Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-01-25MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY, JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Snyder convened the meeting at 4:15 p.m. H. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmember Jean M. Benson Councilman Buford A. Crites Mayor Pro-Tempore Richard S. Kelly Councilman Robert A. Spiegel Mayor Walter H. Snyder Also Present: Ramon A. Diaz, City Manager David J. Erwin, City Attorney Sheila R. Gilligan, Director of Community Affairs/City Clerk Carlos L. Ortega, RDA Executive Director Richard J. Folkers, ACM/Director of Public Works John Wohlmuth, ACM/Director of Administrative Services Paul S. Gibson, Finance Director/City Treasurer Wayne Ramsey, Director of Code Compliance Phil Drell, Acting Director of Community Development Joe Gaugush, Senior Engineer Mary P. Gates, Deputy City Clerk III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - A None MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Regular City Council Meeting of January 11, 1996. Rec: See Section VII, Consent Items Held Over, for Council action. B. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Warrant No. 31. Rec: Approve as presented. C. SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS as of December 31, 1995. Rec: Receive and file. APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAOE LICENSE by Keith Eugene Marlow and Stephanie Michelle Payne for Greta's, 74-894 Lennon Street, H-1, Palm Desert. Rec: Receive and file. E. CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY (#299) by Lora M. Sobelman in the Amount of $125.00. Rec: By Minute Motion, deny the claim and direct the City Clerk to so notify the Claimant. F. REOUEST FOR APPROVAL of Parcel Map 28253 (Mr. John L. Curci and Mr. Robert O. Briggs, Applicant). Rec: Waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 96-7 approving Parcel Map 28253. G. REOUEST FOR RELEASE of Subdivision Improvement Security for Tract 24984-2 (Foxx Development Corporation, Applicant). Rec: By Minute Motion, accept the subdivision improvements as complete and authorize the City Clerk to release the subject improvement securities. H. RFOUEST FOR RELEASE of Agreements for Ordinance 416 Improvements. D. Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the Mayor to execute the Release Agreements for the following: 1) Country Club Care Center, 2) Frank R. Swiniuch and Linda H. Swiniuch. 2 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Advertise and Call for Bids for Landscaping on Fred Waring Drive between Elkhorn Trail and Warner Trail, Project No. 679/95 (Contract No. C10840). Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the City Clerk to advertise and call for bids for the subject project. J. REOUEST FOR CONSENT TO CONTRACT, with Southern California Edison (SCE) for the Relocation and Undergrounding of Edison's Electrical Facilities - Monterey Avenue Bridge at the Whitewater Channel - Project No. 696-95 (Contract No. C10850). Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the Mayor to execute the subject agreement. K. REOUEST FOR AWARD OF BID for Tractor Loader. Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Reject bid submitted by lowest bidder Glenn B. Doming, Inc.; 2) award bid to Garner Implement Co. of Coachella for a tractor with loader bucket, box scraper, flail mower, and extended warranty in the amount of $49,909.80. L. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Change Order No. 1 to Contract No. C09700 - Monterey Avenue Bridge at the Whitewater Channel (Project No. 696-95). Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Approve Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $543.90; 2) authorize the transfer of $543.90 from contingency to base. M. REOUEST FOR APPROVAL of Notice of Completion for Contract No. C09900 - Varner Road Realignment at Cook Street (Project No. 658/95). Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion for the Varner Road Realignment at Cook Street project (Contract No. C09900). N. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL{ of Funding for Classification Study Arbitrations. Rec: By Minute Motion, appropriate $15,000 from the unobligated general fund reserves to the City Manager's Professional Services Account (110-4130-311-3010). O. REOUEST FOR AWARD OF BID for Sale of Scrap FMC Street Sweeper. Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the sale of scrap FMC Vanguard Street Sweeper to Sweeper Sweepers, Inc. Mr. Erwin asked that Item A be held for separate discussion under Consent Items Held Over of the Agenda. 3 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Upon motion by Crites, second by Spiegel, the remainder of the Consent Calendar was approved as presented by unanimous vote of the Council. V. RESOLUTIONS None VI. ORDINANCES For Introduction: None For Adoption: A. ORDINANCE NO. 792 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 2.16.010 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO THE INVESTMENT AND FINANCE COMM111 tt. Councilman Spiegel moved to waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 792. Motion was seconded by Crites and carried by unanimous vote. VII. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER A. MINUTEST of the Regular City Council Meeting of January 11, 1996. Mr. Erwin asked that the Minutes reflect action of Council in Closed Session to deny the claim of James Shelton. Councilman Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the Minutes as amended by Mr. Erwin. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by unanimous vote. VIII. NEW BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION OF REOU$ST FROM BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF THE DESERT FOR OFFICE SPACE IN THE PALM DESERT AREA. Mrs. Gilligan noted that this letter had been sent to Councilman Crites and placed on the Agenda at his direction. She said that staff had not yet had an opportunity to make a recommendation. Councilman Crites suggested that when looking at the possibility of providing space, one thing that should be considered is the office complex to the east of City Hall where there is 4 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * vacant space. He said staff should look at that when considering what to do with the old library to accommodate charitable organizations. He added that a lot of these organizations would not need to use the facility 40 hours per week and perhaps there are ways to have joint space utilization. He asked that staff take a real good look at that. Councilmember Benson agreed. Councilman Spiegel asked whether this request was for space only, and Councilmember Benson responded that that was her understanding. MR. ALIBABA FARZANEH, 39-902 Newcastle Drive, Palm Desert, addressed Council and said this organization had been having its meetings every Monday at Club 74 and was looking for office space to locate the headquarters for this organization. He said they needed space to use as soon as possible, and later on if the City wanted to move them someplace else, that would be okay. A representative of Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Desert addressed Council and said they had originally been given the territory from Banning to Blythe; however, that was too large to begin with, and they now had only Palm Springs to North Shore, and with this territory, he felt no other place would be better than Palm Desert for their headquarters. He added that they were unable to receive United Way funding because they were advised that organizations needed to be in operation for at least one or two years before they could be funded. Upon question by Council Spiegel, Mr. Farzaneh responded that they would need approximately 2,000 square feet of space. Mayor Snyder expressed concern that approving space for this organization would set a precedent for other organizations to come in and request the same. He suggested that staff be asked to look at the ramifications of using space in the Brothers' Building. He said the Council was desirous of assisting in this matter but felt staff needed to look into it further. Councilmember Benson agreed that staff should look at it but felt it should also go to the committee looking at use of office space and what to do with vacant buildings. Councilman Spiegel asked if staff would be able to have a report for the Council by its meeting of February 8, 1996, and Mr. Diaz responded that a report could be ready. Councilmember Benson moved to continue this matter to the meeting of February 8, 1996. Motion was seconded by Crites and carried by unanimous vote. 5 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * « « « « * « « « « « « « « « « « * « « « « « « « « « * « « « « * « « « « B. