Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes Public Safety Commission 11/08/06 i--� ----�� CITY OF PALM DESERT PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION APPROVED MINUTES Wednesday, November 8, 2006 - 3:30 p.m. Administra�ive Conference Room I. CALL TO ORDER i a� � .� The meeting was cadled to order at 3:30 p.m. by Chairman Ri L b I. � 0 11. ROLL CALL �' � �.; Present: �' �--, v Commissianer James Butzbach Q � � Vice Chair Gloria Kirkwood (s�rrived at 3:47 .m. � � � � -rs P ) ►� s� za Commissioner Jim Larsh W � Commissioner M�rtin Nethery (arrived at 3:35 p.m.) o Q � Chairman Rick Lebel � , � 0 Also Present: ► N iaC Cu Mayor Jim F�rguson H � �? � � Mayor Pro Tem Richard S. Kelly � - � `� ° Carlos L. Ortega, City Manager � Q A � „ � W � Sheila R. Gilli gan, ACM for Communi t y Services � � � � � w� Ca ptain Steve Thetf�rd, Palm Desert Potice De partmetnt� a W � � �' �' H H �' Ha � www �.� �'� Lt. Frank Taylor, Palm De�ert Police Qepartment H �t � �� z�� �� W a l t Ho l loway, Ba tt a lion C hie f, Pa lm D e s e r t l Riv�rs i de Cou n"�y ire Dep t Mark Diercks, Transportation Engineer David J. Erwin, City Attornay Mark Greenwood, Director of Public Works Hart Ponder, Code Compliance Manager Pat Scu{!y, Senior Managem�nt,Analyst Mary P. Gates, Recording Secretary 111. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS MR. BiI.L WINTERHALTER(Belmonte Estafies), MR. GREG VAKA(Desert Falis Courtyards}, MR. JOHN GR�NT (Mont�cito), and MRS. ANN VAKA (Desert Falls Courtyards) �ach addressed the Pubtic Safety Gommission relative to th� Ciiy's speed survey on Cook Str�et and agreed to defer APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 comment until such time on the Agenda as the matter was discussed by the Commission. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of Minubes of the Sap�ember 13, 2006, Public Safety Commission Meeting Rec: Approve as presented. Commissioner Butzbach moved to approve the Consent Calendar as presented. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Larsh and carried by a 3-0 vote, with Vice Chair Kirkwood and Commissioner Nethery ABSENT. V. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER None VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Palm Desort Fire Services Monthly Report�or August 2006 Chief Holloway noted the report included in the packets and offered to answer any questions. Commissioner Butzbach moved to, by Minute Motion, receive and file the Palm Desert Fire Services monthly report for August 2006. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Larsh and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Vice Chair Kirkwood ABSENT. B. Palm Desort Special EnforcQmant T•ams Monthly Statistics for August and Septiember 2006 Commissioner Larsh noted that neither report included data on the bicycle patrols. Lt. Taylor noted that the City of Palm Desert had authorized a new bicycle team for the business district, and the Police Department was in the prooess of making those designations, which would be for a finro-year time period. Upon additfonal question by Commissioner Larsh, he responded that this process would not be completed in time for the upcoming holidays; however, there would be a significant number of bicycle units on patrol as part of the Holiday Theft Suppression Program. 2 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 Commissioner Larsh moved to, by Minute Motion, receive and file the Palm Desert Special Enforcement Teams monthly statistics for August and September 2006. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Nethery and camed by a 4-0 vote. C. Palm Desert 3tation -Trafflc Collision Statjstics for Auguat and Septismb�r 2006 Commissioner Larsh moved to, by Minute Motion, receive and file the Traffic Collision Statistics for August and September 2006. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Butzbach and carried by a 4-0 vote. D. Commercial Vohicle Enforcoment Stat�stics for September 2006 Lt. Taylor reviewed the report, nofing that it covered the three Cove cities, with Palm Desert's statistics outlined in green. This unit inspec�s and monitors commercial vehicle violations,including weight, speed, safety chedcs, etc. Chairman Lebel asked whether there were restrictfons on residential streets for large commercial vehicles. Captain Thetford responded that there are certain trudcing/commercial routes in the City;however, if someone orders something that takes a large vehicle to deliver,they do hav� the right to go into th� residential area for that purpose. In addition,the truck/commercial route can be altered in the event of an emergency. Upon further question by Chairman Lebel, Captain Thetford responded that no special City of Petm Desert permits were required for these commercial vehic,les to travel on City streets on a regular basis; however, if they were carrying hazardous materials or were transporting something that was above the weight timit, they woutd have to get a varianoe from the City to move it during specific hours. Mr. Greenwood added that while the City does not cover hazardous materiafs, permits are issued for overweight or oversited vehicles. Captain Thetford noted that the permitting process was through the State for movement of hazardous materials, such as for the City's flrewotics events. Chainnan Lebel asked whether the City received the money collected from the fines. Captain Thetford responded that it goes through the County of