Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDirection - PS Desert Resorts Convention & Visitors Auth.LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP C.• AGENDA PACKET SECTIONl 1 MEMORANDUM � - f October 21, 2005 TO: Mayor and City Council — CLIENT -MATTER No.: 72500.00715 City of Palm Desert FROM: David J. Erwin RE: The Palm Springs Desert Resorts Convention and Visitors Authority 0 Cal ,07 . Iv o mN t. OUESTION PRESENTED What is the status of the City of Palm Desert i::'they give notice of withdrawal from this r �� organization? When should the notice be given, and what would be the effect of the withd val:a� of such notice? The issue of withdrawal is addressed in Article XIII of the Agreement which indicates withdrawal may be done as follows "ARTICLE XIII WITHDRAWAL OF MEMBER ORGANIZATION A member organization may withdraw from participation in this Joint Powers Agreement subject to the following conditions: 1. The effective date of withdrawal shall always be the last day of a Calendar year; 2. Current annual contribution to the Authority must be paid in full; 3. Annual contribution for the next following calendar year must be paid in the usual manner for such payment. If an "Active Publi.c Member" withdraws during the 1995-1996 fiscal year, prior to June 1, 1996, the annual contribution for the next following fiscal year must be paid in the usual manner for such payments. 4. Notice of withdrawal must be given not less than thirteen months prior to the effective date of withdrawal. For example, notice must be given prior to January 1 to effect withdrawal at the end of the next following Calendar year. Notice given between January 1 and December 31 shall be effective at the end of the second following calendar year. 5. After giving notice of withdrawal, a withdrawing member shall not have voting privileges on the Executive Committee except for operating budget items during the next thirteen months. R M P U BTJ E\2 60 567.1 -1- LAW OFFICES OF BEST BEST E. KRIEGER LLP Mayor and City Council — City of Palm Desert October 21, 2005 6. A withdrawing member organization may again become a participating member of this Joint Powers Agreement on condition that it pay to the treasury of the Authority an amount equal to all contributions which the member organization would have paid if it had not withdrawn from participation. Private members may remain active members as long as the government entity is a member and during the period of withdrawal from the Point Powers Agreement." Per the above language, the withdrawal notice must be given prior to December 1, 2005 to be effective December 31, 2006. Upon giving this Notice, voting rights for city representatives will cease except for operating budget items. It should be noted that any amendment of the member contributions require the unanimous vote of the Executive Committee and ratification by all active member organizations. The issue of the City being a withdrawing member and that effect upon these provisions is not addressed directly. The ability to return to active membership is addressed in number 6. Palm Desert would have paid their normal contribution and if Notice of Withdrawal is cancelled, payment is the only condition to returning to active membership. Voting should be restored at that time. If there are further questions, please let me know. 2 RM PUB'OJ E 260567.1 . an 'Jrq an CITY OF PALM DESERTi�F°i Office of the City Council Staff Report REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF CONTINUED MEMBERSHIP IN THE PALM SPRINGS DESERT RESORTS CONVENTION AND VISITORS AUTHORITY SUBMITTED BY: Carlos L. Ortega, City Manager DATE: October 27, 2005 CONTENTS: 1. Councilmember Jean Benson's Memorandum dated October 18, 2005 2. Preliminary Minutes from City Council Meeting of October 13, 2005 3. Mayor Buford Crites' Memorandum dated October 10, 2005 Recommendation: By Minute Motion, authorize the notification for withdrawal from the Palm Springs Desert Resorts Convention and Visitors Authority. Discussion: At its meeting of October 13, 2005, the City Council considered a memorandum dated October 10, 2005, from Mayor Buford Crites which outlined his concerns about the City's membership in the Palm Springs Desert Resorts Convention and Visitors Authority. By unanimous vote, the City Council took the following action (Mayor Crites was absent): 1. Non -elected members should not sit as voting members of the CVA Executive Committee. 2. The CVA should change its name to be a "Desert Resorts CVA". Specific names such as Palm Desert or Palm Springs should be used in advertising campaigns where they are appropriate. 