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 1. Update on Interchanges: a. I-10/Washington Street b. I-10/Cook Street c. I-10/Monterey Avenue Mr. Gaugush updated the Council on the progress of these interchanges. Upon question by Councilman Kelly, he responded that there are bulldozers out at the Cook Street site and that the project was underway. IX. CONTINUED BUSINESS None X. OLD BUSINESS A. REOUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF LAS SOMBRAS CENTER/DESERT CROSSING COMMON ACCESS AT FRED WARING DRIVE. Mr. Gaugush reviewed the staff report and asked for clarification of Council's intent with _ regard to the percentage of funding and reimbursement to the developer for modifications at this location. Councilman Crites stated that it was his understanding that the City would pay for the median, and the center owners would pay for changes to the driveway. MR. DON BALLARD, 44-32 San Luis Rey, said it was his understanding that the City would pay for City property and the center owners would pay for private property. He said the Minutes reflected that the City would pay for the Fred Waring Drive portion and property owners would pay for their respective property. He noted that everything worked fine with access until the developers across the street came in. Councilman Crites disagreed and said if the median opening had been lined across from the Las Sombras entrance, there would not have been enough room to stack cars between that entrance and Highway 111. He said this was as close to Highway 111 as that entrance could go on the extension of Fred Waring. It was not their choice -- it was the only option available. Mr. Ballard said Desert Crossing was a new center going in, and he felt someone should have considered the Las Sombras center whin the new one went in and that they were the innocent bystander. Now all of a sudden people cannot get across to the Desert Crossing center from the Las Sombras center very easily. He said he thought the intent was that the City would 6 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * pay for the City property, and the center would pay for its property to make it work. He said they had to move their driveway and some trees, etc. Mr. Diaz stated that if the City had allowed the applicant to relocate his driveway when the Desert Crossing center was being built, he would have had to pay the entire relocation of that driveway, and the median would have been built differently by the Desert Crossing center. That particular cost of relocating the driveway would have been borne by the Las Sombras center anyway. He said now it was the cost of the median which was being borne by the City. He said there was no greater charge being placed on the current owner now than would have been placed on him had he been given permission to relocate the driveway. Mr Ballard asked if it was fair for a developer to come in and put in a development across the street that adversely affects the Las Sombras center, and now they have to spend $20,000 to bring the center back to even. Councilman Crites stated he did not believe it adversely affected Mr. Ballard's property. He said what Mr. Ballard was asking for was for people to get from Desert Crossing into Las Sombras which will benefit that center, and he did not have a problem with that goal. However, he said it was not the City's business to move the driveway. He said a person could make a reasonable case that the City did not do a good enough job in talking to the neighbors in terms of that median design and, therefore, the City should bear the cost of relocating it; however, beyond that, he felt Mr. Ballard should tend to what he would have _ had to pay even if the City had done it perfectly the first time. Or, the City could move the median, open it up, and leave the driveway where it is. Upon question by Councilman Spiegel, Mr. Gaugush responded that the numbers presented by Mr. Ballard as the cost for the entire modifications was approximately $24,000, of which $20,000 would be for driveway relocation and median modification, and the additional $4,000 being attributed to his property modifications to accommodate the driveway. Councilman Kelly asked whether the median could be opened where the driveway is. Mr. Gaugush responded that staff would not recommend it without looking at it in detail. He said it would present some conflicting movements with respect to left turns in and out. Councilman Kelly stated that he needed to look at a drawing, and Mr. Gaugush responded that staff had a line drawing that showed the proposed relocation but did not necessarily show how it is at this time. Councilman Spiegel suggested continuing this matter for two weeks and directing staff to come back with drawings for Council review. Councilman Kelly moved to continue this matter to the meeting of February 8, 1996, and direct staff to bring back drawings on the current situation as well as what is being proposed and the cost for each. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by unanimous vote. 7 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * B. REPORT RELATIVE TO HIGHWAY 111 AND PANORAMA DRIVE. Mr. Gaugush noted the report in the packets, stating that Caltrans had approached the City with the accident history at this location. Their request was to extend the median on Highway 111 through the intersection at Panorama Drive to prevent all left turn movements at this location to reduce the number of collisions. Caltrans was asking the City to concur with its recommendations. Councilman Kelly stated that this would mean more traffic on Deep Canyon. He moved to continue this matter to the meeting of February 8, 1996, and have staff come back with sketches. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by unanimous vote. C. REQUEST FQR CONSIDERATION OF REJECTION OF BIDS FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATION (CONTRACT NO. C10660). Mr. Diaz noted the report and recommendation in the packets to reject all bids, readvertise for bids, and to provide an additional contingency for the project. He said five of the six bids received had irregularities in them at one level or another. He said the apparent low bidder, Mr. Murphy, submitted a bid that did not include in the per item cost various fixed costs (fencing, restrooms, etc). The total had that cost, and there was a difference of approximately $28,000 between the total of the items and the grand total of the bid. He said the City could take the low bid, and the low bidder was requesting that the City take the low bid. He said he had discussed this with the City Attorney. In order to take the low bid, we would take those costs that were not placed on the per item and spread them out in the per item, and the total would be the same. Councilman Kelly said the Council could accept low bid and accomplish exactly what it wanted to accomplish in the first place. He said he and Mayor Snyder met with staff and the low bidder, and all agreed there would be no problem with that. He said it would not make any sense to go through the whole process again and spend more of the City's money and the bidder's money. Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion, accept the low bid for the electric vehicle charging station from G.J. Murphy Construction. Motion was seconded by Councilmember Benson. Mr. Erwin asked that the maker and seconder consider including in the motion the fact that a different contract be prepared reflecting that the irregularities are specifically being waived and that the difference is being apportioned to each item. Councilman Kelly agreed amended his motion as requested by Mr. Erwin. Councilmember Benson agreed, and the motion carried by unanimous vote. 8 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCII. MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * D. REOUEST FOR APPROVAL OF LOW POWER RADIO PRODUCTION PROPOSAL. Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Authorize the Mayor to enter into an agreement with Willi Rose Productions to produce weekly radio messages; 2) appropriate $1,300.00 from the unobligated general fund to the City Manager Professional Services Account No. 110-4130-411-3010. Motion was seconded by Crites and carried by unanimous vote. E. REQUEST FOR FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF ARTWORK AND REFUND OF FEE TO LOWE ENTERPRISES FOR THE DESERT CROSSING PROJECT. Mr. Diaz noted the report in the Council packets. Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion, accept the placement of the "Midnight at the Oasis" by The Larson Company, "Cross Roads" by John Pugh, and "Lush Life" by Barbara Field as final and refund Ordinance 732 fees in the amount of $89,909.72 to Lowe Enterprises. Motion was seconded by Crites with a strong comment that the City had worked for about six months to fix the lighting problem at this center so that it is within Palm Desert's lighting standards; however, the glow from those lights can still be seen even from as far away as the freeway. He said he would like this to be taken care of by the next meeting or have a report from staff on what it takes to get those lights shut off. Motion carried by unanimous vote. F. REOUEST FOR APPROVAL OF DESIGN PROPOSAL FOR ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES BUILDING LOBBY AREA. Community Arts Manager Catherine Sass reviewed the staff report, noting that the subcommittee members had reviewed all 23 responses to the RFP for the lobby redesign and had come up with three to recommend to the City Council. She said she would like to have Council direction prior to having the applicants do any more detailed work. She said all three of these proposals had come in on budget, and she explained them to the Council. Councilman Crites suggested that at another time when the Council is officially in session, it should take all three of these proposals and discuss them in the lobby area where they would be installed. That way the Council could discuss the actual space and be able to better understand how they would look. Mayor Snyder agreed and said it was difficult to look at these designs and try to imagine what they would actually look like. Councilman Kelly stated that his main concern was that we not have tile that needs to be repaired on a weekly basis. Councilman Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, defer action on this item until a time to be established at the dinner break, said time to be adjourned to at the end of the City Council meeting. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by unanimous vote. 9 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * XI. REPORTS AND REMARKS A. CITY MANAGER None B. CTTY ATTORNEY 1. Mr. Erwin asked that an item be added to the Agenda relative to modification of an art contract for the Community Walk to reduce the contract amount from $200,000 to $78,000.00. Councilman Spiegel moved to add this item to the Agenda for discussion. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by unanimous vote. Mr. Erwin stated that this was to modify an existing contract previously approved by the Council. It would reduce the fee to $78,000, and the completion date of the project would be by July 1, 1996. He recommended approval of the modification. Upon question by Councilmember Benson, Mrs. Gilligan responded that this matter was on the last City Council Agenda for appropriation of funds. She said the modification was to scale the project down in order to get the first phase done. Councilmember Benson moved to, by Minute Motion, approve a new Exhibit "A" to Contract C09080 in the amount of $78,000.00 and direct staff to amend the contract to reflect same costs and schedules consistent with Exhibit "A". Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by unanimous vote. 2. Mr. Erwin noted the Closed Session items on Agenda and requested that the Council adjourn to Closed Session at an appropriate time to discuss them. Request for Closed Session 1) Conference with Legal Counsel - Anticipated Litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9: Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to subdivision (b): Number of potential cases: 10 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING - JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 2) Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Section 54956.8: Property: 78-800 California Drive Negotiating Parties: Agency/Property Owner: Palm Desert Country Club Association Other Party: City of Palm Desert Under Negotiation: � Price _x. Terms of payment 3) Public Employment pursuant to Section 54957 Title of Position: City Manager C. CITY CLERK None D. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL o City Council Requests for Action; 1. Councilman Spiegel noted that Attorney Dale Gribow had shown much interest in becoming involved in City, and he suggested that an item be placed on the next Agenda for appointment of a new member to the Police Advisory Committee. Councilmember Benson stated that Council should also have copies of applications from other people who have shown an interest in serving on this committee. Council concurred. o City Council Committee Renorts: None XII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - B None Councilman Crites moved to adjourn the meeting at 5:10 p.m. to Closed Session to discuss items listed under City Attorney Reports and Remarks. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by unanimous vote. Mayor Snyder reconvened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. 11 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * • XIII. COMPLETION OF ITEMS HELD OVER FROM 4:00 P.M. SESSION None XIV. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - C None XV. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS None XVI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. JOINT PUBLIC HEARD WITH THE PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RELATIVE TO THE SPORTSPARK DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (Continued from the Meetings of December 14, 1995, and January 11, 1996). THE FOLLOWING IS A VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT OF THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING: ay WHS Walter H. Snyder, Mayor/Chairman RAD Ramon A. Diaz, City Manager CLO Carlos L. Ortega, RDA Executive Director DY David Yrigoyen, Redevelopment Manager RAS Robert A. Spiegel, Councilman/Member BAC Buford A. Crites, Councilman/Member JMB Councilmember/Member Jean M. Benson LW Leonard Wolk RO Richard Odekirk FR Dr. Frank Reale SR Mr. Sal Reale DJE David J. Erwin, City Attorney JH Jim Hardy LG Lee Goodsell CS Crystal Sweidell, City of La Quinta AHE Judge Arnold H. Einbinder, Retired MP Marlene Paisokopf SRG Sheila R. Gilligan, Director of Community Affairs/City Clerk WHS The next item on the Agenda is a public hearing. It's a joint public hearing with the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency and the City Council relative to the Sportspark disposition and development agreement. Mr. City Manager... 12 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * RAD Yes, our Executive Director of Redevelopment, Mr. Ortega, will give the report. CLO Mr. Chairman and Mr. Mayor, this is a joint public hearing before the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council. The reason a public hearing is required is because the Agency is either leasing or selling land that it owns; otherwise, a public hearing is not required. That item is also accompanied, of course, by a lease and loan terms that are combined in one agreement. And Mr. David Yrigoyen is here, and he will give you a summary of the deal points. DY What you have before you is the agreement that is very similar in nature to the agreement that was presented to you at the last meeting. Essentially, the basic elements of that deal point are that we would have the developers submit an amount of deposit in the amount of $1,250,000 into a construction account by the term of January 31st. The account would be administered by an independent agency. The agency would be able to hire an independent company that would oversee the administration of that account and the construction processes. The changes that were made to the agreement that you may want to note are that the agreement also contains a provision that there shall be no music or concerts at the park in accordance with the request made at the last meeting and that there shall be a provision wherein the sportspark operator shall provide the facility to youth programs at an amount of ten hours per week between the hours of 8 and 12 on an amount of two hours per day. Essentially, the provisions are other than that similar in nature to what we discussed at the last meeting, and we would be willing to answer any questions that you might have. I would also like to call your attention to the chart, or the (unclear). What we have done is, we have developed a contour map to show the sportspark essentially in the area where the...they would go in the corner of Gerald Ford and Cook Street. This is essentially the sportspark site, everything else around it is the vacant land. We have the contour lines that show an elevation in the flat level at 61 feet at grade, and much of the park is established at that elevation. It goes up as you go south towards Frank Sinatra. At the Frank Sinatra level, the road there is at 223 feet at grade, so therefore there is a steep drop from Frank Sinatra all the way down to Gerald Ford based on that contour map. RAS 162 feet? DY It is the difference between... RAS 223 and •61? DY 223 and 61. RAS 162 feet. DY As stated to you before, this hearing is for the purposes of establishing the Section 33433 of the Health and Safety Code to make a finding that the disposition of the site is within those provisions of Redevelopment law. Our findings are that this site certainly does meet that 13 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * criteria. We have with us today Leonard Wolk who has accomplished that analysis for us. he is available to answer any questions which you might have with regards to that report. Other than that, that is our report, and if you have any questions, we would be available to answer them. WHS Any questions by the Council? BAC I have one. Would you repeat what you said about the hours available for local kids. DY What we have is we've inserted a provision in the agreement that the sportspark operator would be responsible for providing free of charge to the youth community youth sports, between the hours of 12 and 8, ten hours per week. BAC Now wait. Is it 8 to 12 or 12 to 8? DY 12 to 8. Excuse me, 12 to 8. Between the hours of 12 to 8 they would provide up to ten hours per week on the basis of two hours per week. BAC What happens if they choose to provide those two hours between 12 and 2? DY It is between the hours of 12 and 8. BAC But it's their choice, right? DY Right. BAC If they chose to provide them between 12 and 2, it's useless. DY In the summertime, it might not be. BAC I'm not asking about the summertime. Summertime...for nine months of the year...those hours have to be in hours that are not school hours. DY That's correct. BAC That's in the agreement? DY No, that's not in the agreement that way. BAC It's till 8 o'clock, but they choose when the hours are, Walter. They can choose to do it from 12 to 2 the way the agreement reads. DY It's between the hours of 12 to 8. 14 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * BAC That's not acceptable, at least to one person. DY Okay. JMB And two hours a day, they can't even play a ball game. BAC I mean it has to be non -school hours and it has to be enough time to get a game in. DY We could add that provision in there. WHS Any other questions by the Council? RAS I have just one. Mr. Wolk, there's been quite a bit of correspondence that I've received from citizens of Palm Desert indicating that they didn't feel this was a profitable thing for the City. And I know that you've done a lot of analysis, and I wonder if in a minute and a half or two minutes you could sort of go over that a little bit for me. LW Well, the analysis I did pertained to the sportspark when it was first approved on Portola. And it concluded that there was enough market in order to make a profit on this location, and the same analysis also holds for the sportspark as it is on Cook Street. I made certain projections for income over a 30-year period, and I've done projections like this for the last 15 years, and I've come out fairly close on my projections to what actually happens. I took the developer's initial projections, and I was much more conservative than he was after my studies and concluded that there is indeed a good market for the sportspark here in the Valley. That's a minute and 15 seconds. RAS Thank you. WHS You kept within your time. Any other questions by the Council? If not, this is indeed a public hearing, and I'll declare the public hearing open, and I'll take testimony for those in favor of the project. RO Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I'm Richard Odekirk, 43-670 Lisbon Way, Palm Desert. Let me first before I discuss anything further, let me address the issue of the youth sports because I think there's been maybe a little misunderstanding between staff and us. It was our understanding that those hours would be indeed from three o'clock till eight, from three in the afternoon so that everything did take place after school. And that makes sense to us, and we're very agreeable to that. So, if you want to make the amendment to be clear on that, we can go forward on that issue. After three and a half years of working to get our project going, our company, Big League Dreams, is anxious to end the talking and start building. Hopefully