Riverside, and the City receives a portion of the money. MR. GREG VAKA, President of the Homeowners Association for the Courtyards at Desert Falls,asked whe#her there were time resfictions on w►hen these vehicles can travel through the City. M�. Greenwood 3 APPR4VED MINUTE3 PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 responded that commercial trucking was largety regulated by the State and Federal govemments, aithough the City did have a few streets with time limits for commercial trucking. Mr. Vaka noted that the City of Indian Wells had a resViction on truck travel through that city; i.e., Fred Waring Drive. Mr. Greenwood responded that the City of Indian Wells established the program on Fred Waring Drive after the City of Palm Desert had done the same, and the reason Palm Desert established that program was the very close proximity of houses to Fred Waring with no sound walls or poor quality sound blodcers. Mr.Vaka noted there was a similar sttua�on with homes on Cook Street from Frank Sinatra to Country Club, which was all residentiat, all without sound waits, and atl with houses badcing up to Cook Street. Chairman Lebel noted this might be something for staff to look into. Mr. Greenwood added that the City currentiy had a project on Cook Street, which will include the necessary sound mitigafion measures. Commissioner Larsh moved to, by Minute Motion, reoeive and flle the Commercial Vehicle Enforcemer►t Statis#ics report for September 2006. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Nethery and carried by a 5-0 vote. E. Considaration of th� Establishment oi Sp�d Zones Cltywide Mr. Dierdcs reviewed the staff report and offered to answer any questions. At the request of Chairman Lebel, he explained the speed survey prooess, noting that speed limits were posted at 85% of the average speeds. MR. BILL WINTERHALTER, Belmonte Estates, asked when the survey was done, and Mr. Diercks responded that it was conducted in August 2005. Mr. Wintefiafter expressed concem with traffic on Cook Street between Frank Sinatra and Country Club, most specificalty the speed of Vaffic, designation of Cook Street as a truck route, and stopping distance of the large trucks. He was also concemed with vehicles tuming onto Cook Street from the various housing developments such as The Lakes, Desert FaNs, Montecito, etc. He fett increasing the speed limit would result in more collisions, and he suggested it be dropped from 55 to 45 miles per hour. Chairman Lebel noted that without speed surveys and designation of speed limits, law enforcemeirt cannot effectively use radar and cite violators, as the cases could be throvm out of court due to not having the survey to back it up. 4 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 200fi Mr. Wintefialter asked whether the Police Department could track how many citations are issued or�Cook Street during a certain period of time. Captain ThetFord responded that the Polioe Department fies to hit every large arterial street in the City at least onoe a month. The Public Safety Commission receives monthly totals of citations, but they are not street-specific; however, he did have the ability to break the inforrnation down by street. MR. GREG VAKA noted that the City was currenUy considering narrowing the lanes on Cook Street between Frank Sinatra and Country Club by eliminating the bicycle lane and expanding the existin9 two lanes to three lanes. In addition, the recommendation was to increase the speed limits. He was concemed with that as well as the trudc traftic and felt this was a disaster waiting to happen. He fett the speed limit should be 45 miles per hour the full length of Cook Street from Frank Sinatra to Fred Waring. MR. JOHN GRANT, Montecito, agreed with Mr. Vaka and Mr. Winterhatter. He said there was a lot of both general traffic and truck traffrc on Cook Street in the momings, and the biggest violator of speed and noise was the Burrtec trudcs. He felt these vehicles cawsed a big maintenance problem for the City due to the rippling of the roads from the weight of the trudcs. He was conoemed about safety, especialty in the eariy moming and late aftemoon hours, with the trudcs using Cook Street as an on and off ramp for the freeway. He also felt that having 45 miles per hour on one side of Country and 50-55 miles per hour on the other side did not make sense. He asked that the City seriousiy reconsider increasing the speed limits. He also feit this was a decision that should be made on the local level rather than by the State of Califomia. MRS. ANN VAKA, resident of Desert Falls, noted that she had actualty seen vehides traveling south on Cook Street become airbome after hitting the dip at Country Club. In addfion, she asked why the City would conduct speed tests in August, which is the slow�est time of the year, and feft they should be done when the snow birds are back. Mr. Baka stated that a petition had been submitted in March 2006, signed by approximately 215 residents, suggesting that the City consider slowing the traffic down,keep the two lanes and bicycle lane, put up a sign stating that Jake brakes cannot be used by the large trudcs because of the residential area, give Burrtec some kind of 5 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSfON NOVEMBER 8, 2006 incentive to move its yard from its current location to an area some place else in the City where it would be more convenient to the frseway, etc. Mr. Greenwood stated that staff was in