HomeMy WebLinkAboutInformattional Item - Update on New Sheriff's Facility on Gerald Ford, S "_')
WWI -
CITY OF PALM DESERT
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Carlos Ortega, City Manager
Date: May 19, 2005
Subject: Update on Proposed New Sheriff's Facility
Over the last few years, the Cove Communities Services Commission has explored the
proposed development of a new Riverside County Sheriffs Department Palm Desert
Station. On June 19, 2002, the Cove Commission endorsed a proposal to have
Highland Partnership, Inc. conduct an analysis on the future facility needs for the
current Palm Desert Police Station. The initial analysis resulted in a finding that the
current Sheriff/Contract City Police personnel have outgrown the existing facility. This
analysis determined that although the present facility was approximately 26,000 square
feet, the size needed to accommodate the current staff (based on a spatial analysis)
was approximately 43,000 square feet. Furthermore, the analysis projected that with
long-term personnel growth out to the year 2035, the minimum size facility needed
would be approximately 75,890 square feet and encompass approximately nine acres.
Based on the high projected cost to build a facility capable of supporting the City's
future contract police services needs, the Cove Technical Advisory Committee JAC)
suggested conducting an additional analysis to study the benefits of completing the
project in phases. Such action would distribute the total project cost over a determined
period. This phasing analysis breaks the project down into two potential Phase One
scenarios, a Maximum Phase One and a Minimum Phase One project. At the time of
the original analysis, the costs for the Maximum and Minimum phases were
approximately $18,000,0000 and $13,000,000 respectively. Since this time,
construction rates have significantly risen and the project's costs have most likely
increased thirty-five percent (35%).
Under the Minimum Phase One Scenario, approximately 24,127 square feet of the
54,117 of the main Police Headquarters Space (or approximately 45% of the proposed
main building) would be constructed. In the Maximum Phase One scenario,
approximately 43,565 square feet of the 54,117 square feet of the main Police
Headquarters Space (or approximately 80% of the proposed main building) would be
built.
Update on Proposed New Sheriff's Facility
May 26, 2005
Page 2 of 2
The Joint Powers Authority of the Riverside County Palm Desert Financing Authority
(RCPDFA) can fund either the minimum or maximum project scenarios. The RCPDFA
can issue bonds utilizing Riverside County property tax pass through funds to finance
the debt service, if the County Board of Supervisors approves this funding request. The
soon to be completed Coachella Valley Animal Campus was funded under a similar
scenario. The County of Riverside would own the facility and would apply a facility's
charge for its use via the Sheriffs services contract. Based on either a maximum or
minimum phase project, the approximate annual County facility rate increase (including
an annual 2% depreciation cost over 50 years) for the three Cove cities is as follows:
City of Palm Desert
City of Rancho Mirage
City of Indian Wells
$66,000
$24, 000
$13,000
At the February 16, 2005, Cove Commission meeting, staff was directed to establish a
committee comprised of Commission members, the TAC, and County representatives,
to further discuss this matter. The Commission also indicated a preference for a
Maximum Phase One facility, with a willingness to proceed with a Minimum Phase One
facility, and to have site selection as part of the Committee's responsibility. Supervisor
Wilson attended this special committee meeting and expressed his willingness to
recommend to the County Board of Supervisors, tax -increment funding of this and other
County projects via the RCPDFA. There was also mutual consensus that the City of
Palm Desert would take a lead role in selecting a potential facility site location within the
City. A copy of the February 16, 2005, Cove Commission report and minutes are
attached for the City Council's review.
&44?
Carlos L. Origga
City Manager
Attachments: Cove Commission 2/16/05 Agenda Report
Cove Commission 2/16/05 Minutes
G:\CityMpr\Amy Huphes\Word Files\Aryan\Proposed New Sheriff Facility Update 51905.doc
COVE COMMUNITIES SERVICES COMMISSION
AGENDA REPORT
REQUEST: Discussion and Direction of the Proposed New Sheriff Facility
SUBMITTED BY: Cove Commission Technical Advisory Committee
DATE: February 16, 2005
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Current Sheriff Staffing Levels Outline
2. Contract City Facility Rate Comparison
3. Phasing Analysis Space Requirements Data Sheet
4. Phase One Budget Range Analysis
5. Minimum Phase One Debt Service Information
6. Maximum Phase One Debt Service Information
RECOMMENDATION
By Minute Motion:
Recommend financing of the Minimum Phase One portion of the proposed new
Sheriff Facility through the partnership of the Riverside County Palm Desert
Financing Authority and authorize the Palm Desert City Manager to initiate
negotiations with the County regarding such action.
2. Discuss a potential site location for the proposed new Sheriff Facility.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On June 19, 2002, the Cove Commission endorsed the proposal to have Highland
Partnership, Inc. conduct an analysis on the future facility needs for the Riverside
County Sheriffs Department Palm Desert Station. The initial analysis resulted in a
finding that the current Sheriff/Contract City Police personnel have outgrown the
existing facility. The analysis determined that although our present facility was
approximately 26,000 square feet, the size needed to accommodate the current staff
(based on a spatial analysis) was approximately 43,000 square feet. Furthermore, the
analysis projected that with long-term personnel growth out to the year 2035, the
minimum size facility needed would be approximately 75,890 square feet and
encompass approximately nine acres.
Based on the projected cost to build a large enough facility to support our contract
police services well into the future, the Cove Technical Advisory Committee (T.A.C.)
suggested conducting an additional analysis to study the benefits of completing the
project in phases. Such action would distribute the total project cost over a determined
period. This additional analysis concluded that the cost for a Minimum Phase One
W10
Proposed New Sheriff Facility Discussion
February 16, 2005
Page 2 of 5
project is $12,625,280. In the Minimum Phase 1 Scenario, approximately 24,127
square feet of the 54,117 of the main Police Headquarters Space (or approximately
45% of the main building) would be built.
Staff recommends that the Commission support a Minimum Phase One project via the
Joint Powers Authority of the Riverside County Palm Desert Financing Authority
(RCPDFA). The RCPDFA can issue bonds utilizing Riverside County property tax pass
through funds to finance the debt service, if the County Board of Supervisors approves
this request. The soon to be completed Coachella Valley Animal Campus was funded
under a similar scenario. The County of Riverside would own the facility and would
apply a charge for its use via the Sheriff's services contract.
Based on a $13 million County expenditure for Minimum Phase I, the facilities annual
cost increase (including an annual 2% depreciation cost over 50 years) for the three
Cove cities is as follows:
City of Palm Desert
City of Rancho Mirage
City of Indian Wells
$66,142
$24, 087
$13,016
DISCUSSION
The existing twelve -year -old County Sheriff's Station, located in the Palm Desert Civic
Center Complex, serves as the main Police Headquarters for the cities of Palm Desert,
Rancho Mirage, and Indian Wells, including portions of the County of Riverside's
unincorporated area. This 25,393 square foot facility, with its small -secured parking
area, is significantly overcrowded, accommodating 198 staff (a ratio of 128 square feet
per person). This facility should be sized in the range of 45,000 square feet to
comfortably accommodate current staffing levels. The facility has also accommodated
additional department functions not originally anticipated.