after tonight that will be the case. Because you already know about the support our project has in this community, I didn't ask anyone from the youth or adult leagues to attend. You already saw these chambers 15 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * packed with supporters a year ago when around 300 athletes of all ages turned out. Over the last several months we have worked hard, spending considerable time and money forming our youth foundation, which will still have a significant role in our project, getting the International Softball Federation Olympic Headquarters commitment, which is progressing, and working with Carlos Ortega to work out an agreement which would work for our investors, the International Softball Federation, and the City of Palm Desert. And as recent as this week, we have reached an agreement with Mr. Ortega and feel we can work out the remaining details of this transaction. For the past three months, we have been going through serious negotiations with four substantial investment groups. Two of these groups are represented here tonight. Mr. Ray Kaiser is a gentleman who is very well known in this valley. He's here tonight and part of a local investment group that we have been working with. We also have with us tonight Mr. Sal Reale who wants to be part of our sportspark project. Our negotiations with Mr. Reale have progressed to where we have a prepared legal agreement which is with me, and we are awaiting his attorney's review of tonight's approved development agreement. Mr. Reale would like to address the City Council and on his behalf, I am going to introduce his cousin who is the Assistant Director of Operations of the L.A. Olympics and the founder and developer of Flex -All 454, Dr. Reale. FR I'm delighted to have this opportunity to address such a distinguished group of people on behalf of my cousin, Mr. Sal Reale. WHS Could we have your name and address for the record, sir? FR My name is Dr. Frank Reale of Vancouver, Canada, at the moment. It's one of my residences., WHS Thank you. FR And, speaking on behalf of my cousin, Mr. Sal Reale, who is a resident of the Valley. In considering this project with my cousin we considered the matter of involving ourselves in a project that not only was fiscally sound but more importantly would be a blessing to so many different levels of society in regards to participation in this sports program and specifically this one. Mr. Reale has been negotiating with the Odekirk family for a number of weeks with the goal to be a part of this Big League Dreams sportspark. And to show his seriousness and intentions and abilities to help in this matter, he has brought with him a certified check in the amount of $1.5 million. Naturally his attorneys will want to review the approved development agreement and the conditions it contains, and he was concerned that he'd be able to get this done within four days. We feel that this is a wonderful project for the Valley, and he wishes to be a part of it. And it seems only fair that he have a little additional time for that purpose. But at this time, I would like Mr. Sal Reale to present the certified check to the Mayor on behalf of this project. SR Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. I have before me a certified check here that I had certified today. Who would like to review it? 16 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * BAC If it doesn't have a name at the top, I'd like to. WHS (unclear) I put it in my pocket? DJE SR • Yes, thank you. It is, Mr. Mayor and Members of the Council/Redevelopment Agency, a certified check payable to the order of Salvatore J. Reale, one million five hundred thousand dollars. (NOTE: COPY OF CHECK ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF AS EXHIBIT "A") I would just like to take this opportunity to thank the Board and Mayor and the City Council for being so patient this evening. And we're going to get this on a fast track as soon as possible. Thank you for your patience in giving me this opportunity. WHS Thank you, sir. RO As you can see, all of our interested groups are solid companies and individuals, and all of these parties as well as corporate sponsors and the International Softball Federation are waiting for your decision tonight and what conditions you make part on it, part of it, excuse me. Obviously, we can't make a final decision and reach a final deal with our investors until we have an approved agreement from you. And hopefully after tonight I can give our investors that agreement. And since this is already the 25th, that gives our investors only four working days for their lawyers to review tonight's final agreement, document everything, _ and have us deposit our money with you. There is the possibility that we can still meet the January 31st deadline for delivering our capital, but since this is the last Council meeting before the 31 st, and in light of our experience with attorneys and legal agreements, we need to notify you now that it is likely and possible that we're going to need a little more time to get the legal agreements completed. In spite of Mr. Ortega's cooperation and efforts, we only saw the most recent changes to the agreement by the City's attorney this week. And in order to be safe and certain that we have enough time to get the attorneys' work done, we are requesting 60 days to deliver the funds. Here's what we're ready to deliver to you -- the most beautiful and unique sports complex in the country for your citizens to use, priority for all Palm Desert residents to use the park first, two hours of free use daily for the youth leagues, 100,000 tourists the very first year through our tournament, celebrity, and corporate events, charity events the very first year that will be raising funds for Palm Desert youth sports, the Olympic Softball Headquarters bringing Olympic events and exposure to Palm Desert in over 100 countries around the world, and finally, a place for families to get together and play in secure, wholesome environment. You've allowed us to come this far and to get this close. Please allow us to complete this deal. We're ready to accept the agreement with this one amended change. I'm available for your questions. Thank you very much. WHS Thank you. Anyone else who would care to testify in favor of this project? Seeing... 17 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT t,1TY COUNCIL MEETING - JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * JH Mr. Mayor, Members of the City Council, my name is Jim Hardy, and I currently live in La Quinta. I've been a resident of the Valley for ten years now, and I'm an enthusiastic supporter of this project. I've been associated with the Odekirks and Big League Dreams and I assisted them in the creation of their Big League Dreams Youth Foundation. I really hope that you will approve this project tonight because it will bring an opportunity for youngsters who might not otherwise be able to participate in sports to involve themselves in a health environment and a very clean atmosphere. It's something that over a period of time will be a tremendous benefit culturally and economically to the City of Palm Desert. Thank you. WHS Thank you, Mr. Hardy, and if we can put something together as well as you played football, we'll have a hell of a program. LG Hi, Lee Goodsell, I have an advertising agency in Palm Desert, have a business license in Palm Desert. My purpose in speaking to you is just to speak about the impact that having the International Softball Federation here would bring. Knowing the value of publicity to a city the, I guess the promotional advantages of