Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-02-26MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Benson convened the meeting at 4:10 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Councilman Buford A. Crites Councilman Richard S. Kelly Mayor Pro-Tempore Robert A. Spiegel Mayor Jean M. Benson Excused Absence: Councilman Jim Ferguson Also Present: Ramon A. Diaz, City Manager David J. Erwin, City Attorney Sheila R. Gilligan, Agency Secretary Richard J. Folkers, ACM/Director of Public Works Carlos L. Ortega, Executive Director Pat Conlon, Director of Building and Safety Phil Drell, Director of Community Development Paul Gibson, Finance Director/City Treasurer Mary P. Gates, Deputy City Clerk III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Regular City Council Meeting of February 12, 1998, and the Adjourned Meeting of February 17, 1998. Rec: Approve as presented. B. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Warrant No. 42. Rec: Approve as presented. C. CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY (#351) by Pamela E. Downs in the Amount of $500.00. Rec: By Minute Motion, deny the claim and direct the City Clerk to so notify the Claimant. MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * D. CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY (#353). by Leonel and Eleodora Leon in an Amount in Excess of $8,000,000.00. Rec: By Minute Motion, deny the claim and direct the City Clerk to so notify the Claimant. E. CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY (#354) by John Julian in the Amount of $929.76. Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Deny the Claim and refer the Claimant to E.L. Yeager Construction; 2) direct the City Clerk to so notify the Claimant. F. APPLI ATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE by Southland Corporation and Asim Butt for 7-Eleven Store #2171-22362, 73800 Highway 111, Palm Desert. Rec: Receive and file. G. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF BID for a Flatbed Utility Truck. Rec: By Minute Motion, award the bid for a flatbed utility truck ($24,537.91) to Fuller Ford, Chula Vista. H. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT for the Fabrication and Installation of Three Display Cases for the Palm Desert Historical Society (Contract No. C14040). Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Award Contract No. C14040 to Dave's Woodworking for the fabrication and installation of three display cases in the amount of $4,975.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the subject agreement; 2) authorize the Director of Finance to appropriate $4,975.00 from the unallocated construction tax revenue fund No. 231-4275-422-4001. I. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Audio/Lighting Services for "Haute Nites, Cool Sounds" 1998 Summer Concert Series. Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize the preparation of a purchase order in the amount of $13,200.00 with Musicians Outlet to provide audio/lighting services for the 11 scheduled `HAUTE NITES, COOL SOUNDS" 1998 Summer Concert Series scheduled to be held in the Palm Desert Civic Center Park Amphitheater. J. LETTER OF RESIGNATION from Robert J. Coates for the Rent Review Commission Rec: By Minute Motion, accept the resignation of Robert J. Coates and direct staff to schedule a presentation of appreciation to Mr. Coates at a future City Council meeting. 2 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 ******************************************************* K. MINUTES of the Palm Desert Golf Course Committee dated January 12, 1998. Rec: Receive and file. L. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Reproduction of City's Historical Video. Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Approve the request for the dubbing of 1,000 copies of the subject video; 2) appropriate $3,500 to cover the cost of said reproduction and the design and printing of a label for same. M. MINUTES of the Palm Desert Rent Review Commission dated October 28, 1997. Rec: Receive and file. N. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT for Engineering Design of Monterey Avenue at Fred Waring Drive Intersection Improvements (Contract No. C14150). Rec: By Minute Motion: 1) Approve engineering design proposal from Robert Bein, William Frost and Associates (RBF) for the subject engineering design in the amount — of $13,700 plus a ten percent contingency of $1,370 for a total amount of $15,070 -- funds are available from Account No. 110-4300-413-3010; 2) authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. O. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION to Reject Bids for Desert Willow South Course Perimeter Wall (Contract No. C13810). Rec: By Minute Motion, authorize staff to reject the bids received for the construction of the Desert Willow South Course Perimeter Wall and authorize the City Clerk to readvertise this project. P. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF CONTRACT WITH THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE FOR FUNDING FOR TWO PART-TIME POSITIONS FOR THE PALM DESERT LIBRARY (Contract No. C14160). Rec: By Minute Motion, approve the request and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract. Mr. Diaz noted that with regard to Item G, it was staffs intention to acquire a CNG conversion kit for this vehicle and would come back to the City Council with the price. Upon motion by Spiegel, second by Kelly, the Consent Calendar was approved as presented by unanimous vote of the City Council. 3 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * IV. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER None V. RESOLUTIONS A. RESOLUTION NO. 98-a - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, ORDERING FORECLOSURE ACTIONS AND APPROVING SPECIAL COUNSEL AGREEMENT. (Continued from the meetings of January 22 and February 12, 1998.) Councilman Crites moved to continue this matter to the meeting of March 26, 1998. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by unanimous vote. VI. ORDINANCES For Introduction: None For Adoption: A. ORDINANCE NO. 848 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE PCD TEXT FOR "THE CREST" FOR A MAXIMUM OF 151 UNITS, CASE NO. C/Z 90-12 AMENDMENT #1. (Continued from the meetings of December 11, 1997, and January 8, 1998.) The following is a verbatim transcript of this portion of the Minutes. Key JMB Mayor Jean M. Benson PD Director of Community Development Phil Drell PS Paul Selzer TM Ty Miller RAS Mayor Pro-Tempore Robert A. Spiegel RSK Councilman Richard S. Kelly BAC Councilman Buford A. Crites RAD City Manager Ramon A. Diaz DJE City Attorney David J. Erwin SRG City Clerk Sheila R. Gilligan 4 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * JMB PD Ordinances for adoption...Ordinance No. 848, an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, approving the PCD text for "The Crest" for a maximum of 151 units, Case No. C/Z 90-12 Amendment #1, continued from the meetings of December 11, 1997, and January 8, 1998. I have two speaker requests. Are there any questions of staff beforehand? If not, we'll take... Other than, you know, you have the two...correspondence from U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services and Fish and Game and, also, we just got a letter from the applicant and my understanding is, and I spoke to Mr. Sorenson in the last couple of days, today and yesterday, and they are, and for what it's worth, in negotiation with the applicant to find alternative mitigations that will satisfy their concerns. And the feeling I got from Mr. Sorenson was that there was room and possibilities for successful negotiations. The applicant will be here, I believe, to request a continuance. JMB Okay. Alright, the first speaker I have is Paul Selzer. PS Madam Mayor and Members of the Council...I think as has been represented we, as a result of the City Attorney's inquiry to both the Department of Fish and Game and the United Fish and Wildlife Service, we did recently receive responses from both of those entities and were successful after various phone calls back and forth in meeting with the Fish and Wildlife Service yesterday and talking to the Department on the phone. Mr. Miller, I was not at that meeting, Mr. Miller was, and I'd like for him to come up and describe to you where we are in those discussions. It is not, from what we can tell, the situation is not as dire as either of those letters might make