The Cove Communities Services Commission, to better study the space needs for a
future station, retained the services of Highland Partnership, Inc., and McClaren Wilson
& Lawrie, Inc. These consultants prepared a space needs assessment and presented
their findings to the Cove Commission on November 19, 2003. The Commission
agreed that there is a need to expand the existing Sheriffs facility and directed staff to
return with a financing plan and alternatives for implementing such a facility. An
approximate three-year timeline would be required to design and construct such a
facility. As proposed costs were significantly high, the Cove T.A.C. instructed the
consultants to perform a preliminary cost analysis of phasing this project to lessen its
initial fiscal impact. This phasing analysis breaks the project down into two potential
Phase One scenarios, a Maximum Phase One and a Minimum Phase One project.
G:\CityMgr\Karen Russo\Cove Commrssion\SheriR Facility Agenda ReportZdoc
rjI
Proposed New Sheriff Facility Discussion
February 16, 2005
Page 3 of 5
In the Maximum Phase One scenario, approximately 43,565 square feet of the 54,117
square feet of the main Police Headquarters Space (or approximately 80% of the main
building) would be built. This scenario would include housing personnel from
administration, the front office, accounting and finance, investigations, special teams,
crime analysis, patrol operations, traffic operations, station logistics, temporary evidence
storage, common shared spaces, and building maintenance spaces.
The Maximum Phase One scenario would not include the relocation of the Palm
Desert Sheriffs dispatch operations center and does not include the separate support
building needed for long-term evidence or special team equipment storage. These
operations would remain in the current station. This scenario would essentially allow
the entire Palm Desert Station operation to move into the new facility at once. The
remaining 20% of the main Police Headquarters Space would include relocation of the
Dispatch center, completion of the mechanical space needed to support the Dispatch
Center, and the completion of the shared spaces (such as the conference rooms,
hallways, and interview rooms). Along with this phase, there would also be the final
phase(s) to complete the support building. The Sheriffs Department indicated that a
Maximum Phase One project would be the best scenario to maintain the operational
integrity of police services.
In the Minimum Phase One scenario, approximately 24,127 square feet of the 54,117
square feet of the main Police Headquarters Space (or approximately 45% of the main
building) would be built. This scenario would include the main portion of the Sheriffs
direct public support function, namely their patrol and traffic operations. The Minimum
Phase One scenario includes housing personnel from patrol supervision and patrol
officers, traffic officers, patrol support space, station logistical support, temporary
evidence storage, a portion of the shared space, the building services areas, and a
portion of the front office space needed to temporarily manage patrol operations.
This phase scenario does not include administrative support space, accounting and
finance, the remainder of the front office space, their investigations and special teams
functions, crime analysis, or dispatch operations. This scenario leaves approximately
55% of the main building to be completed as well as the construction of the
support building to finalize the project in any subsequent phase(s). The Sheriffs
Department indicated that the Minimum Phase One scenario would affect the
operational integrity of patrol operations, in that it would separate their administration, a
portion of records management (front office), investigations, crime analysis, and special
teams unit from their primary patrol function. All these services provide major support to
the Sheriffs patrol function and they indicated it is critical that these separate functions
have direct avenues of communication for police services to remain effective. Although
the Minimum Phase One scenario may not be the optimum scenario for overall patrol
operations, the Sheriffs Department indicated that that they can work through this
scenario for a temporary period to reach the optimal goal of a new Cove Police Facility.
They understand the financial situation of the Cove Cities and are willing to make all
G:%QtyMgAKaren Russo\Cove CommissionZhedff Facility Agenda ReportZdoo
?A/
Proposed New Sheriff Facility Discussion
February 16, 2006
Page 4 of 5
necessary adjustments to see the completion of this project, until a funding source is
identified for the final phases of the project.
Financina Options
Either the Minimum or Maximum Phase One scenarios could be funded under the
following financial arrangements:
1. Direct the Cove Cities to initiate a Joint Powers Authority to finance the project.
2. Request the City of Palm Desert finance the facility and initiate facility fees'
agreements with the remaining Cove Cities and County of Riverside.
3. Request the Joint Powers Authority of the Riverside County Palm Desert
Financing Authority (RCPDFA) fund this project, whereby the County of Riverside
would own the facility and participating cities would continue to pay facility fees to
utilize it.
Proposed Contract Citv Facility Rate Comparison
The attached proposed contract city facility rate comparison (Attachment II) provides
detail regarding the estimated cost of the Phase One staffing transition into a new police
facility. Essentially the patrol and traffic operations components of the Palm Desert
Sheriffs Station would be hypothetically moved into the new facility and the staff
remaining at the current facility would consist of the Classified, Investigations, and
Special Teams support units.
The operational cost of each facility is based upon the County's cost allocation formula,
whereby the County assumes the life span of 50 years for facilities. Therefore, the
contracts are charged for 2% of such costs and for the percentage of Sheriffs facilities
that are used to support patrol services (Dispatch, Administration, Accounting and
Finance, Information Services Bureau, Personnel, and Technical Services Bureau).
They then determine a cost per position and multiply that cost by the number of staff
assigned (to the individual police contract), to determine facility rate charge for each
contract.
The attached facility rate scenario (Attachment II) represents the estimated contract city
facility rate charges for each of the identified Sheriffs contract cities, based on current
(FY 04/05) staffing levels. It also estimates the cost per position for each facility based
on the proposed Minimum Phase One staffing scenario estimated for move in FY 07/08.
Based on a hypothetical $13 million County expenditure for Minimum Phase One, the
facilities annual cost increase for the three Cove Cities is as follows:
City of Palm Desert
$66,142
City of Rancho Mirage
$24,087
City of Indian Wells
$13,016
G:1CityMgr\K2ren Russo\Cove Commission\Sheriff Facility Agenda Reportldoc /�
W
Proposed New Sheriff Facility Discussion
February 16, 2005
Page 5 of 5
Conclusion
The Cove T.A.C. reviewed all three funding scenarios and recommends that the Cove
Commission select the RCPDFA funding scenario (Scenario #3). The Cove T.A.C.
Chairman has discussed this matter with County Supervisor Roy Wilson. Supervisor
Wilson indicated that he is amicable to recommending that the Board of Supervisors
fund the Minimum Phase One scenario from County property tax pass through funds.
Again, under such a scenario, the Cove Cities arrangement with the County would
essentially remain unchanged, as they will continue to pay the County facility fees to
utilize the station.