having the ISF here cannot be underestimated. The national and international exposure on a year-round basis alone is worth the investment that this park will bring to the City. Thank you. WHS Thank you. Anyone else care to testify in favor? CS Good evening, Mayor Snyder and Councilmembers. My name is Crystal Sweidell, I'm from the City of La Quinta. I work in the field of recreation at a local municipality, and I know how important it is to provide facilities of this nature to the youth, to our men's and women's sports leagues, and to the seniors. The City of Palm Desert is on the verge of becoming one of the most unique sporting facilities in the country. In the three years since this idea was presented to you, the sportspark has gained a tremendous amount of support and recognition locally and around the world due to Palm Desert being selected as the headquarters for the International Softball Federation. Continued approval and support of the Big League Dreams sportspark will not only impact the City of Palm Desert, it will also impact the entire Coachella Valley. Participants and spectators and visitors will shop, dine, and stay in the Valley, which means a huge increase in revenues for Palm Desert and the surrounding cities. Some of you may have remembered the public hearing a year ago where over 300 supporters from various adult and youth sports organizations were here on behalf of the sportspark. They are all anxiously awaiting the day the developer receives final approval of this park and breaks ground on the project. Sports and recreational enthusiasts like myself are excited about the potential the Big League Dreams sportspark has to offer the City of Palm Desert. I hope you will continue to support the sportspark and the developers of this project as you have in the past. This is a unique opportunity for everyone involved, and if all the parties continue to work together, this big league dream will become a reality. Thanks. WHS Thank you. Anyone else who would care to testify in favor? Seeing no one, anyone who would care to testify in opposition? 18 Al:MUTE$ REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING - JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * AHE Mr. Mayor, Members of the City Council, my name is Judge Arnold H. Einbinder, Retired. I live at 549 Desert Falls Drive East, Palm Desert, California. I had come prepared with a statement that I was going to be asking the Council for me to read into the record. But I changed my mind. I feel that there are certain things that are just nonsensical, and rather than go through those nonsensical items, I will just bore the Council by addressing just a few that I deem not nonsensical. First of all, my impression from a long municipality position and understanding was that redevelopment was created for a particular purpose, and that was to get rid of blighted areas in the community and to redevelop those areas so that they would be in a fashion and form to be able to be constructively utilized by not only residences but by business establishments. I also was under the impression that by virtue of the fundings that were provided through redevelopment agency that when individuals who were in those blighted areas had to be relocated that relocation benefits were available to them so that they would be able to survive the period in which they would be able to be required to displaced. It seems to me that that objective has long gone by the wayside, that now due to monies that are available to redevelopment agencies, they utilize them as they see fit. There is very little restraint on them, and they only answer to inevitably themselves and, if necessary, a review board of some nature. I can only ask that you take into consideration that when you say in the agreement that you have prepared (unless) staff and the Odekirks have agreed to, and you indicate in that agreement that this project is going to take care of the blighted area, create new jobs, all the things that are flowery for the purposes of redevelopment agency funds, and you then turn around and see a vacant area that's been vacant for a long time, that is surrounded by vacant area that is not blighted and no one is living in shacks, no one has to be relocated, I just feel that you should take a second, third, even a fourth look at the use of the redevelopment funds. Not withstanding that, my understanding further was that this Council had approved an agreement in December of 1994, and presumably the new agreement, and that was for Portola, and the new agreement, 1994, I'm sorry if I misspoke, and the new agreement was supposed to be reflecting the old agreement, or an image of the old agreement, but in a different location. If the Council has read both agreements, they know that is not true. There are so many changes in the new agreement that it doesn't look like the same agreement as the first. There are a couple of things that bother me that are included unfortunately in both of those agreements. And that is that there is a preamble, and in that preamble it identifies as I indicated before that the project will assist, it's called recitals on unnumbered page probably one, the site will assist in the elimination of blight in the project area. We know what the project area is, the vacant land that the City owns, part of the land that the City owns -- will provide additional jobs, of course additional jobs meaning certainly those who are working in the locality. I don't anticipate that the Council is saying that they are going to have a thousand, two thousand, five thousand more employees in this area. And will substantially improve the economic and physical conditions in the project area. When you would look at the section on page 3 which is entitled "I ease of Land" and you look at 2(b), you will have to take note that as part of that (b), there are several conditions, if you would have, that are set forth. My problem is that they are not conditions when they can be waived, and if they can be waived by virtue of the contract, then they don't come to the public. When the contract is approved, and let's presume it's going to be approved, and you want to waive a requirement, including the requirement of the 19 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT cITY COUNCIL. MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * $1,250,000 being set forth on January 31, 1996, you do so on your whim but not as a part of the process that is before us. My concern is this — if you can waive them, and obviously most of these conditions are set forth by the Redevelopment Agency as the landlord, if you can do that and telling us that certain things are going to happen; i.e., you're going to have this condition, you're going to have that condition, you're going to be imposing certain time limits, you're going to impose certain occurrences that cannot be going forward, and you can waive them by just saying okay we'll waive this after the fact, what good is it in telling us that you will do these things if, and I don't mean this derogatorily but as a matter of fact, behind our backs you can change it. So my feeling is this. My understanding further was that the tenant had inquired of staff that certain items be considered as ambiguous and to resolve that ambiguity, and they have done so, supposedly at least on two occasions. I'm a little concerned in that matter, too, because I hear from Mr. Odekirk that "changes" in the contract proposal, whatever this agreement might be concerned, were just made, new changes were made this week, because they just came to Mr. Odekirk this week. And we come to a point in time where