Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-07-09MINUTES — REGULAR PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING THURSDAY, JULY 9, 1998 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Benson convened the meeting at 4:06 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Member Jim Ferguson Member Richard S. Kelly Vice Chairman Robert A. Spiegel Chairman Jean M. Benson Excused Absence: Member Buford A. Crites 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 John M. Wohlmuth, ACM/Director of Administrative Services Pat Conlon, Director of Building & Safety Phil Drell, Director of Community Development Paul S. Gibson, Director of Finance/City Treasurer Richard J. Folkers, ACM/Director of Public Works Rudy Acosta, RDA Project Manager Dennis Coleman, Redevelopment Agency Analyst Teresa LaRocca, Housing Programs Coordinator David Yrigoyen, Redevelopment Agency Manager Joseph S. Gaugush, Engineering Manager Rachelle D. Klassen, Deputy City Clerk III. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency of June 25, 1998. Rec: Approve as presented. MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING JULY 9, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * B. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE_AGENCY TREASURY - Warrant Nos. 61RDA, 62RDA, 59DR, 61DR, 62DR, and 61HA. Rec: Approve as presented. C. PORTFOLIO MASTER SUMMARY for the Period Ending May 31, 1998. Rec: Receive and file. D. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of Change Order No. 1 to Contract No. R1069) with Community Dynamics. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve Change Order No. 1 to Contract No. R10690 in the amount of $16,800.00 and authorize the appropriation of Unobligated Revenues from the Special Revenue Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund. Upon a motion by Spiegel, second by Kelly, the Consent Calendar was approved as presented on a 4-0-1 vote with Member Crites ABSENT. IV. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER None V. RESOLUTIONS None VI. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND REAL ESTATE ANALYSIS COMPANY (REASCO). Vice Chairman Spiegel asked if REASCO had any other employees besides Mr. Wolk. Mr. Coleman replied negatively. Chairman Benson asked if $75,000.00 for a 12-month contract meant up to $75,000.00 and per project, not a retainer. Mr. Coleman responded that the retainer was less than that, a little over $41,000.00. He said it was $3,467.00 per month for retainer, then there was extra work as directed, not a $75,000.00 retainer. Therefore, he said staff was requesting $3,467.00 per month in retainer and the ability to use his services beyond the amount of the retainer not to exceed $75,000.00 for the year. 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING JULY 9, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Vice Chairman Spiegel asked how much was spent this year. Mr. Coleman said approximately $57,000.00 with $66,000.00 the average in previous years. He added that anything unspent over the retainer, of course, would not be utilized. Member Ferguson noted that the staff report stated that Mr. Wolk would work primarily on the Request for Proposals for Desert Willow hotel sites, which would be received next week, and analyzing the Agency's 725 housing units. He asked what kind of analysis was necessary on the housing units. Mr. Coleman stated that from time to time, Mr. Wolk's analysis was utilized by Ms. LaRocca for reviewing the property management contract with RPM, just as was previously done with the Housing Authority. In addition, he said prior to the acquisition of the housing units consultation with REASCO occurred in order to project costs of their operation. He added that the services would also include involvement with ongoing projects such as the Cal State project and Town Center Parking project. He stated that in the past, these services had been applied to any prospective real estate transaction where development was involved. Member Ferguson stated his concern was the same as the Chairman's-- why the Agency would obligate itself to a 12-month contract with a monthly retainer totaling $41,000.00 as opposed to using the service on a project basis. Mr. Coleman said staff had received a per project basis proposal from Mr. Wolk as an alternative; but Mr. Wolk requested a retainer to guarantee hours towards the Agency's projects. He said that if some sort of retainer was not approved, then the service would not be available on a guaranteed basis— the Agency's requests would follow those of an entity with a retainer. He reported that in the past three fiscal years, REASCO had been utilized for approximately 66 hours per month, which would exceed the retainer, hence the recommendation for approval of same. He said, if directed, staff could renegotiate with Mr. Wolk, but added that the alternative proposal included less hours. He said that instead of ten guaranteed hours, there would be eight, which reduced the retainer but Mr. Wolk asked, in turn, to increase his rates from current $80.00 to approximately $90.00+, well within the going rate charged by principals of real estate analysis firms. He stated that when informal Requests for Proposals were obtained some time ago, rates averaged $155.00 per hour for most of the major firms. Vice Chairman Spiegel asked if Mr. Wolk worked with any other cities. Mr. Coleman stated he did not know the answer. Chairman Benson said that in the past when contractors were put on retainer and a scope of service was requested, there was a vast difference between the service actually provided and amount paid. She added it was often hard to track performance against all the hours which were billed; therefore, she would rather pay as the service was provided, even if it amounted to more than the retainer would have been, at least she knew what she was getting. 