Although the Sheriffs Department indicated that a Maximum Phase One facility would
better suit their needs, they can still function under a Minimum Phase One facility. The
minimum scenario is also supported by Supervisor Wilson and would be easier and less
problematic to promote, given the County's other priorities. What is evident and
undisputed is that the current Cove Police Facility is operating in a building that is
approximately half the size required for current staffing levels. Therefore, proceeding
with the Minimum Phase One scenario is a step that will better service the existing and
future population of the Cove Communities.
If the Cove Commission recommends the Minimum Phase One funding scenario, the
County will most likely, as a condition to fund a new station, require that the participating
cities commit to a minimum number of years to contract for Sheriff services. Please
note that subsequent project updates will be provided to the Commission.
G:%CityMgr%Karen Russo\Cove ComrrmssioMSheriR Facility Agenda Report2.doc
Riverside County Sheriffs Department - Palm Desert Station
Staffing Outline
ATTACHMENT 1
Current Staffing Levels
2
3 City of Palm Desert
4 30 Deputies (146.4 hrs per day Supported Basic Patrol)
5 1.7 Patrol Lieutenants
6 6.4 Patrol Sergeants
7 5.9Investigators
8 8 Deputies - Traffic
9 4 Deputies - SET / Target Team
10 1 Deputy - CCAT
11 1 Deputy Community Oriented Policing
12 1 Dedicated Lieutenant / ACOP
13 3 Dedicated Sergeants - (Traffic / Target Team / Admin)
14 1 Sergeant - Motorcycle
15 4 Deputies - Motorcycle Team
16 2 Deputies - School Resource Officer
17 6 CSO II - Patrol
18 2 CSO I - Sub Stations
19 2 SSO II - Logistics
20 0.5241 Dedicated Crime Analyst (Cove)
21 0.5241 Dedicated Office Asistant 11 (Cove)
22
23
24 City of Rancho Mirage
25 16.4 Deputues (80 hrs per day Supported Basic Patrol)
26 3 Deputies - Burglary Suppression Unit (BSU)
27 2 Deputies - Motorcycle Team
28 3 CSO II - Patrol
29 0.2713 Dedicated Crime Analyst (Cove)
30 0.2713 Dedicated Office Asistant II (Cove)
31
32
33 City of Indian Wells
34 5.5 Deputies (27 hrs per day Supported Basic Patrol)
35 2 Deputies - Burglary Suppression Unit (BSU)
36 1 Deputy - Motorcycle Team
37 5 CSO II - Patrol
38 0.2046 Dedicated Crime Analyst (Cove)
39 0.2046 Dedicated Office Asistant II (Cove)
40
41
42 Unincorporated County Area
43 21.7 Deputies - Basic Patrol (Note: 2 Deps TDY)
44 2 SSO II - Logistics (County)
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
Page 1
Page 2
-a
Riverside County Sheriffs Department - Palm Desert Station
Staffing Outline
ATTACHMENT 1
1 Phase 3 will consist of the following remaining Station operations;
2 Page 3
3 56 PSCO & Dispatch Management
4 11-15 Central Homicide Unit - East County
5
6
7 Support Building (21,773 sq ft Total Gross Space)
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
MI,
eR
vs
E
Cf
M
3
OGo
r:
ti
0)
N
8
N
O
(C
O
n
y
N
c
CD
co �_
O H
Z
U) n. L)
F
F-Z00-�
Ix O c0
Q
H
H
d'
{L —►-Lnrn
00 N
N
H
W
G O
a*
v
a
N
7
co
E
O
O
t
U
A
w
0)
0
Of
y
0 =
ui
CQ
0 `=
W= o h
O
W
O Z a U
�Ov�o
~
Lp N
U)
O c M
O
Z
LU
O
a
Z o
90
Ix
to
0
Of
co
M
N
m r- (a ti
N M w 14
) %- N
00 t co
N O M (
0) co Y9 c0
� 6ft N N
!A H
c W
o 0
N Z
= N W
W co�Q W
LL
O m 7 O LL
ui Z 0 I- 0
Q ~
G. W
N
W
G
Z J
� a
L Cc to
O O Cl CD
00 In M 1.-
N (0 0 00
O r- ti O
00 of a
Il- N M N
fA EA wil {A
Il- covco
ti-:C!-:
rn rl- co cc
c0 N
CO co of
cn — un .-
fA tsi M M
N
~ N
w `—
� O
U �
HCL
Q
W
Z
Z U H 0
O
W d
J
3 �
g �
a
G Z
Z �
0
Z /_�
Z-
0
O r
v' a
o-m
O
Q- N
00
o
n
t v
0
0 'co
.fl c
d
r-
-
0
o o
O N +�
2 N o N
N
N@ d o N U
'a
Z O
v d Z d
- r-
u E 7 0 %
Nam•
to GaNC7r CO.
Gr-
d- W
to
N
G
O
G
N �
"G N
3Z �
Cove Contmunides
Palm Desert -Rancho Mirage -Indian Well% CA
Police HQ - Phasing Analysis
• Space Program/13uilding Area Requirements
Revised Nlaximum Description #Staff Total Project Phan I j I Phase LU35, Comments
Ilse Year 2015 is the initial build -to milestone (10 yerus+/-growth built m); the Year 2035 is the future growth panning milestone
Police Headquarters and Shared Spaces Square Footage Summary
Police Headquarters Spaces:
Administration
11
Z724
2,724
0
No Admen or temporary use of other
Visiting Executive Offices
1
639
639
0
space at front of Patrol functions until
Accounting and Finance
6
910
810
0
Phase 2 is built
Front Office
24
Z928
Z929
1,000
Wrimum assumes reuse space for lobby
Investigations Unit
27
5,604
5,604
0
lmcs igadoru left behind in Minimum
Special Investigations
26
3,694
3,694
0
Phase 1 approach creating operational
Crime Analysis
6
666
666
0
inefficiencies and duplication of temporary
Patrol Supervisors do Officers
170
3,310
3,310
3,510
evidence storage.
Traffic Division
49
1,444
1,444
1,444
Patrol Support
0
4,927
4,927
4,927
Station Logistics
8
1,430
1,430
1,430
*Dispatch Operations
56
3,891
0
0
Dispatch Operadotu are Phase 3
Temp. Evidence
0
904
904
904
Canine Unit
2
0
0
0
Shared Spaces
1
10,719
5,889
5,899
See detail sheet; Partial required in Phase I
BuMing Services
4
936
936
936
Total Net Square Feet
r3-917--j
1 44,725
36,004
19,940
Grossing Factors:
Mechanical Spam
0.12
5,367
4,320
Z393
Outdoor Access for Servico
Stmcturc7Wa8 Thickness
0.09
4,025
3,240
1,795
Total Gross Poke Spaces
54,117
43,565
24,127
Functlons to Remain in Erdsting Sheriff Station:
2035 Milestone
2015 Milestone
2013 Milestone
*Storefront Operation
1,422
1,422
*Dispatch Operations
0
0
3,510
•Central Homicide - East Co.
