item. This would be preceded by
a Study Session to be held on December 1st to hear Mr. Gan's report and
to be attended by Sunrise Company and Coachella Valley Television.
He noted the Public Hearing would be legally advertised.
Councilman Newbrander moved to continue Ordinance No. 268 to the meeting
of December 3, 1981, and to direct the City Clerk to advertise for a Public Hearing to be
preceded by a Study Session on December 1, 1981. Councilman Puluqi seconded the
motion; carried unanimously.
B. ORDINANCE NO. 275 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN, AS AMENDED.
Mr. Strausz noted the City Council has received the required documents
in preparation for the adoption of Ordinance No. 275.
Upon motion by Snyder, second by McPherson, Ordinance No. 275 was
unanimously passed to second reading.
For Adoption:
None
Xll. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER
None
XIII. • NEW BUSINESS
A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE.
Mr. Bouman stated this action would be the same as that just taken by
the Redevelopment Agency. He recommended the Council approve the
Agreement and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute.
-7-
MINUTES
ADJOURNED CITY COUNCIL MEETING November 19, 1981
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Councilman McPherson moved to approve the Cooperative Agreement with the
County of Riverside and to authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute. Councilman
Newbrander seconded the motion; carried unanimously.
XIV.
XV.
CONTINUED BUSINESS
None
OLD BUSINESS
None
XVI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - B
MR. ALEX SCHER, 74-129 Zircon Circle West, complained that the lighting at
the Safeway Shopping Center is insufficient. Mr. Diaz responded that Chazen
Construction has requested the right to replace the lights to give more
illumination, and they will be installed within a few weeks.
Councilman Newbrander commented on complaints that she has received on
the traffic pattern at Safeway. Mr. Diaz responded that these plans were
submitted by the developer and approved. Mayor Wilson noted that the
entrance off El Paseo should be used for a functional traffic pattern.
XVII. REPORTS AND REMARKS
A. CITY MANAGER
RESOLUTION NO. 81-149 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ENCOURAGING THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF MONTEREY
AVENUE TO INTERSTATE 10 FREEWAY.
Mr. Bouman stated this resolution is the result of a request by
Coachella Valley Association of Governments to provide additional
access to I-10. He recommended approval.
Upon motion by Newbrander, second by Puluqi, Resolution No. 81-149 was
unanimously adopted.
RESOLUTION NO. 81-150 - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE
1981-82 BUDGET TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION
FOR COMMUNITY PROMOTION.
Mr. Bouman stated this resolution would appropriate the amount of
$20,000 for additional copies of an insert which will be featured in the
February issue of Palm Springs Life and which is devoted to Palm
Desert. He noted an amendment to include the separate binding and
the distribution of said copies.
Upon motion by Snyder, second by Puluqi, Resolution No. 81-150 was
unanimously adopted.
B. CITY ATTORNEY
C. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Mayor Pro-Tem Newbrander stated she was pleased with all that had
been accomplished this evening. She expressed her gratitude to all the
citizens who had participated and to the staff for their fine work.
-8-
MINUTES
ADJOURNED CITY COUNCIL MEETING November 19, 1981
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mayor Wilson noted there would be a special Study Session held on
December 1, 1981, at 4:30 p.m.
XVII. ADJOURNMENT
Councilman Puluqi moved to adjourn the meeting to Wednesday, November 25,
1981, at 7:00 p.m. in City Hall Council Chambers. Councilman Snyder seconded the
motion; carried unanimously. Mayor Wilson adjourned the meeting at 8:59 p.m.
AT/F.ST:)
DEL CLAUSSEN, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA
i
-9-
tea/
a0Y-VILSON, MA
MINUTES
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL
EXHIBIT "A"
ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY
November 19, 1981
COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
POST OFFICE BOX 1058 • COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELEPHONE (714) 398-2651
DIRECTORS
RAYMOND R. RUMMONDS, PRESIDENT
TFLLIS COOEKAS, VICE PRESIDENT
JOHN P. POWELI
PAUL W. NICHOLS
STEVE 0 BUXTON
S. Roy Wilson
Chairman of the Board
Redevelopment Agency
City of Palm Desert
45-275 Prickly Pear Lane
Palm Desert, California 92260
Dear Mr. Wilson:
November 18, 1981
OFFICERS
LOWELLO. WEEKS. GENERAL MANAGER -CHIEF ENGINEER
BERNARDINESUTTON. SECRETARY
VICTOR B. HARDY, AUDITOR
REDWINE AND SHERRILL, ATTORNEYS
rE ECEI
rs:iv a . 1881
I_'1
PALrl.