3. The CVA should not hire a salesperson with CVA funds to be responsible for booking conventions at the Palm Springs Convention Center. While Convention Center bookings have some residual value to all cities, certainly the primary value radiates out from the geographical proximity to the Conventions Center. CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 27, 2005 RE: CONSIDERATION OF CONTINUED MEMBERSHIP IN THE PALM SPRINGS DESERT RESORTS CONVENTION AND VISITORS AUTHORITY The City's liaison to the CVA, Councilmember Jean Benson, subsequently reported this action to the Executive Committee at its meeting of October 18, 2005. A secondary issue raised in the Mayor's memorandum was to direct staff to begin meeting with local hotels and businesses in an effort to determine a recommendation to the City Council as to whether or not Palm Desert should continue its membership in the CVA. Possible options to be explored were: 1. Using existing CVA funds through our own marketing efforts; 2. Using those in combination with our local hotels and businesses; 3. Potentially joining together with our neighbors in a mid -valley marketing consortium. Since the last City Council meeting, staff has discussed this issue informally with members of the community. However, this two -week period was not sufficient time to conduct an extensive review to justify one direction or the other. At its meeting of October 18, 2005, the Marketing Committee received a report from Councilmember Jean Benson as well as a copy of the Hotel Room Report which was presented by a representative of the CVA. Some Committee members did express concern about the City's continued participation in the CVA; however, two members of the Committee were absent, and the item was not agendized for discussion. The Committee, therefore, requested that the item be placed on its November agenda for full discussion and recommendation. Conclusion: Specifically, the City Council, at its meeting of October 13, 2005, directed the CityAttomey to bring back an opinion on the legal requirements for withdrawal. Mr. Erwin has provided that information to the City Council, noting that "the withdrawal notice must be given prior to December 1, 2005, to be effective December 31, 2006." Even though the City Council did not request that staff bring back a recommendation on this matter, we think this report will help the City Council in making that decision. The CVA JPA Agreement itself places the City in a position of having to consider this potential withdrawal one year in advance of an actual withdrawal. Because the City has an investment of approximately $1 Million per year, it is prudent at this time to consider this action. 2 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 27, 2005 RE: CONSIDERATION OF CONTINUED MEMBERSHIP IN THE PALM SPRINGS DESERT RESORTS CONVENTION AND VISITORS AUTHORITY The CVA was formed over 15 years ago, well in advance of the City's growth and the opening of the Valley's largest hotel, Desert Springs, a JW Marriott Resort & Spa. Since then, the City has implemented its own marketing program, one which has established the City as a premiere destination resort. The costs of these marketing efforts has risen over these years, and today Palm Desert spends almost $1 Million per year on its own to promote itself. In addition, the City has taken a very proactive stance in the establishment of its own Visitor Information Program, and the success of this program is evidenced bythe recent opening of the new VIC. As a member of the CVA, the City of Palm Desert has one vote, and while the City Council can take action to oppose non -elected membership on the Executive Committee and/or the CVA name, it could be outvoted when the CVA makes those decisions in the future. This would be true with any issue presented to the CVA board. This has been a concern of the City Council in the past, and it continues sans any amendment to the official JPA Agreement. In conclusion, staff concurs with the direction set forth by the City Council that the City should at this time give notice of its potential withdrawal from the CVA next year. During this one-year period, staff will commence a focused review in order to make a recommendation to the City Council which is not only substantive but which provides justification for continuing in the CVA or withdrawing from it. We recognize that the City would lose its voting right during this one-year period except as it relates to "operating budget items." CARLOSIL.O GA CITY MANAG R 3 CITY 01 PH I M 0ESER( 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260-2578 TEL:760 346—o6ii FAX: 760 340-0574 info@palm-desert.org To: Honorable Chairman and Members of the Palm Springs Desert Resorts Convention & Visitors Authority (CVA) Executive Committee From: Palm Desert City Councilmember Jean M. Benson Date: October 18, 2005 Subject: City of Palm Desert's Position' At its meeting of October 13, 2005, the Palm Desert City Council gave official direction for me to pass on to the CVA Executive Committee its position as it relates to the City's membership in the Palm Springs Desert Resorts Convention & Visitors Authority. The following action was taken by unanimous vote of the City Council, with Mayor Buford A. Crites absent: 1) Non -elected members should not sit as voting members of the Board. 