30
3,870
3,790
*Shared Spaces
1,920
1,774
Total Net Square Feet:
30 1
7,212
10,496 1
Grossing Factors:
Mechanical Spaces
0.12
865
1,260
Suruehtriwall Thickness
0.09
649
945
Total Gross Police Spaces
I
9,727
12,700
Support Building (CCPD Needs Only)
Long-term Evidence Facility
4
I.D. Tech Workroom
0
Target Team Storage
0
Light Vehicle Maintenance
0
Traffic Needs
0
*Emergency Services Unit
Faring Range
0
Total Net Square Feet:
® 1
Grossing Factors:
Mechanical Spaces
0.12
StructurdWall Thickness
0.09
Total Gross Space - New Bldg. F39-5-1 i
1Total Gross Square Footage: Police Headquarters and Su
1,422 No dedicated staff- drop in only.
3,510 Temp. BadM SF is smaller using (E) acnup
3,790
1,774 Some redundant spaces
10,496
1,260 Outdoor Access for Service
945
IZ700
Warehouse construction
9,320
0
0
CCPD needs only
350
0
0
No dedicated forensic staff
293
Modular
Modular
Rent/Buy Storage -Container temporarily
1,656
0
0.
Vera_,
6,375
Modular
Modular
Same storage container
To remain at Indio Sheriffs Facility
Not in Phase 1
17,994
0
0
2,159
0
0
Outdoor Access for Service
1,619
0
0
21,773
0
0
Single Story Construction
75,8901
43,5651 1
241,1271
McClaren, Wilson and Lawrie Inc.
Public Safety Facility Consultants O 2002
In Association tenth Highland Partnership, Inc.
M
_ r r �rrr rir vrlrrrrrr i nl\111L1\JI111 IIIMI
oiaabUM T-013 P.00Z/OOZ F-143
r,
4$
o
�
o
a:
�
0 �
�
V
a
P
4
:
.c
0.
'o
s
m
60
�Q
00�
O
py
G
.fir
N
n
C
n
1
N
10
a
�
r 0k03 g
e'c
� W
cs
r 4
W
� a
G�
0 w
A
�
5
mf
N i mom N%c, 04e.,
I Joint Powers Financing Authority
Series 2004 (Sheriff Substation Project)
AAA Insured
Sources and Uses of Funds
Sources:
Par Amount of Bonds
Investment Earnings Construction Fund
Investment Earnings Capitalized Interest
Accrued Interest
Total Sources
Uses:
Construction Fund -Acquisition Fund
Reserve Fund
Underwriter's Discount (%}
Costs of Issuance
Capitalized Interest
Upfront Insurance Premium (bp)
Other Use of Money
Original Issue Discount
Surety Bond Premium (%)
Letter of Credit Fees ON
Letter of Credit Fees M
Accrued Interest
Total Uses
Adjustment
Run Date
Run Time
Version
13.765.000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
13,765,000.00
12,625,260.00
0.00
1.000
137,650.00
150,000.00
547,401.25
100.00
258,467.99
0.00
0.00
5.00
42,800.75
0.0000
0.00
0.00
0.00
13,761,599.99
3.400.01
9/20/2004
11:55 AM
1.22
MuniSoft Version 1.22
10
SUMMARY INFORMATION
Reserve Fund Calculation
Maximum Annual Debt Service 856,015.00
Percentage of Par Amount of Bonds 1,376,500.00
1.25' Average Annual Debt Service 1,042,209.63
Dates
Dated Date
12/1/2004
Delivery Date
12/1/2004
First Interest Payment Date
5/1/2005
First Maturity Date
5/1/2006
Last Maturity Date
5/1/2035
Arbitrage Yield Calculation
Par Amount of Bonds
13,765,000.00
Plus Accrued Interest
0.00
Less Insurance Premium
(258,467.99)
Less Surety Bond Premium
(42,800.75)
Less Underwriter's Discount
0.00
Less Costs of Issuance
0.00
Less OID/Plus Premium
0.00
Less Letter of Credit Fees (Upfront)
0.00
Less Letter of Credit Fees (Annual PV)
0.00
Less Reserve Fund
0.00
Target Amount
13,463,731.26
Arbitrage Yield 4.7576366
INIC Calculation
Total Interest 12,081,798.75
Plus Underwriter's Discount 137,650.00
Plus OID/Less Premium 0.00
Target Amount 12,219,448.75
Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4.67541"
Insurance Premium Calculation
Total Debt Service 25,846,798.75
Less Accrued Interest 0.00
Less Capitalized Interest 0.00
Target Amount 25,846,798.75
Premium 100.00
Cost of Insurance 258,467.99
Other Information
Bond Years
261,355.42
Average Life
18.9869536
Average Coupon
4.6227466
Denomination
5,000.00
Compounding
sera
Day Basis
30/360
MuniSoft Version 1.22
i�fJ g iz�Ngn)f' aNl.�t'f�. A��f�i l3 l.�tJ� � �� � •+�+�+� �� � � � � �1 Oaaaa O OOlaa
W
N P W W N N tp m m m V m W to m P P W W N N O O m tD � m w V m m N m A D W W N N++ O O t0 f0 m m v V m O� tJ� m
o
� O
o
0
A A A mA L AA mpA mpA A A (P AAA pA WPp 1pP� AN A 8A W mWp W W W 41 ppN� NS
NPm NW
(A� {N�
O p O S O O O O O O O O O S O O O S S O S O O O O
N N
m
WpOWOW
m ip _Omb ram W W Of SQOmpo
Opp NN_fmJ
O{�IL W tm0 tm1Op�N NOOA P V v
i0 iD
_trail
(Q0�p�m
(S(��OC (Ot��lll yOy I.iH (O� (O�_CpV1���NNO
(N�{tANNmp am
Owi AwiN tml� OOIUO m SO/P PO1 A A m m00 W ON1NN ram W tJbm W W,fN)I tNT000v OOmm000Sv v V W NrOV N NNNm
tJN (A O O t✓
S
N O N
tVt�� tJt�� lJV!J�� tVt�� (V(JJ�l {�I�� (V(.� .m .