a tough position with regard to speed limits. Unfortunately, speed aones are barely a local control issue. The City is regulated at both the State and National level. If the City is going to enforoe with radar, it has to follow detailed procedures set forth by the State. He said the speed limit established has to be based on the 85"' percentile of the actual traffic on those streets. When the SherifPs Department uses radar to enforoe the speed limits, if the City does not follow these guidelines, an officer may not present radar evidence against the speeder; if he dces, the officer is breaking the law. I�the City abandons speed enforcement on any given street, the speed limit will actually increase. Staff's rec:ommendation was that the Public Safety Commission forvvard a recommendation to the City Council that it follow these guidelines so the City's enforcement program can be found to be valid and substantial and would withstand the challenge in court. Chairman Lebel noted it was his recolledion that Mr. Greenwood had made a report to the Commission relative to the number of houses on a street within a given segment being part of the criteria for designating speed zones. Mr.Greenwood responded that this particular issue was when the City found itself at odds with the Vehicle Code, which says that any street with 13 houses or more in a quarter mile on one side was a residential street with a speed limit of 25 mifes per hour. On the other hand, if that sVeet was wider than 40 feet or longer than a quarter mile, radar has to be used to enforce that. With that criteria, the houses must be fronting on that street. Commissioner Nethery asked whether the State law said radar cannot legally be used to enforce a speed limit if the limit was lower or higher than the 85"' percentile. Mr. Greenwood agreed. He said it used to 5 mile per hour increments below the 85�' peroentile, but it has recentty been changed to "the nearest 5 mile per hour." For example, if the 65�' percentile resulted in a speed limit of 48 miles per hour, the City used to round it down to 45 miles per hour, but now it must be rounded up to 50. He said this was the law, and if the City did not follow it, the judge would not only throw that particular citation out but would also invalidate the speed 6 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION N4VEMBER 8, 2006 zone program. He added that police officers were required to present the evidence at every trial. Mayor Ferguson noted that he had been working on this issue for ten years, and the most important thing he had leamed was that most people do not follow speed limit signs. They look at how wide the road is, how clear the visibility is, how straight the road is, etc. He noted that the reason for the speed studies is so that law enforcement can cite the 15% of the people who are driving over the limit and be able to take them to court. The counterintuitive thing would be to lower the speed limit under the belief that people are going to actually read ttte sign and follow the speed limit. While it was very difficult for the City to raise speed limits, experienoe showed that unless the surveys were done and the limits set at the 85"'percentile, they could not be adequately enforoed. Upon question by Mr. Grant as to why the study was done in August, Mayor Fe►guson responded that if the surveys are done in the off season when are were fewer people, the statisfical data is such that there will be a bwer speed survey. Ii done in high season when there are a lot more people here, the average speed would be faster, and the 85"' percentile wouW also be higher. Commissioner Nethery steted that while the Commission was sympathetic to the concems of the residents, the problem was in deciding what to do: 1)Lower the speed limit below the 85"'percenble mandated by the State and not be able to use reder which, in the long run, would result in people driving faster because the limit could not be enforced with radar; or 2) set the limit at the 85�' percentile as required by I aw so that the Police Department can use radar and try to step up enforoement. He said that was the tradeoff that the City was studc with, and there were problems with both options. Mr. Greenwood noted that enforcement was the key, and the City of Palm Desert was fortunate to have the best traffic enforoement group in the Coachella Valley. The City had the resources to respond when complaints and issues like this arise. Captain Thetford noted that the Police Departrnent's enforcement program was driven in part by collision data, where collisions are oc;curring. Another part of that enforcement program was based on public comment, and the Polioe Department could not do its job without public input. He said representatives attended meetings of the City Council,Public Safety Commission,etc.,and concems raised at those meetings about traffic drove them to do the enforcement 7 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 programs. He added that the Police Department was compietely accessible to the public. This included having a website, palmdesertpolice.org, where citizens oould type in their concerns about traffic and anything else in the Cit�r, and the Department would look into those issues and respond. Upon question by Commissioner Nethery as to the impact of setting speed limits at less than the amount recommended by the speed survey, Lt. Thetford responded that it would take an extremely effective tool out of