it out to be, and we think we're fairly close to a resolution with them. But I'll have Mr. Miller discuss that with you. We are respectfully requesting a continuance in order that we may continue our discussions with the Service and the Department, which we intend to meet with within the next several weeks and were led to believe yesterday, as I think Mr. Drell indicated, that the Service, at least, believes we are close to closure. Thank you. TM Thank you, Mayor and City Council Members, nice to see you again. I did want to just summarize our meeting with the Fish and Wildlife Service yesterday. I personally met with Pete Sorenson who was the gentleman who prepared the letter which was signed by Sherry Barrett. And we met for about two hours, discussing the issues, and I think that it would be fair to characterize...I tried to summarize in a letter to you all, because we just met with them yesterday for two hours, they had been out of the office, it was difficult to get a meeting on such short notice on a very complicated project, but the letter that you have in your correspondence, I believe, which was dated February 26th, is a summary of that meeting. And what I'd like to do is just address briefly certain issues that were raised in a letter written by Mr. Sorenson as concerns for the project. I think the challenge in understanding our project, which is unlike 99% of the projects that are down here in that we're not grading the entire site, we're only allowing grading underneath the building pads in essence and where the roadways area. You know, it's nothing like the other projects. It takes a fair amount...and the documents are very extensive on the project. When Pete Sorenson reviewed the documents, 5 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * there are certain biological mitigations that are in three documents. They're in the development agreement, they are in the PCD text, and they are also in the EIR. There isn't one place where all the mitigation is made, and it's extensive information. Suffice it to say we went over a summarizing of what those issues were. Mr. Sorenson was concerned, and I'll just direct you to the letter for examples of several issues, that the property, he indicated that it probably should be fenced. Early on we identified this as an impact which should be mitigated, and so we designed in, and this is going back five years when we did initially meet with Fish and Game and Fish and Wildlife, we designed into the project that all of the grass areas, if any, on a site would be enclosed within a fence...and because it was determined that a fence across the entire property would prevent...it might be good for sheep, but it may not be good for all of the other species that need to come and could coexist within the project, you know, all the critters...coyotes, quail, any type of other animals that could migrate through there. So, that is incorporated in the design, and I asked him yesterday would that satisfy your concerns relative to a fence, and he said yes. I said were you aware that each one of these areas was fenced and he said no. Another item which we addressed was he said he was concerned about the toxic plants, possibly like oleander, a sheep eating an oleander. I mentioned to him that this was also our concern...we're very sensitive about this...that's why we put into the PCD text exclusions and a very specific plant list. Only native vegetation is allowed. He pointed out that some of the vegetation that we have is actually native to Scottsdale, Arizona. If there's anything in there from Arizona that you don't want in there, we're happy to take it out. The point being...and if there's anything toxic to sheep...at this time...that plant list was prepared by our biologist in cooperation with our landscape architect to try to do that very thing, we believe it does it. And I said was this acceptable if there aren't any toxic plants planted there, and he said yes that would be acceptable mitigation. Item number three, we talked about the presence of dogs potentially scaring away sheep or creating, you know, a problem, and we anticipated this also in our meetings with Fish and Game and the Department five years ago, and we addressed this in the PCD text that there will not be free-range dogs allowed on the property, they will only be either enclosed in a house or on a side yard or on leashes. There'll be no...it's a specific condition within the PCD. We said would that be adequate and he said yes. He said that the project could be scaled back. I went over the history with him briefly that there was a certified EIR for 209 units, that we scaled the project back to 185 units, and that subsequently we had scaled the project back to 151 units so that there was a significant...I showed him the original project boundaries which had, in fact, been scaled back...and he was not aware of those facts. Next, he said he was concerned about... there are some tanks or reservoirs that were required for the project just outside of the development area but still on our property. I said we would be willing to move those if that was a concern. Originally the City had placed those...recommended they be placed there because of view shed issues. They were also placed there because of CVWD issues. So we're open to moving those if it's a concern with the City. Lastly, it was discussed, he said, well, if...would you be opposed to working with us on additional mitigation in terms of trying to find some offsite land that could be purchased and added to the habitat, and I said, well how much land, and he said well we'd have to determine that, and he said well I wrote in my letter about a 400 meter buffer, and I mentioned that we have a 410 acre buffer that we are giving, we discussed that issue, and he 6 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * said well, you know, I still think there should probably be, you know, some area that you should purchase in terms of other habitat. I agreed that we would explore that issue. I said I couldn't commit to the specific amount unless you tell me a specific area. I need to know, you know, is it 200 acres, 100, 40, 30, 10, I mean, we will work something out. So, I guess what I would say in summary...and I said did you realize that your letter had quite an effect on the City Council from where I can tell as well as the Planning people, and he said I was not aware that it had such a negative effect because I got various messages that indicated that, you know, it's over, basically. And, in fact, he said I really like your project when you really understand how little is being graded...he said that this is the kind of project, and he said this to me, that I would like to live in if I was down here because it isn't reproducing Hawaii, it's nothing like The Canyons at Bighorn, Mirada, or anything else. All of those projects grade the entire project. When he understood that we're going to, under the construction phase, we will fence every unit, and that no property outside of the building envelope of the building would be developed, and it would all be dedicated back into open space...in other words, between each house the yards get dedicated back into open space. You know, he thought that was great from the standpoint of preserving the flora and the fauna of the area. And so, anyway, he said I think that it's an exemplary project and to that end we discussed that basically it's feasible if we meet with Fish and Game and the Department to further discuss, you know, just what further mitigation in terms of offsite mitigation land, you know, that was the remaining issue, could be worked out. I guess in summary I would say that, you know, it's possible to work a solution and we just respectfully request a little bit of time to discuss with those agencies, the Fish and Game and the Federal Government, which we have to do anyway, they are conditions of our PCD text and our development agreement, that we have some further negotiations with them and come up with a feasible solution. So, if there are any questions at all, I'll sit down, and Paul will just speak with you for a moment. JMB No questions? TM Paul doesn't have any other questions, so we'd respectfully request a continuance. JMB Okay, any other discussion? RAS Well, comment, Madam Mayor. Mr. Miller knows that I don't believe in developing on the mountains on west side of Highway 74. And this project goes back, I guess, four or five years ago when I was on