N t l i P O O O twn N O O O O O O O O O O O O S S S S O O m N N U N wN N tw1 l O S O O O O S S S S S S S S O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O N
N N
N pNmp tm� t,l t� {�80
� {pyl ENO
p� p pp p q tp�� (� t�l A
T W _Omi (OO/l�tmp twit 1pApl �O�plO NNO tO A V NOONN w NW m,w OD w.m.�{WA ppWpN k.N AO WSOD.0 p0 tN�ONltOpl �Op mph++{mi1 NPpp011m W,(ON�I _4�i (mW�tpra�pm
{wlrS twn twT lw/i PO DSfwT NOOOOOOOO�OOOS OOS OONN twli NNN Owl NSSOOOOSSOSSSSSO00000000 OOON i 6
N N
4m�
� N
j m
mm
N
mm
N
mm
N
N
S
N
N
S
N
N
N
m
fT
N
m
N
m
tT
N
m
N
�
mN
S
m
N
m
N
m
N
m
A
p�
5�
m
N
at
m m
A
j
N
A
N
tT
O
AW
(001111
VI
m
pWp
�tlp�
�Wp
N
pyp
O
O
f!1
N
C
O
S
N
Uf
ANT
,
lT
tT
qo
m0
tF P S N
t�
O
N
S
tl�
S
tV�
O
,tWi�
S
to
S
N
S
N
O
S
N
S
O
S
S
_{mll
S
tV�
fS
try
O
tV�
O
t-m�/
O
S
S
S
O
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
S
lwn
Q
ND
N
N
4
Iy
Capitalized Interest
Joint Powers Financing Authority
Series 2004 (Sheriff Substation Project)
AAA Insured
0.0000000
0.0000000
Drew
Res. Fund
Cap. Int.
Net Draw
Date Amount
Earnings
Earnings
Amount
5/1/05 248,818.75
0.00
0.00
248,818.75
11/1/05 298,582.50
0.00
0.00
299,582.50
547,401.25
0.00
0.00
547,401.25
MuniSoft Version 1.22
Balance
547,401.25
298,582.50
0.00
13
INet Debt Ron4co Schedule
Joint Powers Fklancing Authority
Series 2004 (Sheriff Substation Project)
AAA Insured
4.TS76388
0.0000000
Now Issue
PV of
New Issue
Less
Less RF
Plus LOC
Net Debt
New Issue
Net Debt
Date
Period Total
Cap. Mt.
Famings
Fees
Service
Fiscal Total
Service
611 /2005
248,818 75
(248,818.75)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
000
11112005
298,582.50
(298,582.50)
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
sm2006
553.582 50
0.00
0.00
0 DO
553,582.50
553,582.50
517,909.29
11/12006
296,032 50
000
0. DO
0.00
296.032.50
270,520 78
5/12007
556,032.50
TOO
0.00
0.00
556,032.50
852,065.00
496,308.03
11/12007
293.107.50
0.00
0 DO
0.00
293.107.50
255,545.33
y12008
558,107.50
0.00
000
0.00
558,107.50
851,215.00
475,279.14
11/1/2008
289,662.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
289,662.60
240,94230
W/2009
564,662.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
564.662.50
854,325.00
458.77487
11/12009
285,637.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
285,537.50
226.601.99
Sr12010
565,637.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
565.537.50
851,075.00
438.381.13
11112010
281,057.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
281.057.50
212.801.91
5M2011
571,057.60
0.00
0.00
0.00
571.057.50
852,116.00
422,328.18
11/12011
276.200 00
000
0.00
0.00
276,200.00
199,518.78
5112012
576,200.00
0.00
0.00
000
578200.00
852,400.00
406.658 69
11/12012
270,950.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
270,950.00
186.736.43
5/12013
580,950.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
580,960.00
851,900.00
391,082.63
11/1/2013
265.215.00
0.00
000
0.00
265,215.00
174,388.46
5112014
590,215.00
000
0.00
0.00
590,215.00
855,430.D0
379,070.33
11/l2014
259,040.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
259,040.00
162,50483
5/12015
594,040.00
0.00
000
0.00
594,040.00
853,080.00
364,003.04
11/12015
252.507.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
252.507,50
151,130.98
5/1/2016
602,507.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
602.507.50
855,016.00
352,234.23
11/12016
245.507.60
0.00
0.00
0.00
245,507.50
140,192A7
5/l2017
610,507.50
0.00
0.00
000
010,507.50
856,015 00
340,517.84
11/12017
236,025.00
0.00
0.00
0.D0
238,025.D0
129,678.52
5/120111
613,025.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
613,02500
851,05000
320,217.18
11/12018
230.243.75
0.00
0.00
0.00
230,243.75
119,675.81
5/12019
626,243 75
0 DO
0.00
0.00
625,243.75
855,487.50
317,43T. 17
11/12019
221,948.75
0.00
0.00
000
221,948.75
110,065 45
&1/2020
631,948.75
000
000
0.00
631,94835
853,897,50
306,104.74
11/12020
213,133.75
000
0. DO
0.00
213.133.75
100,83941
5112021
638,133.75
0.00
000
000
838,133.75
851267.50
294,903.34
11/12021
203.783 75
0.00
0.00
0.00
203,783.75
91,987.20
S/12022
648.783 75
0.D0
0.00
0.00
648.783.75
862,587.50
286,053.79
11/12022
193,882.50
0.00
0.00
0,00
193,882.60
83.490.03
5/l2023
658,882.50
000
0.00
0.00
658.802,50
852,76500
277,163.15
11/12023
183.420 00
0.00
0.00
0.00
183,420.00
75.364.03
5/1/2024
668,420.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
668.420.00
851,840.00
268,260.50
11/12024
172.26500
000
0,00
000
172,26&00
67,52961
5/12025
682,265.00
0,00
0.00
0. DO
882265.00
854,530.D0
261,240.29
11/1/2025
160,407 50
000
0.00
0.00
160,407 50
59.99114
5/12026
690,407.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