CITY c_..
May this letter be entered into the record of your November 19, 1981
hearing concerning the formation of the enlarged Redevelopment Agency
within the City of Palm Desert.
This District wishes to go on record in favor of the Redevelopment Agency
as long as the funds are used solely for the construction and improvement
of stormwater facilities for Carrizo, Dead Indian and Palm Valley
Stormwater Channels.
We recognize, of course, that under the law funds must be set aside for low
cost housing.
Yours very truly,
:Jell 0 . We e-ks.
General Manager -Chief Eineer
• LOW:bas
cc: Martin Bouman, City Manager
S. Roy Wilson, Mayor
City of Palm Desert
TRUE CONSERVATION
USE WATER WISELY
— 10 —
MINUTES
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL
EXHIBIT "A"
.Danie
g CAL
,T7854
McLaughlin
MASONRY
P.O. BOX 922 • CRYSTAL BAY, NV 89402 • (702) 831-4402 • (916) 546-4490
City of Palm Desert
45-275 Prickly Pear Lane
Palm Desert, California 92260
Gentlemen:
November 19, 1981
I, 0 Z3 Al 1 53
CITY C! ER S
I am in receipt of your October 1, 1981, letter advising
me of the Amdended Redevelopment Plan to solve flooding
problems in the Project Area described.
I would, at this time, like to go on record as being totally
against any such redevelopment program. I feel that this
plan will only raise taxes and solve nothing. I am quite
happy with my street and the surrounding area and would like
nothing changed at this time.
Very truly yours,
Daniel McLauglin
DMC:dor
MINUTES
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL
EXHIBIT "A"
November 19, 1981
1
CoaclaeQQa. UaPQai Reneatioa aHd Poi/ Diafnict
POST OFFICE DRAWER YYY
46-350 SOUTH JACKSON STREET • INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92202
November 16, 1981
Mr. Marty Bouman
City Manager, City of Palm Desert
45-275 Prickley Pear
Palm Desert, CA 92260
Dear Mr. Bouman
After looking at the alternatives and justifications for the City's
proposed Redevelopment Area for Flood Control, we have come to the
following conclusions:
1) The reasoning for establishment of some type of agency to build
and pay for flood control measures in the Palm Desert area seem valid in
light of the two major floods (September 1976 and July 1979).
2) The establishment of a Redevelopment District will curtail any
Recreation District growth within the confines of the said area. Most
probably there will be gradual reduction of Recreation District services
within this area, due to continued inflation, population growth within
the area, and frozen tax growth imposed by the establishment of the
Redevelopment District. Even a moritorium on building would not allow
growth or even the retention of the present level of service. With
positive population growth the district would have to increase service
fees and charges throughout the district in an attempt to offset expenses
incurred in the redevelopment area.
3) Therefore, the establishment of a Redevelopment District will
be detrimental to Recreation District services within the area for the
life of the Redevelopment Program.
4) If the City would agree to sharing the incremental increase or
dedicate the District's share of the 2% annual growth the possibility of
marginal offset of funds would help sustain present level of service.
Respectfully,
Lee B. Hirt
President
- 12 -
MINUTES
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL
EXHIBIT "A"
November 19, 1981
(714) 345 2831
iGJ 7ZLiCC/!2
45-300 CLUB DRIVE
VIA'
• INDIAN WELLS- CALIFORNIA 92260
November 6, 1981
Howard D. Stephens, Auditor -Controller
County of Riverside
4080 Lemon Street
Riverside, CA 92501
RE: Fiscal Review Committee, Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency
Dear Mr. Stephens:
Representatives of the City of Indian Wells have participated in
the two Fiscal Review Committee meetings of September 21 and
October 23. It is our belief that the redevelopment project
for flood control and implementation of Bechtel 1-A Modified
is a project that will be beneficial to Palm Desert, County
of Riverside and Indian Wells. This project is necessary
for protection of life and property presently existing in
the proposed project area. Additionally it will protect
property that may not be buildable at this time due to its
possible inundation by flooding.