the Planning Commission and was opposed to the project for that very reason. That plus the fact that it will open up the ability to build additional homes adjacent to the property because the road will have to be put in. And from my standpoint,. I think we've gone long enough and we should vote on it tonight. JMB Councilman Kelly? RSK Well, it seems to me, without going into all the issues now of whether it should be the County or it should be the City or whether it's an opportunity for us maybe to control the development 7 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * versus the County having charge of this development, it seems to me there is a simple issue there, and that is, do we want to annex this area to the City? You know, if we don't care to work with the project, then to me the basic decision, ..you know, none of us likes hillside development. That's why we put the hillside ordinance in and made it very strict so that it would be controlled. That's what it was all about. To say that you just don't like something is not, I don't think, the way you determine whether you're going to have a project or not have a project. Some of us actually live on the hillside. Now, my feeling is that if we don't want the project, we don't like the project, that the simple answer is don't annex it to the City. Also, that's the safest thing for the City to do, and if we're...well, that's the bottom line. If we don't want to deal with it, we should not annex it. That should be the decision. We shouldn't be fooling around with all of this decisions about how we're going to do it or how we're not going to do it if we don't want to annex it in the first place. So that's the decision we need to make. IMB Councilman Crites? BAC I think that...I hear Councilman Kelly's comments and they're, I think, an appropriate set of comments to make a choice about. I think Mr. Miller's comments are square on target in terms of accuracy of sensitivity of landscaping and fencing and all those kinds of issues and I think are directly on target. I think it is mildly misleading to suggest in a letter to us that really what this is about is about a reduction in size when the reason you're here before us is to increase the number of units from what has been previously approved. There is an approved process for back around a hundred and some units, and you're here to try to get it up to 151 units, and that, oddly enough, is nowhere in this letter, and if a person didn't know that, there's certainly nothing in this letter that would ever hint that that's what this process is about. And I think, at least to me, what we're hearing is, yeah, a lot of these things can be mitigated, but should we be adding to density, and I suspect the answer to that is not going to be a positive one. IMB Is that it? BAC You know, I think the other comments are square on target in terms of the things they've done to make this project probably the best designed project of any development of this kind anywhere in this valley. RSK I guess I'm not clear on...are you saying that all these things are mitigated, like they're being done, that we should annex this area? Is that what you're saying? I don't quite follow you. BAC I was addressing the issue that's in this letter, which is about...what the developers are here for is to ask for a number of unit increase, whereas what the letter appears to note to Mr. Sorenson is that what they're actually doing is being in the process of decreasing, and that's not, that's just flat not true. And my comment is, given some of the issues I see from Fish and 8 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Game and Fish and Wildlife, increasing again the number of units in density does not appear to be a responsible reaction to that. RSK And therefore? BAC And therefore, the project as it was has already, I think, been given approval by this Council, and I'd ask the City Manager or City Attorney for that. JMB The 119 units? BAC Whatever number, I don't remember the exact number, it's been so long ago. RAD I don't remember the exact number. RSK But we haven't...have we given approval for annexation? PD I believe it's 105. JMB 105? — RAD The annexation issue is still open. BAC And the annexation issue is not ever resolved, is that correct? PD Yes, there has never been official initiation of the annexation process. RAS And it passed on a 3-2 vote. JMB The 105 units. PD If the property is not annexed, the approval has no effect. RSK What was your statement? PD If we don't annex the property, then our approval has no effect. JMB We're not being asked to... BAC Yes, that is... _ RSK I thought it would be the first issue. BAC Well, then, put a motion on the floor. 9 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * PD Well, we're required... RSK I would move that we choose not to annex that area. JMB Mr. Selzer? PS Thank you very much. I understand this is unusual. The letter you have before you was in response to the letters we received from the Department of Fish and Game and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Those were the issues they raised. Those were the specific issues they raised in their letter, and that was the intention of the letter. Those were the issues they wanted to talk about, were those specific issues. The open space, the plant palette, the various things, those were the issues that they asked us about and asked you about. So, while it's clear that our application, which has been on file for now over a year, for several years as a matter of fact, does ask...the only reason we're here is to have it increased from 105 to 151, which we have discussed with all of you but in particular Councilman Crites for many, many, many months. I don't think it's an accurate portrayal to say it's misleading because that letter, specifically, is in response to concerns of the Service and Department. So...I don't know what to say. Well, I think it's important that it be understood, and the basis for our reapplication is an application we filed with the County after we were told by the City only 105, and at that point the County told us and you that it was likely that they would approve this project for 151 units including the property that's in the City. BAC Mr. Selzer, I would also think that that's mildly misleading. A County staff member said that staff member would make a recommendation. That is significantly different than "the County would x or y". PS We did what the City asked us to do. BAC I know. I'm just... PS We did what the City asked us to do. We made a formal application. It went through the formal staff review process and the Planning Director of Riverside County...again, I think we're being faulted for doing what the City asked us to do, which is what we did, which is what we did, we did exactly what the City asked us to do. And, did it go to hearing? No, it didn't. Do I think we would have prevailed at the hearing? Yes, I do. Nonetheless, I think the bottom line is this. We would like our project...we would like to be within the City of Palm Desert. We've said that clearly. If we can't, then we can't. But I think that, as Councilman Kelly has pointed out, the question is who's going to control the development of the property, you or the County. Last time I checked, the Constitution said we have the right to develop the property, and so I think the bottom line is who controls the development. And that's, of course, that decision ultimately rests with you. Thank you very much. JMB I have a question for Dave. Voting whether to annex it in is not on the Agenda. 