690,407.50
850,815.00
252,215.83
11/12026
147,687.50
000
0.00
0. DO
147,687.50
52,69877
5,/1/2027
707,687 50
000
000
000
707,637.50
055,375 00
246,653.99
11112027
134.247 50
000
0.00
0.00
134,247 50
45,702 79
511/2028
719,247 50
000
0.00
0.00
719,247.50
853,495.00
239.168 93
11/12028
120,20750
0.00
000
0.00
12020T50
39,04342
5112029
735,207 SO
0. DO
0 GO
000
735,207 50
855,415 00
233.247 02
11112029
105,447 SO
0.00
0. DO
000
105.447 50
32,676.26
5/1/2030
750.447 50
0 DO
000
0.D0
750,447 50
855,895.D0
227.146 61
11/1/2030
89.967.50
0 00
0.00
0.00
89,967.50
26,598.77
6112031
764.967 50
0. DO
000
0.D0
764,967.50
854,935 00
220,906.61
1 V 2031
73,59B 75
O DO
000
0.00
73,598.75
20.759 94
5/1/2032
778,598.75
0 00
000
0.00
778,598 75
852,197 50
214,515.76
11/1/2032
56,502 50
000
000
000
56.502 50
15.205 58
5/1/2033
796.502 50
0.00
0.00
000
796,502 50
853,005.00
209.369.02
11/12033
38.557 50
0 DO
0.00
0.00
38,557 50
9,899.75
511/2034
813.557 50
0.00
000
000
813.557.50
852,115.00
204,029.66
11/12034
19.763 75
0 00
000
000
19.763 75
4,941 33
5/12035
B34,763 75
0 DO
000
0.00
834,763 75
854,52T50
199.732 35
25,846.798 75
(547,401 25)
0.00
0.00
25,299,397.50
25,299,39T50
12.933,75109
MuniSoft Version 1 22
Iq
P�44�e, ��e,
�Xrml��
Joint Powers Financing Authority
Series 2004 (Sheriff Substation Project)
AAA Insured
Sources and Uses of Funds
Sources:
Par Amount of Bonds 19,850,000,00
Investment Earnings Construction Fund 0.00
Investment Earnings Capitalized Interest 0.00
Accrued Interest 0.00
Total Sources 19,850,000.00
Uses:
Construction Fund -Acquisition Fund
18,276,180.00
Reserve Fund
0.00
Underwriter's Discount N
1.000
198,500.00
Costs of Issuance
150.000.00
Capitalized Interest
789,277.50
Upfront Insurance Premium (bp)
100.00
372,679.08
Other Use of Money
0.00
Original Issue Discount
0.00
Surety Bond Premium (%)
5.00
61,637.25
Letter of Credit Fees (bp)
0.0000
0.00
Letter of Credit Fees ($)
0.00
Accrued Interest
0.00
Total Uses
19,848,273.83
Adjustment
1,726.18
Run Date
9/20/2004
Run Time
11:52 AM
Version
1.22
MuniSoft Version 1.22
15
SUMMARY INFORMATION
Reserve Fund Calculation
Maximum Annual Debt Service 1,232,745.00
Percentage of Par Amount of Bonds 1,985,000.00
1.25 " Average Annual Debt Service 1,502,738.21
'Dates
Dated Date
12/1/2004
Delivery Date
12/1/2004
First Interest Payment Date
5/1/2005
First Maturity Date
5/1/2006
Last Maturity Date
5/1/2035
jArbftrage Yield Calculation
Par Amount of Bonds
19,850,000.00
Plus Accrued Interest
0.00
Less Insurance Premium
(372,679.08)
Less Surety Bond Premium
(61,637.25)
Less Underwriter's Discount
0.00
Less Costs of Issuance
0.00
Less OID/Plus Premium
0.00
Less Letter of Credit Fees (Upfront)
0.00
Less Letter of Credit Fees (Annual PV)
0.00
Less Reserve Fund
0.00
Target Amount
19,415,683.68
Arbitrage Yield 4.7575343
INIC Calculation
Total Interest 17,417,907.50
Plus Underwriter's Discount 198,500.00
Plus OID/Less Premium 0.00
Target Amount 17,616,407.50
Net Interest Cost (NIC) 4.6753811
Insurance Premium Calculation
Total Debt Service 37,267,907.50
Less Accrued Interest 0.00
Less Capitalized Interest 0.00
Target Amount 37,267,907.50
Premium 100.00
Cost of Insurance 372,679.08
10ther Information
Bond Years
376,790.83
Average Life
18.9819060
Average Coupon
4.6226994
Denomination
5,000.00
Compounding
sem
Day Basis
301360
MuniSoft Version 1.22
14
i'C)
m N
ti^��--------------
g«y«
.
wWW� t�a�Z�aaaa�aaaaaaaa'aaSaa+a'a�_�����aaaaaa��aa
o
�
«oowew•
8_'
a
S �
O O S S S S S O S S S S S S S S S S S
V
C
O
O O O O O O O O O O O
ip
A O P P [mA� pAp� pPp� A A mAp (pA�� A pPN {O� Opp �A.q1 A (P� A A8 Wpp W W (pW� {W/� W WS Nqp N N
Y
.�7•
n
mmN W tO IO++W.fV.1 W W NNE+(.m(�l1 SO- V 00+ W W_fUit W fOJ W_4Vi 0 tmnl�pp���pp+p V V Nm Np O� Oo 00
Appra m W W
�Vp ((Vpp
O O
pNp�t. pQl
(O�mmU
1 ppA ♦.♦
t00 mN N m m� W W frail W V V (Alt Nv V NNN A
N V 01N+NNNNm�N���NNNNm�fJ SON+�W MESS 41N
V V(� V(�t
10 V
0810
W tJ G tJ O O O?J W 01 Ol UN
fJN (V(� {V� (V� tJ� (J� (V� pV� V(/� Ql ((J��t p� ((�� ((�� ((J�� p. [�
N N N U SSOS OOOOOOOOOOOO NNN/N)t fNli tNn OOOOOOCSNNNNNN�NPatJT tVf�ONi tNna to mtNn uNt vNt PNS SSOOn
S
W W
V V
JcpVp
J{vpp
_
1.2
NOOSI wO S OtNt��NJ 8f((��mNtt��tNra
W_JSW VVN
fW mtm
mOmP4SmO!-_
ON((��
p
Wm mp�pp11�p p
�mN NmraWW VVVp m �+NO!
O
OS O
W fJ�O++t ,O�O')Ql W OtN NppNUN
(t��tttt�h�mW�1
N tV/� N N SOSSOSOOOOOOOo00 N 0. N tNi1N OOOOOOOONNN N N VNIN NNNN {V7t N NtNn tN)t N N VNi N (Nil N S OOS O
�p~! p1
C6
W W
S O O
m O O O N N
!T
(T flt
U
N
N
Ot
N N
N N
N
V v
N N N
N N
O
N Q M
N
N
O
'Capitalized Interest
Joint Powers Financing Authority
Series 2004 (Sheriff Substation Project)
AAA Insured
0.0000000
0.0000000
Draw
Res. Fund
Cap. Int.