2) The CVA should change its name to be a "Desert Resorts CVA". Specific names such as Palm Desert or Palm Springs should be used in advertising campaigns where they are appropriate. 3) The CVA should not hire a salesperson on CVA funds to be responsible for booking conventions at the Palm Springs Convention Center. While Convention Center bookings have some residual value to all cities, certainly the primary value radiates out from the geographical proximity to the Convention Center. I am presenting this to the Executive Committee as the City of Palm Desert's official position as of this date. C�*" / "'_ Jea4.01. Benson,l Vice air Councilmember, City of aim Desert oa"I:D0.MUDFua PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 13, 2005 Councilman Kelly moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Approve the "Embracing the Desert' design proposals, as recommended by the Art In Public Places Commission; 2) approve contracts with each of the six designers in the amount of $6,500 each and authorize the Mayor to execute same (Contract Nos. C24430A-F). Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by 4-0 vote, with Crites ABSENT. E. REQUEST FOR CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION RELATIVE TO THE PALM SPRINGS DESERT RESORTS CONVENTION & VISITORS 000 AUTHORITY (CVA) REORGANIZATION. Mayor Pro Tern Ferguson acknowledged Councilmember Benson's staff report, summarizing observations from her considerable time with the CVA. He also referred to the memo from Mayor Crites which suggested certain answers to questions posed by Councilmember Benson, as well as three additional recommendations for the Council's consideration. Councilman Kelly prefaced his remarks by emphasizing that they had nothing to do with Councilmember Benson's representation of the City on the CVA, as he felt she'd done a great job, and he commended her for volunteering on regional projects that were often thankless. He went on to say he'd read the staff report and made notes before reading the Mayor's memo, and after reading that, it was almost like he'd dictated it. He agreed with it 100%: 1) That non -elected members should not sit as voting members; 2) that the CVA should change its name to something like "Desert Resorts CVA" and use individual city names as needed; 3) that the CVA should definitely not hire somebody to work at the Palm Springs Convention Center. He further agreed with the Mayor's comment about taking a good look at what Palm Desert is getting for its million dollars and whether it could be put to better use by joining efforts with the City's hotels and businesses, and the potential of possibly forming something mid -Valley. On that basis, he felt the City should make some sort of notice of its intention to do something different, and then preparation would be made should the City definitely decide to go a different way once it studied the alternatives. Mayor Pro Tern Ferguson said in reading through the Joint Powers Authority (JPA) formation documents and bylaws, he found that if somebody were to leave the CVA, the effective date of that severance would be December 31 of whatever year it happened to be. However, the notice of the desire to leave the JPA must be given 13 months prior to the effective date. Therefore, he said if the City decided to leave the CVA, or at least give notice in order to preserve the right to get out, pending answers to questions at the bottom of the Mayor's memo; or if the new Executive Director is not as successful as he thinks he'll be in turning the CVA around, Palm Desert would need to give its notice by November 30, 2005. He said the hedge on not doing that would be the City's commitment of $2 million for the next two years, which he felt was a lot of taxpayer funds on the line. He did not wish 22 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 13, 2005 any ill will on the CVA, and he didn't want putting in notice to be seen as an omen of no confidence, but he also wasn't comfortable betting a million bucks on an uncertain outcome, with questionable decisions being made there as recently as four weeks ago. He felt it would be important for the City Council to discuss the matter, given the short time frame ahead. Councilmember Benson stated that the new director was scheduled to be on board November 1, and having direction of what Palm Desert is looking at during the coming year will show the entire CVA Board its intent. She believed it would be important to give the new director and whole group a chance to turn things around; even with the amount of money the City has to commit, giving notice this year would be a disservice. Further, she noted that a lot of other Valley cities east of Palm Springs had the same sentiment as her colleagues in Palm Desert, but there was