HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-11-21MINUTES
ADJOURNED JOINT MEETING OF THE
PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL
AND
PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 1996
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor/Chairman Kelly convened the meeting at 3:00 p.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Councilman/Member Walter H. Snyder
III. INVOCATION - Mayor/Chairman Richard S. Kelly
IV. ROLL CALL
Present:
Councilman/Member Buford A. Crites
Councilman/Member Walter H. Snyder
Councilman/Member Robert A. Spiegel
Mayor/Chairman Richard S. Kelly
Excused Absence:
Mayor Pro-Tempore/Vice Chairman Jean M. Benson
Also Present:
Ramon A. Diaz, City Manager
David J. Erwin, City Attorney
Sheila R. Gilligan, Director of Community Affairs/City Clerk
Carlos L. Ortega, Redevelopment Agency Executive Director
Paul Gibson, City Treasurer/Finance Director
Lisa Constande, Environmental Conservation Manager
David Yrigoyen, Redevelopment Manager
Mary P. Gates, Deputy City Clerk
V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - A
None
MINUTES
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL. AND
PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 21, 1996
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
VI. NEW BUSINESS
A. DISCUSSION OF CITY OF PALM DESERT LONG-RANGE SOLID WASTE PLAN.
Mayor Kelly thanked the representatives of Waste Management for attending this meeting. He
complimented members of staff for putting this program together, especially the study session
timeline reflecting the order of this meeting (attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit
"A").
Mr. John Lavendar, Waste Management of the Desert, read a prepared statement regarding the
proposed MRF/Transfer Station, its financial impact on the City of Palm Desert, and a possible
alternative (attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "B"). He showed a short film
of an alternative called the WMS System which was a system developed by Waste Management
that achieves the same results without the $8 to $12 million facility. He stated that Edom Hill
was not expected to close until 2002, and with the possible extension the lifespan would be
increased to the year 2010. Because of that, he said Waste Management did not feel the City
needed a MRF/Transfer Station or WMS System at this time. He said when ready, his firm's
system could be implemented in the City within six months at no additional cost to the
residents.
Upon question by Councilman Spiegel relative to what will happen to the charge for Palm
Desert's citizens if the County is forced to close Edom Hill closes, Mr. Frank Orlett of Waste
Management responded that if Waste Management implements the WMS System, there would
be no additional cost to the rate payor above what is being paid now.
Councilman Kelly asked what would happen if the City decided to do nothing. Mr. Lavendar
responded that the City would have to advise Waste Management where it wanted the trash
taken because the City has flow control. Councilman Kelly asked what would happen if the
City continues just with Waste Management and Edom Hill is full (which is where the City's
flow control is). Mr. Lavendar responded that the Waste Management would implement the
WMS System because they would have to go a longer distance. He said this would cost more
money. He said what Mr. Orlett was saying was that it would be no more cost to the rate
payor, and Waste Management would come in to the City and say it would give the City such
and such and would need something in return, such as an extension to the franchise agreement,
whether it would be one year, five years, ten years, etc., in return for the investment of the
equipment.
Councilman Spiegel stated that it was his understanding if the City does nothing, then Waste
Management will not do anything if Edom Hill closes. Mr. Lavendar stated the City would
have to tell Waste Management what to do because the City has the flow control.
2
MINUTES
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND
PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 21, 1996
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The following individuals made brief presentations to the City Council relative to long-range
municipal solid waste disposal options:
MR. ROBERT NELSON, Chief Executive Officer, County of Riverside.
MR. JOHN RAYMOND, Economic Development Manager, City of Palm Springs
MR. JOHN CURTIS, Director of Public Works, City of Coachella
MS. CAROL MANETTAS, Management Analyst, and MR. CHRIS SILVA, Councilman, City
of Indio
Mayor Kelly recessed the meeting at 4:50 p.m. and reconvened it at 4:55 p.m.
NOTE: COUNCILMAN CRITES ARRIVED AT THE MEETING AT 4:55 P.M.
B. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF LOGO FOR DESERT WILLOW GOLF COURSE.
Councilman/Member Spiegel moved to add this item to the Agenda for discussion and action.
Motion was seconded by Crites and carried by a 4-0-1 vote, with Councilmember/Member Benson ABSENT.
Redevelopment Manager David Yrigoyen reviewed the staff report, noting that the Desert
Willow Committee had reviewed the logos presented by Piper Close, Marketing Director for
Desert Willow Golf Course. He said the Committee reviewed three logos, and he showed all
three of these logos, noting that the one that received the most votes was one they called the
mountain logo. He said it was necessary for the Council to make a decision on the logo to be
used so that staff could begin to develop shirts, caps, etc. and start marketing the golf course.