10 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * DJE That is a term within the development agreement. The development agreement as currently written and before you would require the City, within a specific period of time, to initiate the annexation and move it forward. RSK So the motion is proper. DJE Yes. JMB What was the motion? To annex... RSK The motion is to not annex. JMB Oh. RAS I'll second. JMB Any discussion? BAC I think the comments made by Paul are the center of the issue about who ends up controlling the development. RSK Well, my read as a Council is that they don't want to do it so, you know, why spend all our time and all the developer's time hassling with it if we really don't want to deal with it, you know. And my read is that we don't want to deal with it, and so, if we don't want to deal with it, then we should not annex it. It's as simple as that. JMB Okay, any other discussion? Please vote. SRG Has everyone voted? JMB No, I haven't because we're voting on whether to annex them or not, right? RSK To not annex them. If you vote yes, that means you're not going to annex. JMB Alright. RSK Yes means that you're not going to annex. JMB Right. SRG Motion carries by unanimous vote. 11 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * DJE I would assume by that the Council wishes not to take any action changing the text, which would be Ordinance 848 nor would you take any action on 849, merely have them removed from the Agenda. JMB And that leaves the 105 units that were approved originally. DJE Previously, yes. BAC Now, by voting for this, a person has the option of coming back for reconsideration or not. DJE At this meeting. Your rules require reconsideration to be done at the same meeting. BAC Okay. DJE You are correct otherwise, yes. You voted in favor, you can move for reconsideration. BAC At this meeting. DJE Yes. BAC Thank you. JMB Now, do we need another vote? DJE No. JMB Okay. Alright, then, the next item is New Business.... B. ORDINANCE NO. 849 - AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR A MAXIMUM 151 UNIT PROJECT KNOWN AS "THE CREST". (Continued from the meetings of December 11, 1997, and January 8, 1998.) See verbatim transcript for Ordinance No. 848 above. VII. NEW BUSINESS A. PRESENTATION BY IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT RELATIVE TO THE PROPOSED IMPERIAL/COACHELLA VALLEY ELECTRIC POWER JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY. Ms. Rosemary Gonzales, External Affairs Representative for Imperial Irrigation District, noted the letter in the Council packets from Mr. Lloyd W. Allen, President of the Board of Directors 12 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * for Imperial Irrigation District dated February 2, 1998, relative to the proposed Imperial/Coachella Valley Electric Power Joint Powers Authority and stated that she was available to answer any questions. She also invited the Council to attend the March loth meeting in La Quinta to give input relative to this proposed JPA. Councilman Kelly stated that the proposal was to have one representative from the Cove Communities Service Commission which is the cities of Palm Desert, Indian Wells, and Rancho Mirage. He expressed concern that there was a lot of area not yet developed in Palm Desert and its sphere of influence that would be served by Imperial Irrigation District. He also asked about the City of Indian Wells. Ms. Gonzales responded that there was a portion north of Interstate 10 that is served by Imperial Irrigation District and that there was a small residential portion of Indian Wells and a commercial area in the Rancho Mirage area served by Imperial Irrigation. She added that in comparison with the Cities of La Quinta, Coachella, and Indio, these were all small portions, and that is why it was designated as one representative for the three areas. Councilman Crites stated that he applauded Imperial Irrigation District's interest in bringing representation to the power side of the District to members of the Valley. He said he remembered at the earlier meetings that there were discussions of a number of options allowing the District to get there. He said in looking at this, perception -wise this had the feel of a discussion society rather than a decision making body. He also noted that the JPA is one year, which he could understand initially, but that he also noted that the extension renewal would only happen if each governmental unit said yes. He said he was reminded of the Articles of Confederation that were first configured after the end of the Revolutionary War, designed to create a weak Federal government, and he said this seemed to be perfectly in that mold. He said all that would need to happen would be to have one aggravated party who can hold up the threat of "we won't vote yes next year", and the JPA ceases to exist. He stated that he felt Section C2 of the recommendations in Mr. Allen's letter made this an enormously weak body in terms of the ability to take a decision that is not a consensus decision. He also noted that in looking at Section F relative to management selection and reporting and delegation, the power manager, who will apparently be the equivalent of a City Manager, does not report to this board. He said the power manager is hired by reports to the general manager and the board, and only at the general manager's discretion may the power manager even directly communicate with the board. He said without that, and only by that being allowed, was there free exchange of information without going through an intervening body. He said he felt it needed to have some beef to it if people are going to be asked to spend the time, energy, and commitment to make this work. Ms. Gonzales stated that the proposal was designed as a starting point for negotiation, and the letter stated that. She said the final JPA could resemble something quite different from what was in the letter. She encouraged the City of Palm Desert to voice its opinion about these points. 13 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Councilman Spiegel stated that it was his understanding there -would be a meeting on March loth in La Quinta. Ms. Gonzales stated that the, meeting would be held at 1:00 p.m. on March loth, and this would be one of the first items on the Agenda. Councilman Spiegel said he felt it was imperative that the City respond to the presentation with its thoughts and comments. Councilman Crites thanked Ms. Gonzales for her consistent willingness to appear at meetings both here and at CVAG. He said when there was the issue with the potential power company buying up the Valley, etc., Imperial Irrigation was ready and willing to come and make their comments known. With Council concurrence, the City Manager was directed to prepare a list of the Council's comments and concerns in written form to be presented at the March loth meeting of the Imperial Irrigation District Board of Directors, with a member of the Council to represent the City at that meeting. B. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE HARVESTING OF DATES FROM THE CIVIC CENTER DATE GROVE. Mr. Folkers reviewed the staff report, noting that when staff spoke with Efren Castro, President of Cal Sungold, the firm recommended for the harvesting of these dates in an amount not to exceed $25,000, a discussion was also held relative to the packaging and promotion of the dates in conjunction with the City's 25th birthday. Staff also contacted the person who does the harvesting of the dates at College of the Desert, and he was supposed to provide the City with a proposal; however, that proposal had not yet been received. Mr. Ortega noted that Mr. Castro was en route to this meeting, and he suggested that the Council hold this item until such time as he arrives. Councilman Kelly asked whether the $25,000 also included the packaging of the dates, and Mr. Folkers responded that this amount was strictly for the harvesting and that the packaging would be extra. With Council concurrence, this matter was continued until later in the meeting. (Note: Mr. Castro did not arrive at the meeting to make a presentation.) Councilman Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, delegate the decision on this matter to the staff, noting that the Council wants to have maintenance, harvesting, and packaging done, with staff to make the decision as to whether these three things should be done by one firm or if the work should be contracted out. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by unanimous vote. 14 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * C. REQUEST FOR CONSIDERATION OF OPPOSITION TO THE "COMrt i i i iON KILLER" INITIATIVE. Mr. Diaz noted the staff report in the packets as well as the pros and cons of this initiative as requested by the Council: He said staffs recommendation was that the Council adopt a resolution expressing opposition to this measure. Councilman Kelly stated that he felt this would have to be the worst thing that could ever happen to local government if it passed. He suggested that a press release be sent out indicating the Council's opposition and explaining why it took this position. Councilman Kelly moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 98-17 expressing opposition to the so-called "Government Cost Savings and Taxpayers Protection Amendment", an initiative measure on the June 1998 Statewide ballot. Motion was seconded by Crites and carried by unanimous vote. D. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF LINEUP OF ARTISTS FOR THE SUMMER CONCERT SERIFS. Mr. Diaz noted the staff report in the packets and stated that Mrs. Gilligan was available to answer any questions. Councilman Spiegel commended staff member Pat Scully for putting together an outstanding representation for the City's "Haute Nites, Cool Sounds" presentation in the park. Councilman Spiegel moved to: 1) Approve the lineup of artists for the summer concert series in the total amount of $31,100.00 as outlined in the staff report dated February 26, 1998; 2) authorize the Mayor to sign the following ardst contracts as presented: a) No C14050, New Frontier Band, in the amount of $1,000.00; b) No. C14060, Freeway Philharmonic, in the amount of $1,800; c) No. C14070, Swing Savant in the amount of $2,000.00; d) No. C14080, The Mike Costley Big Band, in the amount of $3,000.00; e) No. C14090, Unplugged The Band, in the amount of $1,500.00; f) No. C14100, Instant Replay, in the amount of $1,000.00; g) No..C1411Q, Acapulco Four, in the amount of $800.00; h) No. C14120, Alive & Pickin', in the amount of $1,000.00; I) No. C141.30, Riverside Symphony, in the amount of $11,000.00; j) No. C14140, Pyro Spectaculars, Inc., in the amount of $8,000.00. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by unanimous vote. 15 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * E. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR THE DEEP CANYON STORM DRAIN FROM WHITEWATER STORM CHANNEL TO ALESSANDRO DRIVE PHASE II (Contract No. C13550, Project No. 516-95). Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Award Contract No. C13550 to Cornish Construction Company Inc. of Bloomington, California for the construction of the Deep Canyon Storm Drain Phase II in the amount of $1,340,000, plus a ten percent contingency in the amount of $134,000 and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. Funds are available in project account 420-4379-433-4001 in the amount of $1,200,000; 2) appropriate construction funding in the amount of $274,000 from the Toro Peak/Deep Canyon Storm Drain account No. 232-4379-433-4001 to Project Account No. 420-4379-433-4001. Motion was seconded by Crites and carried by unanimous vote. Councilman Spiegel asked when this project would begin, and Mr. Folkers responded that it would be within a month and a half. He added that it was hoped to have it completed by late summer. He added that the work would be done on the east side of the street outside of the existing traffic. F. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS: 1. Update on Interchanges: a. I-10/Washington Street b. I-10/Monterey Avenue Mr. Folkers stated that everything was going along quite well. 2. Progress Report on Utility Deregulation Mr. Wohlmuth stated that staff had received from Henwood Energy, the consultant for looking at the open market, the RFP which had been prepared in draft form and should be going out within a week or so with bids coming back from electric service providers (ESP) no later than the middle of March. He added that at the second meeting in March, staff would report on the bids received from electric providers. He offered to answer any questions. Councilman Spiegel asked whether it would be staffs recommendation to citizens of Palm Desert that they do nothing until we report. Mr. Wohlmuth responded that citizens cannot choose an electric provider until March 31, which is an estimated date by the California Public Utilities Commission, and this date may be extended. He said the target date was March 31st, and citizens cannot do anything until that date for open competition, although they could possibly sign contracts. 16 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Councilman Spiegel stated that citizens were signing contracts right now. Mr. Wohlmuth responded that this was correct but that the people were not being served by that company. Councilman Spiegel stated that if people are signing contracts, they are going to be served as of April 1, 1998. He asked if staff's recommendation was that the citizens of Palm Desert be advised to do nothing until the City has a report for them. Mr. Wohlmuth responded that staffs recommendation was that citizens allow the City to get the bids so they can compare the City's bid with other bids that they may receive in the mail or be called about. However, he said staff is not taking a position to try and deter the open competitive market and is just trying to inform the citizens and businesses of the facts. He said staff would like citizens to join the City of Palm Desert's aggregated pool but had not told citizens not to sign contracts but had merely warned them. Councilman Crites stated that this was assuming that Palm Desert has an aggregated pool. Mr. Wohlmuth stated that this was assuming that the price comes in and the Council looks at that price and sees there is a reasonable savings for us to do anything. VIII. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FROM THE BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION DESERT CHAPTER FOR SUPPORT OF ITS POSITION REGARDING DISTRICT DEMANDS FOR PAYMENT OF MITIGATION FEES THAT EXCEED THE LIMIT IMPOSED BY THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. (Continued from the meeting of February 12, 1998.) Mayor Benson stated that this matter had been continued from February 12, 1998, in order for staff to obtain pros and cons at the request of Councilman Ferguson. Councilman Kelly asked why this would not fall under Proposition 218, and he asked if local school boards could change mitigation fees. Mr. Diaz responded that they can and have done so. Mayor Benson asked whether school districts can raise fees where others have to go to vote, and Mr. Erwin responded that this was correct. 17 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Councilman Crites asked whether the school district had been notified that the City was looking at this issue so that they could comment on the matter. Mr. Diaz responded that he did not believe this had been done. Councilman Crites stated that the Council had a letter from Ed Kibbey of the BIA asking for support of this issue, and that letter included comments on why they felt this issue was worthy of .the City's support. Councilman Spiegel asked whether the school district had been asked to send a similar letter, and Mr. Diaz responded that he did not believe this had been done. Mayor Benson stated that Councilman Ferguson had asked for pros and cons, nothing from the school district. Mr. Diaz stated that his recommendation was that the City not take a position on this particular issue. He said the BIA was the organization that sponsored the original legislation establishing this type of school impact fees so that there would be a uniformity throughout the State, and the BIA had obviously gotten more than they bargained for. He said that in terms of any kind of impact fees, he believed the City would not necessarily want to have the school district involved in fees established by the City, and this was a matter between the Building Industry Association and the boards of education throughout the State. He recommended that the City not take a position on this issue. Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the City Manager's recommendation that the City not take a position on this issue because this is a matter between the Building Industry Association and the Boards of Education for school districts throughout the State. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by unanimous vote. B. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FROM THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES FOR SUPPORT OF A PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO PRESERVE LOCAL VOTER CONTROL AND PROTECT LOCAL GOVERNMENT FROM FURTHER STATE TAKEAWAYS AND ADDITIONAL UNFUNDED MANDATES. (Continued from the meeting of February 12, 1998.) Mr. Diaz stated that staff had always felt strongly that there should not be unfunded State mandates, and that is what this amendment would prohibit. He noted that the pros and cons were included in the packets, and staff recommended that the Council support the League's position on the initiative. Councilman Crites stated that he still did not have a copy of the initiative. Councilman Kelly responded that this was still being worked on and that the League of California Cities had not yet finalized it. He stated that it was the number one work program for the State Board at this time. He said they were going to try to get it through the Legislature; if it passed through the Legislature, it would not have to go to a ballot initiative. 