a lot of hope for turning things around. She felt it wasn't just the City's decision but a major one for the hotel properties, and it definitely needed to be studied carefully. She said felt the Mayor's memo had a lot of merit and should be conveyed to the CVA but that the City shouldn't give notice for the coming year. Mayor Pro Tern Ferguson said as he understood the CVA documents, simply giving the City's notice of its intent to consider withdrawing was not a decision to withdraw, unless it didn't change its mind. But if the City did change its mind, and the new Executive Director is doing well and everyone is quite happy, Palm Desert could opt back in at no additional penalty. Therefore, he felt the City Council had the ability to do everything Councilmember Benson wanted and everything Councilman Kelly and he are concerned about without putting another million dollars at risk. Mrs. Gilligan pointed out that there was a clause in the prior CVA agreement that said if the City pulled out, it still paid the next year's dues. But if it wanted to come back, for example in five years, the City would pay five years' worth of dues in order to get back in. She said if the City issued its notice of intent to withdraw, it would also lose its vote next year. Mayor Pro Tern Ferguson reiterated, however, that if the City opted back in during the 13-month period, it wouldn't be out anything. Councilman Spiegel suggested deferring the matterto the City Council's next meeting in order to get a report from the City Attorney on what the obligations would be. He was in agreement with Mayor Crites' memo and noted that the Coachella Valley and its nine cities has a population of 319,000; Palm Springs has 45,000, which equals 14.3%, telling him that the "tail was wagging the dog." He acknowledged that Palm Springs contributes more money to the CVA than most of the other cities, but not much more than Palm Desert, and he didn't see our city mentioned very much. He 23 PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 13, 2005 further suggested inviting the new director to Palm Desert so that the City Council could let him know its concerns directly. Mayor Pro Tern Ferguson noted that Councilmember Benson has a CVA meeting coming up, and she wanted to be able to be able to convey Palm Desert's position on the first three questions in the Mayor's memo. He asked whether his colleagues agreed on that much, with the understanding that they could bring back at their next meeting the question of serving notice. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Authorize Palm Desert's City Council liaison to carry the following direction to the next CVA Meeting: a) That non -elected members should not sit as voting members of the Board; b) that the CVA should change its name to "Desert Resorts CVA" and that specific names, such as Palm Desert or Palm Springs, be used in advertising campaigns where they are appropriate; c) that the CVA not hire a salesperson on CVA funds to be responsible for booking conventions at the Palm Springs Convention Center; 2) continued to the next City Council Meeting the issue of determining whether or not to serve notice of intent to withdraw from the CVA prior to November 30. Motion was seconded by Kelly and carried by 4-0 vote, with Crites ABSENT. XIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REQUEST FOR ACCEPTANCE OF CAL COPS (SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES FUNDING - SLESF) GRANT AWARD IN THE AMOUNT OF $100,000. Mayor Pro Tern Ferguson declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony on this item. With no testimony offered, he declared the public hearing closed. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, accept the Cal COPS - SLESF Grant Award of $100,000 to be used to cover the proposed staffing cost for the 2005 Holiday Theft Suppression Program and the acquisition of necessary equipment to support front line law enforcement services. Motion was seconded by Ferguson and carried on a 4-0 vote. XIV. REPORTS AND REMARKS A. CITY MANAGER None B. CITY ATTORNEY None 24 Memorandum City of Palm Desert Office of the Mayor and City Council To: City Council City Manager From: Mayor Buford Crites Subject: Council Direction Relative to CVA Date: October 10, 2005 Let me begin again by thanking Jean for her tenacity and good work in working with the CVA during its period of restructuring. In regard to the particular questions asked, my opinion is as follows: 1) That non -elected members should not sit as voting members of the Board. 2) That the CVA should change its name to be a "Desert Resorts CVA" and that specific names such as Palm Desert or Palm Springs be used in advertising campaigns where they are appropriate. 