•
We believe the County will share in the benefits as property
within the County on the outskirts of the City of Palm Desert
will be enhanced by these improvements. For this reason it
is recommended that the Fiscal Review Committee recommend
support for the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency in this
effort. It is also recommended that 100% of the increment
generated be remanded to the Redevelopment Agency which will
indicate uninimity for such a regionally important project.
We look forward to holding the joint public hearing on
November 19 between the cities of Palm Desert and Indian Wells
to further consider this matter.
PEP/clh
Distribute
2-4ie 4r4ss E.
Yours very truly,
CITY OF INDIAN WELLS
PRINCE E. PIERSON
City Manager
- 13 -
MINUTES
JOINT PUBLIC BEARING
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL
November 19, 1981
EXHIBIT "A"
tAr
3
rfilw
RECEIVED
COACHELLA VALLEY PIal�IQ,CE � TERY DISTRICT
hull /1i1 If 4z
•
Gf y QLI:i iry '7')"r_
November 5, 198)
Mr, Ramon A. Diaz f
City of Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency
42-275 Frickley Fear Lane
Palm Desert, California 92260
Dear Mr. Diaz
V"tMA
To
CON
The Coachella Valley Cemetery District wishes to inform you
of the fact, that our services and facilities are available
to 99,538 people, which lives within our cemetery district.
These population figures are from the office of the Riverside
County Auditor -Controller for year 1980. These services were
made available for this area of over 2,300 souare miles in
1927. Each year the demand for more cemetery space increases
with the population growth. We anticipate the necessity of
developing three acres of grave spaces at an estimated cost of
375,000.00 during the next three years.
The loss of $9,900.00 per year for a period of twenty or more
years would seriously curtail our future development necessary
to serve the people of Palm Desert and the other 90,000 people
in our district. The redevelopment agency would be using over
11f per cent of the districts' total tax monies the first year.
'62.925 AVENUE 52 o COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 PHONE (714) 398.3221
- 1' -
MINUTES
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL
November 19, 1981
EXHIBIT "A"
\r
COACHELLA VALLEY PUBLIC CEMETERY DISTRICT
Mr. Ramon A. Diaz
Page 2
November 5, 1981
This could cause the cost of an individual burial to be
increased as much as $38.00,-adding this to the normal
increase of cost per year, could amount to $70.00 to
390.00 in a one year period. Certainly an unfair increase
to be forced upon the other 91 per cent of the population
of our district.
After serious consideration of this matter, the Board of
Directors, ask that you would exclude the district frori your
Redevelopment Plan, now and in the future, so th;:t we might
serve all the people equally within our boundaries.
Very truly yours
j,ohn I. Richards
Secretary -Superintendent
JIR/b
cc: Supervisor McCandless
S. Roy Wilson
82.925 AVENUE 52 o COACHELLA. CALIFORNIA 92236 0 PHONE (734) 398-3221
- 15 -
MINUTES
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL
EXHIBIT "A"
RarNno RAI rtas
Property C? r?cr is Assock\t1or?
719.49A MONTECITO DR. / INDIAN WELLS, CA. 92260
November 19, 1981
75 406 Montecito Dr., Indian Wells, Ca 92260
Telephone: 714 346 4040
October 19, 1931
'1r. S. Roy Wilson, Chairman
Board of Directors
Palm Desert redevelopment Agency
City of Palm Desert
45-275 Prickly Pear Lane
Palm Desert, California 92260
Dear Mr. Wilson:
Your Certified Letter, dated October 1, 1931,
has been received and is hereby acolknowledged.