He said Kemper had been holding off on doing that until the Council makes its decision.
Ms. Close reviewed the designs, noting that she had contacted Del Webb Sun City in Las
Vegas because they have a project of the same name and use the desert willow tree in its logo.
She said she had received permission in writing to use the name but asked that we stay as far
away as possible from their logo so there is not any confusion. She said the graphic artist had
been directed toward use of the blossom more than the tree. She said the idea of using the Art -
In -Public -Places rusted iron fence came about, and it was felt this would be a good element to
incorporate into the logo. She said should the vote go to the floral design, it could be
incorporated into a lot of the collateral materials.
Councilman/Member Spiegel asked whether this would be registered trademark, and Ms. Close
responded that it would be.
3
MINUTES
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND
PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 21, 1996
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Councilman/Member Spiegel stated that he felt the flower logo was very feminine and would
appeal more to women than would the mountains. He said he felt the mountains were more
avant garde. He said if he were to choose a design for volume to sell as hats and t-shirts as
possible, he would vote for the flowers because women usually purchase more things.
Mayor Kelly stated that the Committee recommendation was the mountain logo but that
Councilmember Benson had indicated she preferred the flowers.
Mr. Yrigoyen noted that Mr. Ferguson, a Desert Willow Committee member, was in the
audience and was at the meeting when this was discussed.
Councilman/Member Crites stated that he preferred the flowers but that he had strong biases
and was not sure it was the right marketing decision. He said he liked what he heard from Ms.
Close that there may be a way to make sure both of them are used. He said he agreed they
both had appeal to them, and he could see the mountain logo used for stationery, etc. He said
when he hears the name "Desert Willow", he expects to see that which it refers to. He said if
there was a way to use both of the logos used, he would prefer that this be done.
Ms. Close stated that there did need to be an official logo for marketing purposes. She said
in this situation with a golf course, a very high percentage of business is the male golfer rather
than the female golfer; however, as this golf course develops into the resort that it is going to
be, there will be more and more women going through a pro shop and making purchases, and
the flower logo would appeal to them.
Councilman/Member Snyder stated that he would have a little difficulty with the mountains,
and if he did not know about the fence, he would not know what the logo was about.
Councilman/Member Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the registering of both logos
as registered trademarks, with the use of the flower logo as the official logo for Desert Willow. Motion was
seconded by Crites.
Ms. Close stated that in the Section 4 Committee, there were some revisions to the logo that
would reflect "golf resort" under the name "Desert Willow". She said if the flower logo was
the one to be selected by the Council, she would like the Council to also distinguish whether
it wants the golf club picture there or if the words "golf resort" should be included. She said
she felt the golf club might be on the trite side and that the words "golf resort" would be better.
Councilman/Member Spiegel suggested "Desert Willow Golf Club" since it is not yet a resort.
Councilman/Member Snyder stated that he refused to override a decision of the Committee that
has worked long and hard to get this where it is.
4
MINUTES
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND
PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 21, 1996
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Mayor/Chairman Kelly called for the vote. The motion carried by unanimous vote.
VIL ADJOURNENT
Upon motion by Spiegel, second by Snyder, and unanimous vote of the City Council/Agency Board,
Mayor/Chairman Kelly adjourned the meeting at 5:15 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. on Tuesday, December 10, 1996.
ATTEST:
M'',-MAYOR/$1AIRMAN
SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, CITY CLERK/AGENCY SECRETARY
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA
PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
5
MINUTES
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND
PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 21, 1996
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
EXHIBIT "A"
PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL
STUDY SESSION
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 1996
OPTIONS FOR LONG-RANGE
MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
This is a study session for the City Council to learn what other cities are proposing in
terms of long-range municipal solid waste disposal options. The cities scheduled to
make presentations have proposed projects (facilities) within their city limits. The City's
franchised waste hauler will make a presentation on a proposed collection system to
consider.
3:00 - 3:20 Waste Management of the Desert — John Lavender
V.P. of Municipal Services
3:20 - 4:00 County of Riverside — Robert Nelson, Chief Executive Officer
4:00 - 4:20 City of Palm Springs — John Raymond, Economic Development Manager
4:20 — 4:40 City of Coachella — John Curtis, Director of Public Works
4:40 — 5:00 City of Indio — Carol Manettas, Management Analyst
CITIES: Presentations will be made on their proposed projects. They expect to
receive questions from the City Council.