the hands of law enforc�ment, as they would not be able to use radar to enforce the limit. Mr. Vaka suggested lowering the speed )imit to 45 miles per hour just between Frank Sinatra and Country Club on Cook Street. Lt. Thetford noted that he would not recommend an artery street like Cook Street having a section wher�e the Police Departrnent could not use radar to enforce the speed limit. He felt it was very important to have the speed survey in Palm Desert, and he felt the Police Departrnent should be able to effectively use all of the tools availabte to enforce the speed limits. Commissioner Nethery said he felt this would be counter-productive. Commissioner Nethery moved to, by Minute Motion, concur with staff's recommendation to City Council to establish speed zones on streets throughout the City. Motion was seconded by Commissioner Larsh and carried by a 5-0 vote. Mrs. Giliigan noted that this matter would be before the City Council at its meeting of December 14, 2006, end a draft set of minutes from this Public Safety Commission meeting would acxompany that report. VII. CONTINUED BUSINESS A. Updats on Video Survei!lance Pilot Program(continued from the msvtlng of Ssp�ember 13, Z006) Ms. Sculfy noted the staff report in the packets and offered to answer any questions. Commissioner Nethery said since only ten businesses would be included in the pilot program, he felt there should be some objective standards or criteria to deteRnine who will and will not be chosen to participate, especialty if more than ten businesses apply. He was concemed that applicarits�ot hee!the selection process is subjective. Perhaps those standards could be induded with the applicafion itself. 8 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 Ms. Scully responded that a flyer would be distributed to businesses by the City's Code Complianoe Department announcing the pilot program, and the flyer could include the selection priorities. Commissioner Nethery expressed concem with staff's second recommendation — that the City Council take action to require that video surveillance equipment be installed in all new businesses as they are being licensed in the City of Palm Desert. He noted that there were probably some small businesses with just o�e or two employees where it might not be that important to have video surveillanoe— pefiaps the businesses did not rea!!y have anything of value to steal; i.e., a CPA frrm, one-person law f+rm, etc. He felt there needed to be some input before the Commission makes a recommendation to the Council relative to which businesses to include. Lt. Thetford noted that this originalty was gang to be for convenience stores but was then changed to include other businesses such as jewelry stores, banks, etc. it was not staff's intent to include every new business that opens in the City but rather those businesses that are more susceptible to theft. Chairman Lebel suggested that it be retail, commercial, a�d wholesale, and Lt. Thetford agreed. Commissioner Nethery stated he felt before a recommendation is made to the City Council, the Commission needs to more narrowly define that group of businesses it feels should be the subject of a proposed orclinanoe. Lt.Thetford agreed. In addition, Commissioner Nethery fett it might be premature at this point to make a recommendation to the City Council to adopt an ordinance and that the results of the pilot program needed to be evaluated first. Commissioner Nethery moved to, by Minute Motion: 1) Recommend to the City Council approval of a pilot video surveillanoe program, with a budget of$15,000 in Fiscal Year 2007/08 to implement the program; 2) direct staff to include in the literature to be distributed to businesses the specific selection standards/priorities by which particapants in the pilot program will be chosen. Mofion was sec:onded by Commissioner Larsh and carried by a 5-0 vote. Note: Mayor Ferguson left the rr�eeting at 4:45 p.m. 9 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 Vfii. OLD BUSiNESS A. Update Rogarding Comespondence from Citizen Sandra Coleman Relative to Concerns About Trafflc Circulatlon in and around Canyon National Bank and the Adjacont Church Parking Lot on Country Club Driva Mr. Greenwood noted that the Commission had previously requested that staff provide copies of correspond�nce to the property owners notifying them of the City's concem with this situation; however, in the course of reviewing the site and the plans, the Church submitted a plan to modify its site. That gave staff the opportunity to require installation of a stop sign on its driveway. He said in looking at the entire layout of the site, he feft this would be the best solution to alleviate the conoerns and allow for the best traffic flow. B. Report from City Attorney Rsls�tive to an Ordinance Either Banning Medical Marijwna Dispensaries in the City of Palm Dosort or Allowing Same with 3pecific Restrict�ons The following ia a verbatim transc�ipt of this portlon of�e n�aetlng: � RL Chairman Rick Lebel JL Commissioner Jim Lar�h DJE City Attomey David J. Erwin MN Commissioner Marty Nethery GK Vice Chair Gloria Kirkwood PS Senior Management Anatyst Pat Scully RSK Mayor Pro Tem Richard S. Kelly JB Commissioner Jim Butrbach CLO City Manager Carlos L. Ortega RL Our next item under Old 8usiness, one that we've been relishing, is a report ftom the City Attomey relative to an ordinance either banning medical marijuana dispensaries in the City of Palm Desert or