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING JULY 9, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mr. Ortega said staff had anticipated this question so an hourly rate was requested. He said that based upon the projected amount of service to be provided, it would probably amount to more, but was sure that if the consultant were asked to work on this basis, he would agree. Member Ferguson concurred with the Chairman's comments in favor of paying_for the service as it was needed, being scrupulous about how often the service was utilized. He asked whether it was necessary to go outside for this service when it could be something the in-house accountants could provide or perhaps our existing contractors, such as MuniFinancial, could also provide. Chairman Benson stated to her, this was just like a "gravy train." Mr. Coleman stated that Mr. Wolk's alternative proposal was for eight hours per week versus the ten and to reduce the retainer by those hours; however, he had asked for an increase in his hourly rate to $90.00 per hour. Vice Chairman Spiegel suggested offering $80.00 per hour with no retainer. Mr. Coleman stated if this was the direction to staff, they would do so and then see if it was accepted. Mr. Ortega stated he would prefer to return to the Agency Board with a proposal from REASCO showing both what the cost would be on an as -needed basis and on an hourly rate. Member Ferguson asked what would be done in the interim since the next Agency Board meeting was not until August 27. Mr. Ortega suggested authorizing one or two months on the proposal and request a new proposal for hourly on an as -needed basis. He added that the consultant would most likely say that on an hourly basis, the Agency would not receive priority. Member Ferguson moved to, by Minute Motion, extend only the base retainer on the agreement (Contract No R14670)with Real Estate Analysis Company, nothing more, for the next two months and direct staff to return to the Agency Board with a proposal on a pay-as-you-go basis. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by a 4-0-1 vote with Member Crites ABSENT. B. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION MAINTENANCE EXPENSES AT DESERT WILLOW MOUNTAIN VIEW COURSE. Mr. Ortega stated Mr. Yrigoyen was available to answer any questions. He said this was the Agency's obligation for part of preparing the project for its transfer to the City. Vice Chairman Spiegel asked how much the North Course was. 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING JULY 9, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Mr. Yrigoyen answered that the North Course was quite a bit more. He said it was the combination of the $1.2 million that was initially allocated; however, of that amount, Kemper had been initially retained and provided for the start up of the Clubhouse and all the other facilities. He said this was essentially a budget from Kemper which outlined the labor and the expenses for fertilizer, etc. Vice Chairman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, approve the construction maintenance costs for the Mountain View Course at Desert Willow Golf Resort in the amount of $294,887.00 and appropriate said amount from the Desert Willow budget fund. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 3-1-1 vote with Chairman Benson voting NO and Member Crites ABSENT. C. CONSIDERATION OF REQUEST FROM DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR INSTALLMENT PAYMENTS OF TAX INCREMENT PASS THROUGH FUNDS. Mr. Ortega noted the report in the packets. He said staff was presenting a request for payment and its recommendation for same. Vice Chairman Spiegel noted there was a project list submitted in the request, near the last page, and some months ago some Council members visited their "Taj Mahal", and they reviewed with Council their plans to do certain projects at their schools. He recalled that there were holes in the floor of the gymnasium at Palm Desert High School, and this was one of the things they planned to replace; however, he noted it was not listed in this report and wondered where this list had come from. He questioned whether this list related to the things they said they were going to do when they previously reviewed their plans with Council. Mr. Ortega stated the report reflected a mixture of projects, some of which had already been completed and for which the Agency had already paid. He said that when looking at the summary of the Agency's obligations, they required submittal of -projects to the Agency which were either within the community or within the Project Area, and the agreements read a little differently depending upon which applied. He said that these were essentially projects located in Palm Desert. He said previously, for example when the football field and the swimming complex at the high school were done, the District paid the contractor and requested reimbursement from the Agency— they were project specific. He said now they were submitting a list of projects they had already done or intended to do in Palm Desert and requesting payment for same. He suggested the Agency could stipulate a request for a specific project on which the District was seeking reimbursement or would use the money. He said in any case, staff recommended that until it did an accounting at the end of the year when it knew what all the monies had been, the auditor verified, then it made a distribution and the money was given. Member Kelly commented that when reviewing the expenditures and the list before the Agency today, the whole thing was kind of a "fool your friends" effort. He said it did not make any sense, they would do what they felt like anyway. He said sometimes he felt as though the money may as well be given to them and forgotten since it did not seem that anything special was gained. He 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING JULY 9, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * said this had been the whole intention-- when there were specific things to be done-- and in reading the list, it outlined fixing the plumbing. Vice Chairman Spiegel responded that they provided a list of things which needed to be done (like the basketball