Net Draw
Date Amount
Earnings
Earnings
Amount
511/05 358,762.50
0.00
0.00
358,762.50
11/1/05 430,515.00
0.00
0.00
430,515.00
789,277.50
0.00
0.00
789,277.50
MuniSoft Version 1.22
Balance
789,277.50
430,515.00
0.00
Q =N-N�N�N�N1_ N
-1CN11NC——
4`�fL�N_s�
eZNNNni;7 W�i'a.� 1N�� 13 f3 r%�tJ i3 i3 a 131�IJ iz. fJ i� f,I' f) fNJ iN3i I, f'f'f'aN f�Ng g NN N i,) ;31 3 S�A3 pN tp� t.�p� I�ppi. NB I.3 p
W W W W W W W N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Jppp iWpp m tVii t�i� Q�Opp� m MCI t0 100 VW+pp V m W S W OW> m pp A O m m -OSC W p Np yp v pm O {p Og (Opl t+p m f f �NWp W V O SW fJ 000 fly pO�I N V V � Np + m O O m 81 Z
V V(� V V(� Q1 + Ol + m m pp N8 S 8 S (T N (T NO
O N �J N N S S O S S O O O O S O S O 0 0 0 VNi N ONi U 1 f T {N) I O O O O O O O O N tN! fNT ONI N S N lVT N N f T O N f 7 S N N N fN)1 ONi N N O G e
m
[OJ (OnD
�i
o0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000�r'3
d
�r
�
888SSSSSS8888SSS88S888S$8S8S8$S88S8So888$888S88S8888888S8SoS�
�&
0
L r
c-
o000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000a00000000000aoo
3M$
o
c�88oS88888c`�8888S888S88o88888588888SS8888SSSSSS8SSSS888SSo8S8S
�ro
s
0
000000000aoa0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
�R
S•
8$SSS8S88888SSS88S8S$888S8S88S8S888SS8S88S88$5888$S$8SS88SS$S
Q.
W fJ� W Ol W W N O fJ W 41 41 (�7t~il N OW fJ Q1 t!� tmT N V �l N m O
J� A m tJ N Vpp
=
-OOi m+ -tV.l
VVVO
mO
p0pp� pmm+p
(O}N}tpO��o (Nqq(�� {+/� pWW pmW pmml pp+��
(� (+� m (O�
Np� W Ol m+N•(N. I N.(� .p1 N.(� . . . . Vd. W mm��SCJ OI ONf�E i.a &.f� tpT O�OO
p
8
(V(A�N(/� (VV:4(/� (.(�
N N N NSOS S�OOO�OOOOOOO N fNAN fN/l �NJ1N00000000NfN/1NPa O N 4V1 OVI NNN fVJ� fNll N fNl� NtlNINP N N NS SSS
N
N
—
N—
NN
'OfJ
"OOtVT
p•
WV N � N � � � � � N
v O O lVT lNT lT tT N (T T N N ,PI N N Ff O N O
�+
P +N+O (VNI� V V OOm�i fWJ-ONION
tWi� TN (mn NN ��.t V V m�O�pWp�{��NNaNV>pV
+
pV
p-pVO�i yV -GoN (.O� Wm
(pvp�Oppf {AD moo
tm�p - (+t �Nt Nm
pml cVp
v NJ v ti m(AO Nm W W 0l AOA+Q AfJON
to z
'� N
Q�iJ _100 OHO �1 mW yN� N p��NmN�NP ODA
ON NM pS�Qp
NNON N
p
09.
pNm mm
OW WWW pip+p (4�t1 (0t p00
W W v v ro ON, OaWD P N W W OINN OlmA01mS W S VN �OIN°o BiSo 0 �01+� O V m V �NNSOI IVD �+ W W o S
j W
PARTICIPATING AGENCIES:
INDIAN WELLS
PALM DESERT
RANCHO MIRAGE
73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE
PALM DESERT
CALIFORNIA 92260-2578
Cove Communities Services Commission
MINUTES
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 2005- 9:30 a.m.
PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER
73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Ferguson convened the meeting at 9:30 a.m.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Vice -Chairman Meepos led the Pledge of Allegiance.
Chairman Ferguson asked for a moment of silence in honor of former Cove
Communities firefighter paramedic Mark McCormack, who lost his life this past
weekend in a structure fire.
III. ROLL CALL
Present:
Chairman Jim Ferguson, Palm Desert
Commissioner Dana Hobart, Rancho Mirage
Commissioner Robert Spiegel (alternate)
Vice -Chairman Ron Meepos, Rancho Mirage
Commissioner Conrad Negron, Indian Wells
Absent
Commissioner Robert Bernheimer, Indian Wells
Also Present:
Carlos Ortega, City Manager, Palm Desert
Greg Johnson, City Manager, Indian Wells
Pat Pratt, City Manager, Rancho Mirage
Ignacio Otero, Fire Chief
Kevin Powell, Paramedic Coordinator
David Avila, Fire Marshal
Captain Craig Kilday, Chief of Police
Page 1 of 7
Prpsr
Cove Communities Services Commission
MINUTES
February 16, 2005
Lt. Steve Thetford
Lt. Rodney Vigue
Michael Barnard, Executive Director, Joslyn Senior Center
Steve Aryan, Assistant to the City Manager, Palm Desert
Cathy Mitton, Director of Management Services, Rancho Mirage
Mel Windsor, Emergency Services, Indian Wells
IV. COMMENTS FROM COMMISSIONERS
Chairman Ferguson acknowledged Ed Monarch's prior service to the Commission,
and Commissioner Negron accepted a plaque on his behalf.
Commissioner Robert Spiegel gave an update on College of the Desert. A multi-
million dollar bond issue was recently passed by the citizens of Coachella Valley to
build new facilities in the east and west end of the valley. The Street Fair will be
moving to the corner of Magnesia Falls and Monterey this fall. The College is
doubling the school of nursing which will be beneficial to all citizens. They will be
building a Public Safety Academy for firefighters and police officers at San Pablo
and Magnesia Falls that will allow training to be conducted in the valley. With child
care becoming more important in the valley, the child care center will be expanded.
There is a tentative plan to install two pools on college land across from the YMCA
and Coachella Valley Recreation. The parking lot at the rear of the driving range
would become two pools — a lap pool and a regular pool. If details can be worked
out, the College would use the facilities in the morning for students with the
afternoon/evening open to residents for a nominal fee. The program may be run by
either the YMCA or Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District, and they would
also be providing facility maintenance.
Vice Chairman Meepos asked if one of the two pools would be Olympic size and
available for competition, and Commissioner Spiegel responded that it would be
available for competition, but it would not be an Olympic size pool. Vice Chairman
Meepos requested a presentation be made by COD to the Cove Communities
Services Commission.
V. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
Page 2 of 7
Cove Communities Services Commission
MINUTES
February 16, 2005
VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - January 19, 2005
Motion to approve the Minutes of the Cove Communities Services Commission
meeting of November 17, 2004, made by Commissioner Negron, seconded by
Commissioner Hobart. Motion carried 4-0-1 with Commissioner Spiegel
abstaining and Commissioner Bernheimer absent.
VII. JOSLYN SENIOR CENTER
A. Executive Director's Update
Michael Barnard, Executive Director, mentioned that the yoga program at the
Center was featured in USA Today on February 7. AARP Monthly National
Newsletter included a story of two people who met in a table tennis class. The
national exposure of the Center is good.
This year's gala will be An Evening In The Old West, scheduled for March 20
in Indio Hills at the Covered Wagon Ranch.