3) That the CVA not hire a salesperson on CVA funds to be responsible for booking conventions at the Palm Springs Convention Center. While I know that convention center bookings have some residual value to all cities certainly the primary value radiates out from the geographical proximity to the convention center. It is my perception working specifically with one entity like that is a misuse of general funds and again, not only appears to be, but is in actuality promoting one city. On a more general note I am interested in asking our staff and local hotels to bring us a recommendation prior to the time for decision making for the City of Palm Desert for the next fiscal year for the CVA as to our continued membership in the CVA. Among possible options to be explored could be : 1) Using existing CVA funds through our own marketing efforts. 2) Using those in combination with our local hotels and businesses. 3) Potentially joining together with our neighbors in a mid -valley marketing consortium. At this time I don't know which of these options is the best use of Palm Desert's money but I think an honest appraisal by our staff and Marketing Committee and recommendation to the Council would be appropriate at this point. / it--� BUF RD CRITES MAYO Page 1 of 1 GE 'ED OFFICE "`' T, C A Michelson, Wilma From: Steve Morris [smorris@palmspringsusa.com] ' �5 U "I l 1 l'pi I' 43 Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 1:25 PM To: TFreeman@rc-lawnet.org; tmckeating@cathedralcity.gov; Histone6@aol.com; rob@govlaw.com; Lupe Ramos Watson; Terry1 Henderson@aol.com; rono@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; Gdanahobart@aol.com; moconnor@rceo.org; Greg Johnson; Glenn Southard; Tom Genovese; David R@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; patrickp@ci.ranch o-mirage.ca.us; Bruggemans, Tony E.; Dada, Aftab; Ellis, Tim; Finch, Neil; Islava, Mike; Krans, Michelle; Netting, Tom; Oliphant, Richard; Parkins, Rob; Powers, Bill; Sarasohn, Lane; Vossler, Judy; Walsh, Richard; Watson, Doug Cc: Rancho Mirage Staff; Gilligan, Sheila; CityhallMail; Ortega, Carlos Subject: Palm Desert City Council Meeting I have attached a letter I have authored to the Palm Desert City Council, which I will read into the record at their meeting later today, fyi. Seems coasting til Friday was not in the cards! Steve 10/27/2005 October 26, 2005 Members of the City Council City of Palm Desert 73 -5 10 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Dear City Council Members, I am writing as one of my last official duties as the Interim President and CEO of the Palm Springs Desert Resorts Convention and Visitors Authority on the occasion of the council discussing its relationship as one of the nine local governments which make up the CVA's Joint Powers Authority. Although I am now a permanent Valley resident, I am relatively new here yet experienced enough as a result of my 5 Yz months with the CVA to have both an `insider' as well as a 30,000 foot perspective on the topic at hand ... should the City of Palm Desert reconsider, or conversely, reaffirm, its commitment to participate with Desert Hot Springs, Palm Springs, Cathedral City, Rancho Mirage, Indian Wells, La Quinta, Indio and Riverside County in TOT support of the CVA. I fully appreciate and understand the need for periodic evaluation of a substantial investment of public funds of any sort and clearly, in the case of your city's investment of nearly a million dollars from Transient Occupancy Tax each year in the CVA, such a review and discussion is entirely reasonable. The purpose of this letter, then is to do my level best to give you an even handed, thoughtful answer to the unstated question, "What has the CVA done for me lately?" I am pleased to say I believe there is a very good answer to that question. And, no, it does not involve a report out of booked group room nights YTD, which you already have from our recent JPA Executive Committee meeting. However, it would be appropriate for me to provide some perspective on that so that your evaluation of it is in the proper context. First, please know that this is a new and as yet imperfect barometer of what the CVA's sales staff is producing in originated definite future room nights for each city. The "Room Nights Booked by City" report was developed in response to member cities request as a result of the recent Reorganization Committee's work, and is one of many substantial steps taken recently and ongoing, towards developing a fully transparent, accountable, and productive CVA. I mentioned it is imperfect, and need to explain. The report details room nights booked by the CVA sales staff s lead generation and work with member hotels and other facilities to close business, but it is broken out at this time ONLY BY HEADQUARTERS HOTEL. Thus, if a very large group selects, say the Marriott Desert Springs as their headquarter hotel, even though overflow may go to, for example, the Westin Mission Hills and Marriott Rancho Las Palmas in Rancho Mirage, the room night totals all accrue to, in this case, Palm Desert. Staff is continuing to work on