18 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion, wholeheartedly support the amendment and authorize the Mayor to send a letter. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by unanimous vote. C. STATUS REPORT ON NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CONTROL PROJECT (Continued from the Meeting of February 12,, 1998). Mr. Folkers stated that the action requested by the Council at its last meeting had been deferred because there were people who were not able to attend the meeting, and there were also those in the audience who were not able to discuss the situation. He said this was an opportunity for residents to present their concerns. Traffic Engineer Mark Greenwood gave a presentation with overheads showing the arrangement for closures of various streets in the Acacia Drive, Adonis Drive, Fairhaven Drive, and Fred Waring Drive area. Mr. Folkers noted that discussion at the last meeting was to move the barricade further north on Acacia, and residents had expressed concern with this move. He explained several options with regard to movement of barricades and placement of driveways. MR. ROD MURPHY, 71-764 Arboleda, spoke in favor of what the City was doing in the area and stated that there had been a tremendous reduction of traffic in the area. MS ELLEN DREYER, a resident of Adonis, stated that if the barricade was moved to the far side of Gloriana, there would still be a way to cut through the neighborhood, and this would increase traffic on her street. She asked that the Council seriously not consider doing this. She said she was surprised to learn that changes had been suggested to the street closures at such an early stage when residents had asked for, and the Council had agreed to, a 90-day trial period. She said she felt this was reasonable and that the Council might find at the end of it that the residents had changed their minds. She noted that there had been a lot of back and forth that she felt had increased a feeling of antagonism rather than problem solving. She asked that the Council continue with the 90-day trial period and evaluate it at the end of that time. She added that she had read some of the letters received by the City, and people had accused residents of trying to privatize the streets when they had only asked for traffic control on public streets. Mr. Folkers stated that in response to the comment about changing the street closure, staff s feeling was that this was a shift of a barricade a few hundred feet, not a major change in the entire philosophy. He said one of the issues that would have to be considered when the development goes in on the north side of Fred Waring west of Monterey was that the driveway will necessitate the City having to barricade further north so that those people do go out on Fred Waring; otherwise, they will be going to the north out of the residential area. 19 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Councilman Spiegel stated that his understanding was that eventually there will be a cut - through on Fred Waring anyway when that corner is redone. Mr. Folkers stated that design work was going to be done to improve that intersection, and hopefully there would be increased capacity. Councilman Spiegel stated he had been over in the neighborhood several times recently, and people are able to get around in there off of Monterey by going through the church parking lot as both gates are open. He said this could be done from the office buildings also. Mr. Folkers stated that normally the church keeps its gates closed. Upon question by Councilman Spiegel relative to the time period, Mr. Folkers responded that the 90-day trial period would end some time in April. MR. DAVID NISSEN, 72-875 Parkview Drive, corner of San Juan and Parkview, stated that he had noticed a change in the neighborhood in the last few years that he has owned the property, and it had changed from and older people to younger people owning homes. He said traffic had become a problem until the barricades were put in. He said it was an inconvenience for him to get to Trader Joe's and the shopping areas but that it was well worth that inconvenience. He noted that in watching cars pass through the area on one Saturday, only one out of five stopped at the stop sign at San Juan and Parkview. MS. SHARON HOWARD, 43-866 Adonis, asked that the Council leave the barricades as they currently are for the remainder of the 90-day trial period. She said residents had asked for a specific solution to this problem, and the solution was based upon the traffic study commissioned by the City. She said there were other alternatives, but the neighbors picked this solution and thought this would be the most effective. She stated she believed in 1987 when the zoning was changed from single-family and the apartments were built, part of the process was to ask that traffic be prevented from going through the neighborhood. This was to be accomplished by posting signs in the office complex; the signs were posted, but they did not work. She said she believed the apartment driveway that exited onto Acacia was supposed to have been an emergency exit only, although she did not have any documentation to that effect. She said the tenants of the apartments exiting onto Acacia was not a problem for the neighborhood and that residents had never complained about it, but she felt there was a solution where they can have their exit on Acacia and the street can still be closed to prevent cut through traffic from Parkview to Fred Waring. She asked that the Council not move the barricade on Acacia any further north because doing so would open up a route through the neighborhood. MR. REX McDANIEL, 72-915 Gloriana, stated he was the owner of the property with the two driveways, and he objected to having his property tied into a traffic control barrier of any kind. 20 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * MS. DIANA LAMAR, 43-827 Acacia Drive, said she noticed the people who were most interested in closing and protecting their children still had not done anything with their property in the approximately four months that this had been going on. She said she was very much opposed to the closures and felt there were other measures that could be considered such as speed limits, a four-way stop at Arboleda and Acacia, etc. She said she was not personally given a notice of this meeting and got wind of the meeting because she was involved with what was going on and had called the City. She said many of the people who were against the closures were not at this meeting for one reason or another, but they had not received notices of the meeting. She noted that she had trouble getting the February 11, 1998, traffic report although she was given the one -day figure by telephone. She said that while she was one of the people who wanted the streets closed because of the proposed fitness center, in retrospect these measures had totally inconvenienced her, and she was not able to get to any of the shopping areas to the west of the neighborhood. She noted that she had been served with notices that her service people, who own their own businesses, are finding it very inconvenient to get around the neighborhood. She asked that the barricades be taken down, although this could wait until after the 90-day trial period, and that consideration be given to alternative measures such as stop signs. MR. MIKE HOMME, 46-300 Desert Lily, stated that while he did not live in the neighborhood, he owned the property on the corner of Acacia and Monterey. He noted he was in the process of obtaining a building permit to begin construction on that property, and it was important that the barricade be to the north because it was the only entrance to the property. MRS. JEANNIE ALBALADEJO, 72-775 San Juan, stated that she had circulated a petition based on the study that was commissioned by the City Council, and she received approximately 70% concurrence. She said this was not a new problem to the neighborhood and that she believed stop signs were a good thing, but taking into consideration the growth in the last five years and the location of the neighborhood, the barricades were