The Board of Directors of the Rancho Palmeras
Property Owners Association by a unanimous vote hereby notify
you that they nave no desire to particpate in your redevelopment
agency. This letter is being written to you to make it a matter
of record that our organization representing an area which you
have unilaterally decided to include in the area subject to your
jurisdictions does not wish to be included.
There are several reasons for our desire to
remain out of your agency:
1. This area has no political accountability to
you and Palm Desert. This is a classic case of "Taxation without
representation", an issue which was settled in these United States
some years ago.
2. This move means that Palm Desert will benefit
by receiving tax revenues that might better be spent under the
jurisdiction of Indian WElls, in which political segment, we, as
voters, have some voice and control.
3. We strenuously disagree with the classification
of flood danger areas which shows this area, which has historically
never had a flood recorded, with a higher flood danger, than the
area bordering the flood drain channel South of Fairway and at the
base of the mountains in El Dorado, which have had floods with virtua115
every major storm. The facts behind this rating system are simply
untrue.
4. Your letter of October 1, 1981 states in the
second Paragraph of Page 3:
"The scope and objectives of the Redevelopment
Plan include, but not limited to:
- 16 -
MINUTES
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL
EXHIBIT "A"
November 19, 1981
Page 2, letter to Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency, 10/19/81
The phrase "but not limited to:" allows you
complete freedom to do anything that might enter your mind.
For example, recent articles in the Desert Sun described a
Redevelopment Agency project to build a Sports complex on Cook
Street North of IIiway 111. How such a complex would benefit
our area, Indian Wells, or for that matter+ anyone except the
promoters of sporting events escapes me. The point is that this
phrase grants you unrestricted freedom in the future course of
your redevelopment agency.
5. Finally, we are not aware of any agreement
of Indian Wells to particpate in this Redevelopment Agency. If
such an Agreement exists, we would appreciate receiving a copy
of it.
Please enter this.ietter on the record of the
Scheduled Public Hearing of this date as being opposed to the
inclusion of the Rancho Palmeras Area (bordered by Hiway 111 on
the North, Fairway on the South, Cook St. on the West, and Rancho
Palmeras Drive on the East) in the Palm Desert Redevelopment
Agency.
Yours very truly,
Vincent A. van Praag
President 1981.
Copies to:
Prince Pearson, City Manager, Indian Wells.
The City Council of Indian Wells
The Board of Directors of the Rancho Palmeras Property Owners'
Association.
- 17 -
MINUTES
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL
EXHIBIT "A"
Joseph J. Lickteig
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
Mr. S. Roy Wilson, Chairman
Board of Directors
Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency
45-275 Prickly Pear Lane
Palm Desert, CA 92260
Dear Mr. Wilson:
r
November 19, 1981
One Scot Lad Lane
Lansing, Illinois 60438
312/895-2300 0 0 2 9 9 8
RECEIVED
October 12, 1981
981 al 15 NI1a 28
,} CI.T.::R7..; OFFICE
I received today a certified letter from your office which was
addressed to Mr. Roger Turner. This is to advise you that I am
now the owner of the property which Roger Turner formerly owned
having purchased same from him.
I would appreciate receiving an explanation regarding your letter
of October 1, 1981. Namely, what does this mean to me, what
concerns should I have as to a flood control facility.
I am sorry to say that I will be unable to attend your November 19
meeting as I will not be in Palm Springs at that time.
Expecting an early reply from you, I am
• JJLickteig/pb
cc: Alta Property Management
Sincerely yours,
- 18 -
MINUTES
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL
EXHIBIT "A"
n02961
November 19, 1981
45-275 PRICKLY PEAR LANE, PALM' DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260
TELEPHONE (714) 346-06!,�.�1
October 1, 1981
+1� 13 Will 410
OFFICE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Dear Property Owner:
•
The Palm Desert City Council and the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency
have scheduled a Joint Public Hearing or, the proposed Amendment to the
Palm Desert Redevelopment Plan for the purpose of financing and under-
taking flood control facilities. The Joint Public Hearing is scheduled
for 7:00 p.m. on Thursday, November 19, 1981, in the City Council:
Chambers, 45-275 Prickly Pear. Lane, Palm Desert', California.