both the software development and dealing with the complex inputting required to be more accurate. Thus the report as it stands currently is only a relative measurement, not a precise accountiniz, by individual hotel blocks. Neither does the report take into account Average Daily Rate, and thus revenue and TOT calculations for each member city. In the future, this is expected to be developed to do just that, however please appreciate that this is far more complex than it may appear at first blush. Nevertheless, it is being done, but it will take more time. It has been mentioned to me that Palm Desert's first reaction to the recent booked rooms by city report was that with a nearly similar contribution to the CVA, the city of Palm Springs showed substantially greater room night results. Consider, however, that without knowing where overflow room blocks have been contracted nor calculating ADR and revenue, the relative performance between cities is difficult to precisely calculate. Another measure might be "booked room nights per available room", in which case; Palm Desert's results would appear quite a bit more favorable. And, for example, checking room rates available for this weekend, a hotel in Palm Springs often selected as the headquarters for groups using their new convention center showed a lowest available rate of $151. The comparable major hotel in Palm Desert's lowest available rate was $269, or 91 % higher! Thus it could be argued that TOT collections to Palm Desert from groups could easily be twice the amount per room night as another city. Back to what has the CVA done lately for the City of Palm Desert? As of this morning, we have been advised that a substantial piece of business filling a huge gap in open dates for several hotels next March has confirmed its use of the Marriott Desert Springs as headquarters, with overflow blocks at the Westin Mission Hills, Marriott Rancho Las Palmas, and Marriott Courtyard. The Associated General Contractors of America will bring some 3000 attendees utilizing over 5000 room nights, with the bulk of these in Palm Desert. This is a huge piece of business booked within six months and will make an appreciable difference in City revenues for March, 2006. And, yes, neighboring governments will reap a portion of that. Without the CVA sales staff working hard to fill these empty dates, the group would have gone elsewhere. This is of course only one of many factors that each city needs to evaluate periodically to justify its investment of public funds in the organization. Unfortunately, much of the work of the organization is far more difficult to measure than group rooms booked, nor does this take into account the impact of leisure visits generated, nor spend by all visitors the CVA has induced to come to the valley which impacts cities who are heavily sales tax dependent, like Palm Desert. Imagine a stay anywhere in the Valley without time spent on El Paseo, for instance. Regardless of what formal action is or is not taken today or soon, I hope the City of Palm Desert will remain with an open mind while the many recent changes at the CVA have an opportunity to take hold and flourish to your benefit. A Valley wide marketing and sales effort is far stronger than individual cities going their own way ... it eliminates the need to —this for the sake of argument —replicate overhead, sales staff, advertising and marketing programs, attendance at trade shows, and the list goes on ---and isn't a world in which each of eight cities locally create their own program unthinkable at the end of the day? I can guarantee you that world, the extreme example of `what if' would fail miserably up against stiff competition from other major destination players. My hope is that now and in the coming months your council will see the wisdom of remaining part of the critical mass that is the CVA, which is needed to move the bar here and benefit the entire Coachella Valley. Group bookings in 2005 by our staff are a positive leading indicator of that as the team continues on track to meet its stated room night goals for the first time in many years. I hope you will give them an opportunity to show you what they can do....as they have already shown me. You have an extraordinary group of people working for you on staff and also in leadership oversight. I believe you will come to the conclusion ultimately that staying the course is not only the right, but the prudent thing to do. Thank you. Steven C. Morris President and CEO Page 1 of 2 Michelson, Wilma From: Gdanahobart@aol.com Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 3:05 PM To: tfreeman@riversidesheriff.org Cc: moconnor@rceo.org; smorris@PalmSpringsUSA.com; Terryl Henderson@aol.com; RonO@ci.palm-springs.ca.us.; MaryTRoche@aol.com; rob@govlaw.com; Citywoman2000@aol.com; Eagleps@aol.com; info@govlaw.com; LaquintaDon@aol.com; Gdanahobart@aol.com; ROliph345@aol.com; JudyVossler@aol.com; CityhallMail; tmckeating@cathedralcity.gov; Histone6@aol.com; luperamoswatson@indio.org; Bwaszak@palmspringsusa.com; MRMEEP@aol.com; richard.kite@ubs.com; ▪ r.i Alandseman@aol.com; cnegron@dc.rr.com; Ortega, Carlos; crism@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; s cvasquez@cathedralcity.gov; dadolph@la-quinta.org; DavidR@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; ;— dbradley@cathedralcity.gov; emonarch@cityofindianwells.org; ginnyf@ci.palm-springs.ca.us; <r ;•- gjohnson@cityofindianwells.org; Mary_K_Stephens@hotmail.com; EKMorcus@aol.com; ry ci r^ : pmarchand@cathedralcity.gov; patrickp@ci.rancho-mirage.ca.us; rperkins@la quinta.org; Cfl V);cf` rspiegel@ci.palm-desert.ca.us; Gilligan, Sheila; tgenoves@la-quinta.org • wr; Subject: CVA Agenda ,r- ----1 -,-1"--' .. r7-n C31 > a Dear Tom: I" rn Because of Rancho Mirage's deep concern that Palm Desert is on the verge (tomorrow) of voting to file a Notice of Intent to Withdraw from the CVA we are requesting that the November 15, 2005, agenda contain the following items. These are offered in the hope that 2/3 of the membership will support the proposed JPA Agreement amendments which will have the effect of allowing Palm Desert another six months to consider the issue of their staying or leaving. Under Article XIII (WITHDRAWAL OF MEMBER ORGANIZATION) the last day of a Calendar Year is "always" the "effective date of withdrawal" by a member. Currently Notice of Intent to withdraw is 13 months prior to the effective date of withdrawal. During that 13-month period the member must still pay its regular annual contribution. They do lose certain voting rights, however. Thus, Palm Desert will be required to file such a Notice no later than November 30, 2005, if they intend to pursue the withdrawal process. If they do file such a document, their effective date of withdrawal will become December 31, 2006. Rancho Mirage would consider the loss of Palm Desert to be a significant impairment to the operation of the CVA. We hope to avert that possibility by proposing certain amendments to our Joint Powers Agreement. A 2/3 vote of the membership (six affirmative votes) would be required to pass the proposed amendments. It appears that three sections of Article XIII require amendments if we reduce the Notice of Intention period down to six months. That is the objective of these motions. MOTION #1: Article XIII, Section 4 currently requires that notice of withdrawal must be given not less than thirteen months prior to the effective date of withdrawal. We propose to amend Section 4 to read as follows: "Notice of withdrawal must be given not later than six months prior to the effective date of withdrawal." The motion would also include striking the balance of Section 4 which explains how the calculation is made, and inserting in its place: "For example, notice may, but need not be given earlier than the 30th day of June of the year the member seeks to withdraw. Notice given on or before June 30 of a year shall have an effective date of 10/25/2005 Page 2 of 2 withdrawal on December 31 of that year." MOTION #2: ARTICLE XIII, Section 2 now states: "Current annual contribution to the Authority must be paid in full." Our Motion is to strike the foregoing sentence and replace it as follows: "All regular contributions to the Authority by a withdrawing member must be paid in full from the time of giving notice of withdrawal through the effective date of withdrawal." MOTION #3: ARTICLE XIII, Section 5 currently states: "After giving notice of withdrawal, a withdrawing member shall not have voting privileges on the Executive Committee except for operating budget items during the next thirteen months." Our Motion is to amend Section 5 by striking the word "thirteen" and inserting therein the word "six." The amendment will have the effect of precluding most voting privileges during the six months following giving notice of intent. Rancho Mirage would suggest a possible alternate amendment to Section 5. One which would not strip voting rights from a withdrawing member who is in good standing with its annual contribution. Such an objective could be achieved by simply striking Section 5 in its entirety. If these motions pass with the required 2/3 vote of the membership, they will have to be ratified by 2/3 of the member entities before taking effect. By giving Palm Desert (and of course, any other city considering such a move) an additional six -months to weigh its decision, it is altogether likely their areas of dissatisfaction can be addressed. There are several significant issues remaining before the CVA Executive Committee which touch on the asserted reasons for the Palm Desert position. If those issues are dealt with promptly, and reasonably satisfy the City of Palm Desert, it is my hope that they will reconsider and remain an active participant in the organization. Respectfully, Dana Hobart Rancho Mirage 10/25/2005