The Wellness Center is on track and scheduled to be finished by the end of
March.
An RFP to request investment services for the endowment fund has been
issued.
Newfinancial statements have been prepared, at the request of Vice Chairman
Meepos, to more accurately reflect year-to-date statistics.
The Center is planning a trip to Dodger Stadium on opening day - Tuesday,
April 12.
Vice Chairman Meepos commended Mr. Barnard on the statements for the
month of January.
B. Receive and File Board of Directors Agenda for January 18, 2005.
C. Receive and File Board of Directors Agenda for February 15, 2005.
Motion to Receive and File Board of Directors agendas for January 18,
Page 3 of 7
Cove Communities Services Commission
MINUTES
February 16, 2005
2005, and February 15, 2005, made by CommissionerNegron, seconded
by Commissioner Spiegel. Motion carried unanimously with
Commissioner Bernheimer absent.
VIII. FIRE DEPARTMENT
Chief Otero reported that the Annual Report should be completed by early March.
Calls for service in the three cities went up 3-1/2%.
A. Receive and File Fire Department's Operational Report for December, 2004.
B. Receive and File Fire Marshal's Report for January, 2005.
Motion to Receive and File Fire Department's Operational Report for
December, 2004 and Fire Marshal's Report for January, 2005, made by
Commissioner Spiegel, seconded by Vice Chairman Meepos. Motion
carried unanimously with Commissioner Bernheimer absent.
IX. SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
A. Introduction of Captain Craig Kilday, Chief of Police.
Lt. Thetford introduced Captain Craig Kilday, a 26-year veteran with the
Department. Captain Kilday spent the vast majority of his career in the
Coachella Valley and at the Palm Desert Station.
Captain Kilday spoke and said he is honored to be the Chief of Police for the
Cove Communities and pledged to continue the excellent law enforcement
service currently being provided.
Commissioner Negron welcomed Captain Kilday.
B. Update on Crime Analyst Report.
No report for the month of February.
Page 4 of 7
Cove Communities Services Commission
MINUTES
February 16, 2005
C. Receive and File Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Program Activity Report
for January, 2005.
Motion by Commissioner Negron, seconded by Commissioner Hobart,
to Receive and File the Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Program
Activity Report for January, 2005. Motion carried unanimously, with
Commissioner Bernheimer absent.
D. Cove Police Facility Phasing Detail and Facility Rate Scenario
City Manager Ortega reviewed the two scenarios presented to the
Commission. The TAC recommends a phased approached and are asking
for guidance on whether it is the Commission's desire to pursue the Minimum
or Maximum Phase 1. Costs have been identified for both.
Funding alternatives are addressed in the report. It is recommended that the
County fund the project and the cities continue to be charged according to the
current formula.
Chairman Ferguson said there is a current demand for43,000 square feet, and
building a 25,000 square foot Minimum Phase 1 only meets current levels and
does not address future growth. With a funding mechanism in place and the
ability to take care of future growth in the Maximum Phase 1, there was a
question as to why the TAC would recommend a Minimum Phase 1.
Mr. Ortega indicated the Minimum Phase 1 was recommended based on
conversations with the County concerning their priorities. If it is the
Commission's direction to negotiate with the County on the Maximum Phase
1, that will be done. Even if the Minimum Phase 1 is undertaken, most of the
infrastructure will be built. The difference would probably be another $6-7
million. The TAC agrees that the Minimum Phase 1 is barely taking care of the
shortage.
Chairman Ferguson suggested scheduling a meeting with the Sheriff,
Supervisor, and representatives from the Commission. It is his understanding
that the excess square footage from a Maximum Phase 1 would be absorbed
by Administration through the Sheriffs Department. The Center of their
operations in the Coachella Valley would shift overtime from Indio to the new
facility.
Page 5 of 7
Cove Communities Services Commission
MINUTES
February 16, 2005
Mr. Ortega also asked the Commission for direction on site identification.
Vice Chairman Meepos stated that Rancho Mirage is paying $75,000 as its
share of the current station. If a new station is built, the cost for the current
station will go down $28,000 and each of the cities' costs would go down
proportionately. The question was raised as to who is picking up the
differential.
Lt. Thetford said that it is a County -owned building and they would continue to
maintain it. The formula used charges the contract cities for personnel at the
station and the remaining costs would be the responsibility of the County.
Vice Chairman Meepos stated that if the Maximum Phase 1 were built and
everyone was moved out of the current station, there would be no related costs
for the current station and Lt. Thetford confirmed that this is correct. There is
an administrative cost built into the formula and the cities are paying for other
infrastructure the Sheriffs Department owns, but the building itself is not part of
it.
Commissioner Negron mentioned that the County of Riverside is investing a
great deal of money in the project, and Chairman Ferguson responded that they
are using tax increment financing. Commissioner Negron stated he would like
to get this done as quickly as possible rather than holding it up another couple
of years.
Mr. Johnson stated that the TAC is recommending to move forward based upon
what the County has indicated it can afford to issue in debt at this point --$13
million. There is some interest being expressed by the rest of the Board as to
whether we should fund the Maximum Phase 1 of approximately $6 million
more. The County could be approached to see if they can stretch their budget
to make to make this happen, or the Commission could come up with a formula
for the three cities to allowfunding that $6 million independent of the bond issue
to complete a Maximum Phase 1. There are options.
Chairman Ferguson suggested that a recommendation be made to the County
to look at a Maximum Phase 1. Overtime, the regional needs will be met at the
largerfacility. Chairman Ferguson recommended the Maximum Phase land
scheduling a meeting with the Sheriffs Department, Supervisor, City Managers,
and Commissioners to find a way to get to that goal.
Motion by Vice Chairman Meepos to establish a committee of the Cove
Commission together with TAC and representatives of the County, to
Page 6 of 7
Cove Communities Services Commission
MINUTES
February 16, 2005
express a preference forMaximum Phase 1 with a willingness to proceed
with Minimum Phase 1, and to have site selection as part of the
Committee's responsibility. Chairman Ferguson and Vice Chairman
Meepos would represent the Cove Communities Services Commission
and if legal opinion allows a third individual to serve, Indian Wells will
designate a representative., seconded by CommissionerHobart. Motion
carried 4-0-1 with Commissioner Spiegel abstaining.
Chairman Ferguson reiterated that the Cove Commission is an advisory body
and the final decision would be made by each City Council.
Lt. Thetford thanked the Cove Communities Services Commission for actively
looking at this issue.
X. GENERAL BUSINESS
A. Warrants and Demands — January, 2005.
Motion to approve the Warrants and Demands for January, 2005, made
by Vice Chairman Meepos, seconded by Commissioner Negron,
unanimously approved.
XI. ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Ferguson adjourned the meeting at 10:15 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Karen Russo, Recording Secretary
Page 7 of 7