the measure chosen. She asked that the Council consider keeping these barricades at least for the 90-day trial period. With no further testimony, Mr. Folkers stated that staff would proceed to keep the barricades where they are currently located until the end of the 90-day trial period and will then report to the Council relative to these road closures. He added that staff would also work with the developer as the project comes on line and would be back to the Council at the end of the 90 days with a report. Councilman Crites stated that he had a related issue that impacted this issue. He said there were problems on weekends both on Monterey and Fred Waring and in the neighborhoods with parking and traffic flow from the College of the Desert Street Fair. He asked staff to look at whether the people who run the Street Fair are doing what they said they would do in terms of hiring police officers to direct . traffic and what they are doing about keeping overflow parking out of neighborhoods like this one. He said he felt serious discussions needed to be 21 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * held with representatives of the College of the Desert before this becomes even more of an uncontrolled problem. Councilman Spiegel stated that Councilman Crites' comments were well taken. He noted that whenever a proposed shopping center comes to the Council for review, one issue that is looked at is the number of parking spaces per square foot of retail space. He said that College of the Desert is not in the City of Palm Desert, and he asked if there were any restrictions on the College in that regard. Mr. Diaz responded that the College was required to have a conditional use permit (CUP). He said in terms of the parking, the College could have some restrictions placed upon it with a CUP. Councilman Spiegel stated that one of the problems as he saw it was that portions of the parking lot are now being used to sell merchandise instead of being used for parking, particularly on the east side of the McCallum Theatre where there is a gravel lot. Mr. Diaz stated that staff would speak with representatives of the College about the entire parking issue and said they had been very cooperative in the past. D. UPDATE ON SITE RELOCATION OF SKATEBOARD FACILITY (Continued from the Meeting of February 12, 1998). Mr. Drell reviewed the staff report, noting that the Parks and Recreation Commission had voted to reaffirm its recommendation that the first choice in location of these facilities was between the recharging station and the drive entry to the YMCA. He said the noise issue was acknowledged, and this was something that the designer will attempt to address with the design of the facility. Mr. Van Tanner, Chair of the Parks & Recreation Commission, stated he was available to answer any questions. He said the Commission had concluded over a nine to ten month period that this would be the best location for a skate park/roller hockey rink. He added that relocating the dog park cost $100,000 and was done to facilitate this new facility. He asked that the Council approve the location and not delay construction of the facility any longer. He added that other members of the Commission were available to answer questions. Councilman Crites stated that he had visited a roller hockey facility and was surprised at the noise level. He said he had a lot of trouble thinking of this as being compatible with the adjacent quiet use of the park and that he would not personally choose to be near such a facility. Mr. Tanner stated that he said the Commission felt this was a good choice in this area because there is a lot of activity with basketball, soccer, picnics, birthday parties with music, etc., and 22 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * anything in the park will generate noise. He said phase one of the project would answer those questions of noise. He said the Commission wanted to keep the park pretty, open to use, and quiet for everyone's enjoyment, but this was something that the Commission felt was necessary for Palm Desert. If it is not right, the phase one study will tell that. He said what the Commission did not want to happen was for.this to be placed on the back burner. He added that he had expressed to Councilman Spiegel and went on record at the Commission meeting that he was embarrassed at finding out at a Family YMCA Board meeting that there was any concern or conversation about not going ahead with this. He said this happened one week after the last Parks & Recreation Commission meeting, and the Commission had made this recommendation. Mr. Hundt at the YMCA pulled him aside and said that one of his staff had been speaking with people at the City of Palm Desert, that there was concern, and that the facility may go to a new location. He said the Commission was a very cohesive group and was making recommendations to the City that it feels are necessary. He added that it was a unanimous decision to go ahead with this facility at this location. Councilman Crites expressed concern that this area was the last unused significant open area in the park. He asked Mr. Tanner if, from his perspective, he felt this was worthy of that use, and Mr. Tanner agreed. Councilman Spiegel stated that there was a major area west of the Date Grove. Councilman Crites stated that this area would never be used for anything in an active sense because of the adjacent nature to homes. Mayor Benson disagreed with Councilman Crites relative to the issue of quiet and said there were other places in the park that are quiet. She said she felt the park was meant for recreation and meant to be used by the community. She said the City had fought long and hard to get skateboarders off the streets, and the only way to do that was to give them a place to go. She said the City had provided for the tennis players in the park and had provided picnic pavilions as well. She added that she felt this was the ideal location to make the whole area cohesive and show that the park is for the entire community, young and old. Councilman Spiegel agreed with Mayor Benson and stated that he was in favor of the project. He said he felt staff should be directed to make sure that whatever proposal comes back to the Council, it is as quiet as possible, taking into account concerns expressed by Councilman Crites. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the location of the skateboard facility as proposed by staff. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by unanimous vote. 23 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * E. REQUEST FOR AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR PHASE ONE (MASTER PLAN AND COST ESTIMATE) OF THE PALM DESERT SKATE PARK/ROLLER HOCKEY RINK (CONTRACT NO. C14030). Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, award Contract No. C 14030 to Purkiss Rose/rsi for the completion of Phase One of the Palm Desert Skate Park/Roller Hockey Rink in the amount of $24,395.00 and authorize the Mayor to execute the subject agreement. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by unanimous vote. IX. OLD BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO VARIOUS CITY COMMITTEES AND COMMISSIONS. Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion, appoint Ms. Cindy Finerty to the Planning Commission to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Jim Ferguson. Motion was seconded by Crites and carried by a 3-1 vote, with Mayor Benson voting NO. Mrs. Gilligan noted that staff had discovered that the Civic Arts Committee can have a total membership of 15. She said the Council was debating whether Ms. Paula Kroonen could stay on Civic Arts Committee or go onto the Library Committee; however, her schedule did not allow her to go onto the Library Committee. She said in talking to Councilman Crites and Mayor Benson, the Council might wish to consider reappointing her to the Civic Arts Committee. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, reappoint Ms. Paula Kroonen to the Civic Arts Committee. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by unanimous vote. X. REPORTS AND REMARKS A. CITY MANAGER 1. Sonny Bono Memorial Salton Sea Restoration Act Councilman Crites moved to add this item to the Agenda. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by unanimous vote. Mr. Diaz noted that he had received a letter the previous day from the City of Indian Welts relative to adoption of a resolution in support of a House bill sponsored by Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. He said this bill was the "Sonny Bono Memorial Salton Sea Restoration Act". 