COUNTY: Perspective will be given on:
Status of landfills in the Coachella Valley;
Position on closure and post -closure fees for landfills in
regards to the county -wide disposal system;
Position on a transfer station(s): Is there a need?
WASTE
HAULER: Presentation on proposed ideas for the City of Palm Desert's
long-range, solid waste disposal needs.
6
MINUTES
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND
PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 21, 1996
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
EXHIBIT "B"
INTRODUCTION
Today I'm here to address the proposed MRF/transfer station and its financial
impact on the City of Palm Desert and a possible alternative.
We all remember discussion of this concept started about 4 years ago because
of the diversion requirements of AB939 and the projected lifespan of
Coachella and Edom Hill landfills. We realized that the approval, permitting
and implementation process would take time and the Valley wanted to be
ready. At that time the Coachella Valley was generating approximately 1,800
tons per day and with that volume the availability of needed landfill space
would become acute in the near future.
Since that time, due to the economy and the successful waste diversion
programs implemented by most cities the latest tonnage figure is
approximately 1,000 to 1,100 tons per day. Another reason for considering
this project was that there was no known technology available to assist the
Valley in meeting the waste diversion requirements of AB939, therefore a full
blown MRF would be required.
joheMpoodidoe
7
MINUTES
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND
PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 21, 1996
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
EXHIBIT "B"
With the successful waste diversion programs that were implemented the
MRF concept is a thing of the past. For example, the latest report from the
California Waste Board lists the City of Palm Desert at a 53.2% waste
diversion rate for 1995. This was achieved without the impact of a successful
greenwaste collection program for both residential and commercial landscape
generators. Approximately 2 years ago we were informed by the county that
approximately 35% of the total waste stream waste generated was green
waste and of that total 75% was generated by landscape companies.
Therefore, implementation of the greenwaste program can only enhance the
diversion rate for your city.
Now, lets discuss the proposed transfer station, its impact on the City of Palm
Desert, and an alternative option that is available.
First, what is a transfer station? A transfer station is a facility that gives the
collection vehicles a place to deposit their loads rather than at the local
landfills. Normally these Toads would be dumped on the floor of the facility
and then, by means of an end loader or some other equipment loaded into
large transfer trailers for transportation to a distant landfill.
8
MINUTES
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND
PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 21, 1996
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
EXHIBIT "B"
Now let's look at the cost figures. At the CVAG sub -committee meeting last
Monday we were presented cost figures for 1,000 and 750 tons per day. Lets
just use the 750 ton figure for comparison sake.
Use chart.
I don't think the rate payer will be willing to absorb these increases if there is
an alternative and Waste Management has one.
Its called the WMS System and I'll show you a film of it in a few minutes.
This is a system developed by Waste Management that achieves the same
results without the 8 - 12 million dollar facility. In effect you could call it a
mobile transfer station.
Film
Edom is not expected to close until 2002 and with the possible extension the
lifespan would be increased to the year 2010. Therefore, as your partner we
jaei.vprAre
9
MINUTES
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND
PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 21, 1996
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
• EXHIBIT "B"
(REPEAT1 do not feel the City of Palm Desert needs the transfer station or
the WMS System at this time.
The WMS System can be implemented in your city within six months at no
additional cost to the rate payer. Also by the time your city needs a system,
who knows, new technology may be available. We have one of these units
here and would be happy to show it to you at your convenience.
10
MINUTES
ADJOURNED MEETING OF THE
PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL AND
PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 21, 1996
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
EXHIBIT "B"
PALM DESERT - DUMP FEE INCREASE ANALYSIS
Assumes
• No growth
• 14,000 Residents
• 10 year oompansm period
CURRENT FEE PER RESIDENT IS
S3.87
LANDFILL CHARGE
50% MORE S 1.51 INCREASE
(1.51 * 14000 * 12 *10) _
S3.02
S4.53
INCREMENTAL COST INCREASE $2,536,800 OVER 10 YEARS
$253,680 annually
83% MORE S2.51 INCREASE
(2.51 * 14000 * 12 * 10)
S5.53
INCREMENTAL COST INCREASE 54,216,800 OVER 10 YEARS
$421,680 annually
• WMD processes 1000 tons of greenwaste per month at our Palm
Desert facility
• At 500 tons per day, the rough estimate would be $67 (44.91*750) / 500
$624, 000 annually or $6.2 Million
11