allowing same with specific restrictions. Okay? (Undear) JL That's why we're here. 10 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 DJE The Commission will recall thatthe Council passed an interim ordinance moratorium in Derxmber of '05 and then extended that for ten months, fifteen days. The moratorium runs out December 22"�of`06. We have been working on an ordinance with the Police Department. It is, I think, one of the more restricave that we've seen in the State. It is generally pattemed after the Roseville ordinance, which is very detailed and goes into a lot of limitations/restrictions on the operation, the individuals involved in the operation. We were working on that,and then the County decided...but we did look at the County ordinance that was going through the Planning Commission. In Iooking at it, it is somewhat similar but does not go into as great a detail as this one does. Then Grover Trask came in with his white paper, and the Board of Supervisors prohibited these items in the County. What is interesting to me is that they did not prohibit or stop the County from issuing the cards, which seemed like they were speaking out of two sides of their mouth in a way. I think probably they're waiting to see what is going to happen in the litigation and, in fact,they have joined...Riverside County has joined with San Diego County in the litigation, trying to have a determination of whether Federal law controls or whether State law wiil control in this instance. RL Well, they've attempted to, but their requeat was cast out because they got in too late. MN 1 thought I read that the court denied their request to intervene...is that not true? JL It was too late. DJE That's my understanding, that they have not been allowed to do that. There is another case pending that they can get into if they want to. It's out of the City of Garden Grove, which is also raising similar issues. I don't know whether County Counsel has dec+ded to do that or not. One of the things that has crossed our minds in the ordinanoe that we've been working on is that the Council really has, and the Commission really has, three altematives...either to rec�mmend passage of an ordinance permitting it with restrictions on it or profiibiting it or we can extend the moratorium for an additional one-year period of time. Under the current scenario, I think our recommendation to the Council is to extend the moratorium and let's see what happens in the court cases. If at any time w�e decide we are not going to wait any longer, we can also take whatever action we want to take with regard to either the permitting of them under limited circumstances or the prohibition. But I think the third altemative that you have in addition to the finro mentioned on yourAgenda is co�sideration of extending the moratorium. And that is our recommendation, under the cuRent circumstances, and see what happens in the court cases. MN And not adopt any or�dinance. DJE Not adopt any at the moment. 11 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 MN What...l don't know if Pat can answer this...did I read in the paper or did I hear someplace that...remember the iast time we tatked, the license was coming up for renewal, the business license, and we had issues about whether it was a taxing issue or a regulatory issue and whether it was meaningless...what happened with that? DJE It apparently got issued without anybody knowing about it. GK Again? PS Oh, okay then. JL Wait a minute...again? DJE That is my... RL How in the hell could that happen? RSK That's what I asked. RL I am sorry...how in the wo�ld... GK We talked about that at the last meeting. DJE The Council is waiting for an explanation of how that happened. MN Not only that, in our minutes we said specifically, you know, thaYs not going to happen...not that we have that much power, but I think staff bought into that, so I guess...anyway, the point is, it happened. DJE It did happen. And Council is waidng for an explanation of why. MN Now, Dave, can you tell us... DJE They did not want that to happen. JL Why can't Council get an explanation? Somebody had to tell... JB Someone issued it...or reissued it. JL There's got to be a paper trail on it. JB The Business Licensing Department? DJE The Business Licensing Department is the one that issued it. 12 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLiC SAFETY COMMfSSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 MN Dave, IeYs... RL As a medical equipment dispensary. JL Equipment dispensary? (Unctear) MN Dave, we have...and I don't know if you're prepared to answer this, but I'll ask and you can teH me. We had a discussion at the last meeting and the meeting before that where we talked about this about whether the licensing prooess is...l don't want to say meaningleas...but whether it's of a regulatory nature or just a taxing. And so... DJE It is a revenue producing (unclear) MN And so issuing or not issuing it is not goir�g to stop... DJE No MN If you didn't have a license and he continued to operate, what recourse would the City have, ff any? DJE We have the recourse of two things...either to stop them from operating without a license...if they applied for it, we would issue it...or attempt to collect the amount of the dollars. MN Without the lioense. DJE Correct. MN So, the City doesn't have to issue the license, but you can't shut the business down...if they offer the money, you can't shut them down? DJE We have not been able to