Enclosed is a copy of the Notice of Hearing and a'cooy of the map show-
ing the Amended Project Area Boundaries. The purpose of amending the
Redevelopment Plan is to finance a project which will solve flooding
problems in the Project Area.
Participating in this project, by mutual agreement, are the City of
Indian Wells and the County of Riverside. Some properties within
Indian Wells and the County of Riverside are also included as a part
of this project.
The Amended Redevelopment Plan is available for your inspection at the
office of the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency, City of Palm Desert,
City Nall, 45-2?S Prialy Pear Lane, Palm Desert, California 9
S,. ROY 'WI L50;1, CHAIRMAN.
ECPRD OF DIRECTORS
PALM DESERT RLDE\EL0PMENT AGENCY
SP;,CLO/sro
Enclosures ;2)
Mr. Wilson— How much is this
going to cost the unit owners
in Indian Creek Villa? And How
much is the Fed. Government
involved.?
7j U
ECY ADD CI�I COUICII
C 1�
lAoVembez 19 ,
19g1
yN12, S CI
it
(D CO ' (el
cif
� \t n 'no r
rt.>.‘ .--. • rl
.4 4 •A \ 4.,...4s)
9 Nti
MINUTES
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL
r—
N
/
V I
N
O
'co
EXHIBIT "A"
v v
/o/ Jek7.6
T
c
2
t /Z /&%
12.1
November 19, 1981
- 2 1 -
MINUTES
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL
HONORABLE ROY WILSON
Mayor, City of Palm Desert
P. 0. Box 1977
Palm Desert, Ca. 92261
Dear Mayor Wilson:
EXHIBIT "B"
November 19, 1981
November 19th, 1981
Statement of Concern
It was over a year ago that 12 citizens accepted
the challenge of serving on the "Citizens Street Beautification
Advisory Committee". It was October 24, 1980 that this Committee
was started.
r
It is indeed disappointing to be Chairman of a
Committee for over a year and several months with no visible
accomplishment.
After our first few meetings starting December 16,
1980, the Committee recognized and strongly recommended the
weeding and general cleaning of the median strip and north and
south sides of Highway 111, and most importantly, the city start
making plans for funding and installing curbing in the center
and north and south sides of Highway 111 from San Pablo to
Portola as this area already had a sprinkler system.
In 3 months from the start, a "General Plan" was sub-
mitted to the City Council, which plan again emphasized the
improvement of the center median and the north and south sides
of Highway 111.
Plans have been submitted - plans have been approved -
nothing has been accomplished after the money in the sum of
$205,000.00 was allocated for the first phase of beautification
on Highway 111, including the decision and recommendation of
initiating the immediate curbing of the north and south sides
of Highway 111, including the center median from San Pablo to
Portola - no action has been taken. Since May and again in June,
the Committee was informed that the plans and specifications for
this improvement was under way. It was agreed that the curbing
would be necessary before we could proceed with the actual
planting - nothing was done.
- 22 -
MINUTES
JOINT PUBLIC HEARING
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL
EXHIBIT "B"
Page 2
November 19, 1931
The actual curbing to be approved by Caltrans
was forwarded to Caltrans not quite 4 weeks ago. Caltrans
letter or guide to the curbing requirements, etc. was received
by the City months ago. This correspondence is in our files.
Nothing has happened in all these months.
The Committee is not unaware of the many plans, con-
cerns and obligations of the City to be fulfilled, but this
particular planning is direct and simple and should have been
under way at this point and time. The 1973 plans given to the
City has all detailed information - no on the site measuring
was necessary - it was already on paper.
Once again, the disappointment of your chairman and
the entire community and interested citizens and businesses
looking for the improvement and beautification through the
heart of our City is to put it mildly extremely aggravating,
and again, disappointing.
Respectfully, we would appreciate a firm decision
of the Council on these plans for them to be activated
immediately in answer to this letter presented at this Council
meeting this evening.
May we have an answer now?
Respectfully submitted,
�G4rt'�L�
MARIAN M. HENDERSON, CHAIRMAN
Citizens Street Beautification
Committee
- 23 -