floor), it was not generated by the City but by the School District, and he would like to know where they stood on the previous list. He said he agreed with Member Kelly that it was ridiculous, and with Mr. Ortega to wait until the end of the year. He said in the meantime, he would like to know the status of the previously identified items. Member Ferguson noted for the District's 1998/99 fiscal year, it proposed spending $319,000.00 on five facilities, which was barely enough to do routine maintenance, and he asked how much was in the trust fund for Desert Sands or was projected in 1998/99 fiscal year based upon their pass through. Mr. Coleman replied that in previous years, the average had been approximately $504,000.00 from which $157,000-169,000.00 for debt service payments was reserved, and the balance was approximately $350,000.00. Member Ferguson asked if there was a balance currently in the trust fund account or if it was routinely disbursed each year. Mr. Coleman said the last time they requested a payment, they were given everything for last fiscal year less the anticipated debt service payments; therefore, very little probably remained. Member Ferguson asked for the reason staff recommended not making installments but a one-time payment at the end of the year. Mr. Ortega stated it was based upon the current agreements. Vice Chairman Spiegel stated the District wanted to change the agreement, it wanted its money up front. Member Ferguson moved to, by Minute Motion, deny the request for installment payments and pay the Desert Sands Unified School District ("District") their pass through funds on an annual basis and direct staff to obtain status of items on its priority list. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by a 4-0-1 vote with Member Crites ABSENT. D. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 1998/99 WORK PLAN. Mr. Ortega stated he had submitted a reorganized work plan containing the Agency's plans and table of organization with the recommendation for approval. 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING JULY 9, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Vice Chairman Spiegel moved to continue the item to the 7:00 p.m. portion of the meeting or other such appropriate time thereafter. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried by a 4-0-1 vote with Member Crites ABSENT. VII. CONTINUED BUSINESS None VIII. OLD BUSINESS None IX. REPORTS, REMARKS, AND AGENCY BOARD ITEMS REQUIRING ACTION A. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Mr. Ortega noted the items for Closed Session consideration. B. AGENCY COUNSEL Request for Closed Session: Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8: 1) Property: Land located in Section 4 - Desert Willow Negotiating Parties: Agency: Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency/Carlos L. Ortega, Executive Director Property Owner: Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency Under Negotiation: . Price . Terms of Payment 2) Property: Northeast corner of Frank Sinatra Drive and Cook Street Negotiating Parties: Agency: Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency/Carlos L. Ortega, Executive Director Property Owner: Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency Under Negotiation: Price . Terms of Payment 3) Property: 43-871 Buena Circle Negotiating Parties: Boyd L. Sharp, Executive Director - Habitat for Humanity Agency: Carlos L. Ortega/Teresa LaRocca Property Owner: Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency Under Negotiation: . Price . Terms of Payment 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING JULY 9, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 4) Property: 42-662 Rebecca Road Negotiating Parties: Agency: Teresa LaRocca, Housing Programs Coordinator Property Owner: Joseph and Stephanie Gurskis Under Negotiation: . Price . Terms of Payment 5) Property: 42-740 Rebecca Road Negotiating Parties: Agency: Teresa LaRocca, Housing Programs Coordinator Property Owner: Joseph and Stephanie Gurskis Under Negotiation: Price Terms of Payment 6) Property: 43-155 Portola Avenue Negotiating Parties: Agency: Carlos Ortega and Teresa LaRocca Property Owner: Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency Under Negotiation: . Price Terms of Payment 7) Property: Southeast Corner Highway 111 and El Paseo Negotiating Parties: Agency: Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency/Carlos L. Ortega, Executive Director Property Owner: ACD2 Under Negotiation: . Price . Terms of Payment Conference with Legal Counsel regarding existing litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a): a) City of Palm Desert v. REFCO Capital Corporation, et al., United States District Court, Central District, Case No. CV92-7632 b) City of Orange, et al. v. Alabama Treasury Advisory Program, et al., Los Angeles Superior court Case No. BC106461 NOTE: THE FOLLOWING ITEM WAS LISTED ON AN AGENDA ADDENDUM POSTED 72 HOURS PRIOR TO THIS MEETING. Public Employment pursuant to Government Code Section 54957: Titles of Positions: City Manager City Clerk Redevelopment Agency Executive Director 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING JULY 9, 1998 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * C. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE AGENCY None X. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS None XI. PUBLIC HEARINGS None XII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None XIII. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion by Spiegel, second by Benson, Chairman Benson adjourned the Agency Board Meeting to Closed Session at 5:46 p.m. She reconvened the meeting at 7:02 p.m., and on a motion by Spiegel, second by Ferguson, and a 4-0-1 vote with Member Crites ABSENT, adjourned to Closed Session at 7:49 p.m. Chairman Benson reconvened the meeting at 9:45 p.m. and immediately adjourned with no action announced from Closed Session. ATTEST: EILA R. GILL'f(N, SEC PALM DESERT REDEVEL ARY TO THE ENT AGENCY iff/f, de/K-avrt JEAI1 M. BENSON, CHAIRMAN 9