24 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Councilman Crites moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. 98-18 endorsing the Sonny Bono Memorial Salton Sea Restoration Act. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by unanimous vote. 2. Old Palm Desert Water .and _Services District Well and Reservoir Site Demolition Mr. Wohlmuth asked that the Council add this item to the Agenda for discussion and action. Councilman Crites moved to add this item to the Agenda. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by unanimous vote. Mr. Wohlmuth reviewed the report, noting that staff had been working with the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) on the demolition of three Palm Desert Water & Services District sites within the City of Palm Desert that were conveyed to the City and then conveyed to the CVWD. He noted that staff had located a contractor, TNT Demolition, that wanted to do this work immediately, thus the need for this matter to be considered at this time. He said the firm would demolish, remove, and dispose/recycle all materials at the three sites at no cost; however, there was a cost for asbestos removal and disposal in the amount of $1,200. He said the City wanted to take advantage of this opportunity and that it was a large cost savings because $29,000 had been budgeted for this work. He noted that the report also included a memorandum of understanding between the City and the CVWD. Mr. Erwin asked that the memorandum of understanding be approved in principle subject to his review. Councilman Crites moved to, by Minute Motion, authorize the Mayor to enter into a memorandum of understanding (Contract No. C14170) between the City of Palm Desert and the Coachella Valley Water District for the demolition of the three well/reservoir sites and construction of block walls in exchange for the rights -of -way conveyed to the City of Palm Desert, subject to review by the City Attorney. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by unanimous vote. 3. Clarification of the Fuel Cell and Changeover of Programs and Facilities to Sunline Mr. Diaz stated that Mr. Cromwell of Sunline had requested communication from the City so that he can present it to his board. He said this was for information only and that no Council action was necessary unless the Council wished staff not to send a letter. He asked Risk Manager Ken Weller to explain this matter to the Council. Mr. Weller stated that the letter was requested by Richard Cromwell to take to the Sunline Board to show that Palm Desert is taking a formal process of moving its portion of the hydrogen fuel project to Sunline. 25 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * B. CITY ATTORNEY 1) Report and Action on Items from Closed Session Made at This Meeting. 2) Request for Closed Session Mr. Erwin asked that the Council, at an appropriate time, adjourn to Closed Session for discussion of items listed on the City Council Agenda and the Addendum. He asked that another item be added to Closed Session, an item that had arisen since the Agenda was posted: Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Section 54956.8: 1) Property: Lease Property - Parkview Professional Office Buildings, 73-710-720 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 Negotiating Parties: Agency: City of Palm Desert/Paul S. Gibson, Finance Director Property Owner: City of Palm Desert Other Parties: Regional Water Quality Control Board Under Negotiation: _x_ Price Terms of Payment Councilman Crites moved to add this item to the Closed Session. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by unanimous vote. Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Section 54956.8: 1) Property: Lease Property - Parkview Professional Office Buildings, 73-710-720 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 Negotiating Parties: Agency: City of Palm Desert/Paul S. Gibson, Finance Director Property Owner: City of Palm Desert Other Parties: Howard Spielberger Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment 2) Property: Lease Property - Parkview Professional Office Buildings, 73-710-720 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260 Negotiating Parties: Agency: City of Palm Desert/Paul S. Gibson, Finance Director Property Owner: City of Palm Desert Other Parties: Chuck McBride Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment 26 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 3) Property: Parcel 628-03-004-5, South half of the northeast quarter of the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 30, Township 5 South, Range 6E, SBB&M Negotiating Parties: Agency: City of Palm Desert/Ramon A. Diaz, City Manager Property Owner: County of Riverside Under Negotiation: Price 2_ Terms of Payment Conference with Legal Counsel regarding existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a): City of Palm Desert v. REFCO Capital Corporation, et al, United States District Court, Central District, Case No. CV92-7632 City of Palm Desert v. Western Waste, Riverside County Superior Court, Case No. 090744 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: 3_ C. CITY CLERK Mrs. Gilligan reported that the Discovery Channel had completed its filming, and the Economic Development video should be ready within 30-45 days. She added that the airing of "The Making of a Golf Course" should occur in June. D. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL o City Council Requests for Action: 1. Consideration of Community Garden (Councilman Robert A. Spiegel). Councilman Spiegel distributed copies of a map showing seven parcels owned by the City of Palm Desert along the west side of San Pablo Avenue between Royal Palm Drive and Fred Waring Drive. He said these parcels were not developed. He said he understood that at one time the City offered to give these parcels to the adjacent property owners who respectfully declined the offer. He suggested turning these parcels into a community vegetable garden, not all at the same time, perhaps taking two of them after first asking the City Clerk to write to the people in Palma Village and see if they are interested in this. He said this 27 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * would give them an opportunity to grow vegetables and take care of something he knew the Council had been talking about for years. Councilman Crites suggested that Steve Merritt also be contacted. Mrs. Gilligan suggested having the Environmental Conservation Manager also involved in this effort, and Council concurred. 2. Councilman Crites stated that he had a letter from Mr. Leon Bennett, President of the Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce, relative to the Coast Federal Building which was now "on the market". He said Mr. Bennett suggested that the City consider this as a possible Visitor Information Center location. He said the Council had had discussions about leaving it where it is or moving it down to Portola, etc. He noted that this building was at the corner of El Paseo and Highway 111 across from a vacant piece of land. He said that as different sites are looked at, he would like for Mr. Bennett's suggestion to also be considered as an alternate site. He said if there was no objection, he would forward this letter to the City Clerk. Council concurred. o City Council Committee Reports: 1. Councilman Crites welcomed Ms. Judy Mandel, a Palm Desert citizen who had been active in a lot of local civic causes and said he would just like for the Council to recognize her as being in attendance at this meeting. XI. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS None XII. PUBLIC HEARINGS None XIII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Councilman Crites stated that he would like to recognize and welcome Mrs. Kopp who was in the audience. 28 MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 26, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * XIV. ADJOURNMENT With Council concurrence, Mayor Benson adjourned the meeting at 6:00 p.m. for Closed Session. She reconvened the meeting at 6:40 p.m. and immediately adjourned to 2:00 p.m. on Monday, March 9, 1998, for discussion of the Desert Willow Golf Course Budget. ATTEST: SHEILA R. GILL GAN, CpCLERK CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA J M. BENSON, MAYOR 29