are you approving a contract today, or are you approving a contract to be made in the future? Are these documents that were subject to public review and view just preliminary or is it a final product? I don't think it's a final product. Every time I have come here, I have knowledge of new parts of this agreement that are to be made and have been made that is now really "before the Council." So I am concerned in those particular respects. There's another concern I have. We were talking about the rent in regards to the repayment of the amounts of monies that are being loaned to the tenant as well as getting a "fair market price" for the leasing of the land. My concern is that you have credit that is _ being provided for the amounts that are paid for the leasing as against the amounts of monies that are supposed to be paid as a return of the amount of the loan based on a percentage. And I'm just wondering why that fee, if there is supposed to be a two-step process; i.e., a return of the value of the land by rent and a return of the amounts of monies that are loaned, the $3 million to the project in the guise of a percentage return. Also, when you are having as in Section 8b, and I'm sorry, I should have had the page number, but I didn't, but I don't think it would be too difficult, it is on page 11, they have introduced a new word or new descriptive phrase, let's put it that way, and that is project description. Now they used to have it under scope of development in the previous agreement. And there is a scope of development that is in the new agreement. And what does it say? It says that the hours of the facility will be as set forth in the project description, yet there is no project description that has been provided for public review. I don't know why, but there is none. Now we have a gentleman, I think his name is Mr. Wolk, who just appeared before you indicating that he had reviewed this project as it was to be on Portola. And that the same thing goes for Cook. Now that's what the Council is doing. Everything that the Council has prepared and staff has prepared for the review has been, for want of a better term, grandfathered in from the Portola site to the Cook site, and there's a difference. A negative declaration has been prepared solely on the basis of the same things occurring on Cook Street that were occurring on Portola. I think that's a mistake. I think that when you have a feasibility study presumably that's geared to one location, the difference in location may also be changed and may precipitate a difference. So when you come down to those things, I am just, again, 20 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * concerned because that waiver that is provided for is a condition throughout the agreement, and I just wanted to know if you were cognizant of it. Thank you. WHS Thank you. Anyone else who would care to testify in opposition? MP Good evening. My name is Marlene Paisokopf, and I wish to look at this in a more multi - perspective way. We have heard the discussion well spoken, well verbalized as to the assets of the sportspark or those people who are interested in the excitement of the "physical facility" of sports and seek this as a great asset to the community. And I do not see things in a black and white perspective. I see things in a multi -perspective, and although I believe this is very true for those people who represent that perspective, there are more of us in Palm Desert than that particular contingent. And unfortunately, many of the residents here in Palm Desert are not full-time residents, and they are perhaps people who come here to vacation, to get away from the areas of cold, snow birds, and they perhaps buy into I want to be here enjoying myself, and they don't get involved perhaps as much in our politics and in our government and even though they may be part of it six months a year, they have allegiances elsewhere. And as this has been going on for some time, perhaps some of the residents who were more vocal at an earlier time are not here tonight to address the issues that are cogent to the residents. Many of them feel they have made an investment in Palm Desert, and it's not only a financial investment. I say this because investments certainly...Palm Desert has been successful financially, and nobody can argue with that. But I hope that the Board takes into account other than financial success of Palm Desert because sometimes things can be successfully even financially on a superficial level, but when you go deeper, one has to question the longevity of that financial success. And what is given up in the process of achieving it usually some things have to be undermined for others to achieve their purpose. And it is my belief that some of the activities of the park that have been given on the agenda of the group who wish to build it are not perhaps in sync with the growth of this valley in terms of fundamental need for community grounded in support of the people who generally come here and put down roots here and are interested in seeing this area grow over time. And quick fixes usually do not address deep problems. They are...they may be good, just like gambling coming to the desert has its advantages, but perhaps we will have to see in a few years some of the disadvantages that we may have to pay for that. I only ask you to search if you can deeper than the surface issues presented here and understand that you are protectors of the Palm Desert community and all its residents and that you need to weight into balance a perspective that takes into account the issues of these residents. Thank you. WHS RAS CLO Thank you. Anyone else who would care to testify in opposition? Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing and ask the Council their opinions. Let me ask Mr. Ortega if he might address some of the concerns of Judge Einbinder and also what exactly are we voting on tonight? Our recommendation is that you vote on the agreement as presented to you. The Judge spoke to some changes that are included in your agreement tonight that you didn't have at your last 21 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * s s s s s * s s s s * s s s s s s* s s s s s s s s s * s s s s * s s s s meeting. These are specifically the changes that we outlined at the last meeting, two of which we brought up, one of them which was at the request of a Councilmember. And these were that we insert some language regarding use by the youth groups which has been indicated. The other one that we discussed last time, the Council said put it in writing, and I specifically sent the wording to the Judge, had to do with the (unclear) of the termination provision which we explained last time was more appropriate for the Portola site and maybe not necessary for the Cook Street site. And the other one is the clarification of the sharing of the additional lease for compensation were we to allow either a transfer of a lease or a sale of the business by the developer. All those things we indicated to the Council we would come back with an actual writing in the agreement which we have, and my understanding is that the Judge has that wording. With regards to changes in the agreement, the prior agreement contained a provision that said that we could offer the developer a new site with agreements with substantially the same provisions. I don't think it said exactly the same provisions. We feel that this agreement meets that intent. Yes, there have been some clarifications. Mainly those clarifications have been to indicate that this is a private venture, that we are merely lenders on the one hand and that we are leasing property to a private individual for not only our own protection but for his protection for liability purposes, while still having the ability to have control over the disbursement of funds, still retaining the ability to have control over plans and specifications, still having the ability to have control over the project. Those are changes that have been made, but we feel as your staff that these have been necessary to clarify the relationship. This is not a public park. This is a private park, that we're mainly lenders while retaining basically the reins on the use of the loan proceeds of the budget and so forth. So those are the changes that have been made. But in any case, all of those are changes that are included in the prior agreement, and those three changes that I outlined specifically are those that we told you about the last time that have now been put into writing. RAS Thank you. So we're not only approving the agreement, we're also as I understand it, being requested to give a 60-day extension. Is that correct? CLO Well, the agreement as written and as recommended says that the funds have to be in by the end of January. Whether you want to consider an extension of that one provision, that is something that you will have to consider. WHS Any other comments by the Council? JMB I guess my other comment is that I'm glad to see they put in two hours a day, but I can see those 400 children that were out here looking for that ballfield to relieve the crowded conditions they think they have trying to figure out how all the teams are going to play on two hours a day for our $4.5 million. It's a little ridiculous. WHS Any other comments? May I have a motion? 22 REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * BAC Question. This now includes the provision that we talked about the last time about auditing procedures. It includes the provision in there about the potential split of profits from sale and all of those various and sundry things, right? CLO That's correct. BAC And if we vote on this and we sign it or the Mayor, I should say, or the Chairman of the Agency signs it and the developer signs it, this is then done. CLO This is the deal. BAC Period. CLO Unless you vote on any other different provisions, yes. BAC If we were ever called on to vote on any other provisions, does the vote on any other provisions then open up the rest of the agreement to change as well? CLO It does, of course. Any time one party requests an amendment to an agreement, we can request changes. BAC That opens it up to any other changes that the other party wishes to make? CLO That's correct. WHS Do I have a motion? BAC So moved. WHS I have a motion to approve the program as submitted. RAS Second. WHS And seconded. Would you please vote. SRG Has everyone voted? The motion carries by a 3-2 vote, with Councilmembers Kelly and Benson voting no. WHS Thank you. That completes this subject. RAS No, I think we have to vote on the 60 days. CLO You may wish to consider the... 23 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ?? (unclear) clarification please. Is the motion to approve the 60 days? RAS No, it does not. WHS No, we're going to vote on that right now. Carlos, would you recommend 60, 30? CLO Well, if he says he only needs 30, that's fine with us. WHS Do I have a motion to extend the period to receive the check for 30 days. RAS I'll move that. WHS Do I have a second? I'll second it. Please vote. That's for 30 days, an extension of 30 days, is that satisfactory to all? Please vote. SRG Has everyone voted? Motion is defeated by a 3-2 vote, with Councilman Crites, Councilman Kelly, and Councilmember Benson voting no. BAC Let's try for a shorter one? WHS Will someone come up with (unclear) BAC Extend for two weeks. RAS Second. WHS Can you finish in two weeks? JMB (unclear) BAC That's the offer, or at least that's my motion. WHS At this moment, we have the motion and a second to extend it for two weeks from the 31 st. DJE The extension is the due date of January 31, that being extended two weeks from that date. WHS Will you please vote. SRG Motion is defeated by a 3-2 vote, with Councilman Crites, Councilman Kelly, and Councilmember Benson voting no. BAC No. I made the motion. I suspect I ought to support it. 24 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * SRG WHS Change your vote? Okay, so the motion carries by a 3-2 vote, with Councilman Kelly and Councilmember Benson voting no. Thank you all for attending. We appreciate all your attention and your help, and thank you sir for coming. We have one last item, oral communications... Note: The following is a summary of actions taken by the Council/Agency Board: Councilman/Member Crites moved to: 1) Approve the Disposition and Development Agreement between the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency and Ronald Odekirk and Rick Odekirk regarding the development of the Sportspark on the southeast corner of Cook Street and Gerald Ford Drive, Palm Desert, California; 2) waive further reading and adopt City Council Resolution No. 96-6 approving the leasing of the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency of approximately 22 acres of real property located on the southeast corner of Cook Street and Gerald Ford Drive, Palm Desert, California, to Ronald Odekirk and Rick Odekirk; 3) waive further reading and adopt Redevelopment Agency Resolution No. 322 approving the leasing of approximately 22 acres of real property located on the southeast corner of Cook Street and Gerald Ford Drive, Palm Desert, California, to Ronald Odekirk and Rick Odekirk. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by a 3-2 vote, with Councilmembers/Members Benson and Kelly voting NO. Councilman/Member Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, approve a 30-day extension of time for the developer to deposit funds of $1.5 million. Motion was seconded by Snyder and was DEFEATED by a 2-3 vote, with Councilmembers/Members Benson, Crites, and Kelly voting NO. - Councilman/Member Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, approve a two -week extension of time for the developer to deposit funds of $1.5 million. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by a 3-2 vote, with Councilmembers/Members Benson and Kelly voting NO. Mr. Erwin noted that this would extend the time two weeks from the January 31, 1996, deadline. R VII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - D None 25 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * XVIII. ADJOURNMENT Councilman Crites moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. on Monday, February 5, 1996, for the purpose of discussing proposals for redesign of the Administrative Services Building lobby area and for a meeting with the three appointed City officials and one appointed Redevelopment Agency official. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by unanimous vote. /�(4 WALTER H. SNYDER, MAY ATTEST: SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, D ' . CTOR OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS CITY OF PALM DESERT ALIFORNIA 26 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL. MEETING JANUARY 25, 1996 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 1. O JCO g ^ T { • lr O o +c 0 �o o * 0 O% O i▪ t CO it * u1 N — * * * a 0 ru it Ir ru * is h5 U y o H. () omu- eis X� J o • o /6/54// ✓(� Q Oci_ / $ 3nowrl C m IN imam IMO WA ?WPM 0 Met GPO %MOW 0 l EXHIBIT "A" (woo umwrioln'M IS O ru )133HO as ldIl1:l33 w W Z 2 0 W CC > Q W 2 0 40 W W z0 2• _ - apo� - 10-1 co-0 ccE Farlcocr SALVATORE J REALE ONE MILLION FIVE O P000 L L8p' 862-28C23 0 :.Y •!II ; If. R. .') .7U op 27