successfuliy shut a business down that offered to pay the money. MN That offerod to pay the money. DJE That is correct. MN So the answer to the question is evan though somebody, you know, who messed up...we've got to know, you know...even though somebody messed up by issuing the license, if they had offered the money, license or no lic:�nse, we couldn't shut them down. 13 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 DJE We probably could not close the business, that is correct. MN Okay. RSK They have a question for you, Carlos. RL Even though the business is a non-conforming or non-addressed use... DJE Well, our Planning Departrnent made a determination that it was not non- conforming so far as zoning was concemed in the first instance. MN Way back when... DJE Way back when. MN ...a year ago. RL So the Planning Department says it is a conforming use? DJE So far as zoning is concemed. RL Okay. Can you clarify for us... JL (unclear) this again. RL Can you clarify for us the teRn "medical dispensary" because it's not in law. DJE It's not in the law. There are medical 000peratives that can cuftivate marijuana, but dispensary is not in the law. That term is not defined, is not mentioned in the Compassionate Use Act. JL Well, isn't that in the DA's white paper? DJE Yes. (Unclear) RL Correct. MN So... (Unclear) RL Well, we've been dealing with this issue now for approximately eight months, perhaps a littla longer than that. We've had...we've had it agendized at least four 14 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 meetings. At one of the...whether it's the first or the second meeting, pefiaps in April or May...we asked if staff would get clearance to ask the Attomey's Office to prepare two draft ordinances for review (so that goes back a minimum of six montha, which woutd be an ordinance which would permit and restrict it or an ordinance to prohibit it) so that we could review those, and we could take some action. It seems like we've been fraught with fivstration on every point in terms of trying to get action or infortnation in order that we could make a recommendation to the City Council. At our last meefing, a month ago, we had virtual assurance from staff that the ordina�ces would be at that meeting for our review. They were not. (Unclear) GK The previous one. RL Previous...for review. They were not. At this meeting, and in our staff packages, there were no ordinances for our review, so it appears that we are unable to make a recommendation to Council. Pefiaps your recommendation for our consideration, a recommendation that they extend the moratorium for another year, might be one to consider, but that would be a recommendation that I would be embarrassed to make, frankly, because we've been trying to get sufficient data and information to be abte to review to make a determination to make a very clear r�ecommendafion to Council...and w�e've been unable to make that recommendation for nearly a year. I would be embarrassed to ask the Council to consider a moratorium for another year. ! couldn't make that recommendation. I'm sure maybe members of the Commission may have different feelings about that, but that would be very embarrassing for the Commission to do that after the Commission has struggled for month after month after month to try to get some clear language that we could review and read and make our recommendation to Council. GK Mr. Chairman,may I make a point here from our previous minutes? We specifically requested, and this is to our City Manager...in fact, I spoke to Mayor Ferguson and said is there any kind of notation in the busineas ticense when it comes up for renewal, and...to make sure that we know whaYs going to be happening with this renewal. And he, in fact, said correct, we have definitely made a notation, we are looking at that, and we are trying to figure out whether or not we can or need to go ahead and renew this license. So I'm confused as to....l don't want to belabor it, but I'm confused as to why did this get r�enewed, how did it get renewed, under what basis was the license renewed? CLO I think the City Attomey explained the basis under which it was issued in the first place. You will recali that probabty about a year ago, one of the things that the Council considered...there are provisions in the Municipal Code under which the Council can revoke a business license, okay, and one of those was that it was against, I think, the law. But before the Co�ncil could revoke it, there were two 15 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 methods by which it could do it. One was to go ahead and revoke it and then provide a public hearing or notify the holder of the lioense that we intended to revoke it and hold the public hearing. The Council chose the latter, and 1 think at the end of that public hearing the Council chose not to revoke it but instead to carry it further to see, I think at that time, what the County was going to propose. That's my recollection. And so pending no revocation by the City Council, how the (unclear) determines,we h�d no choioe but to reisaue it. Bec.ause for us to revoke it, I don't think we had the grounds. At least the Council chose not to revoke it at that time. MN The business license is...l mean, I share the frustration, but the business license issue realty is a non...has taken us no ptace because as the City Attomey has said, and I think Mayor Ferguson said in the meeting before that that was his understanding is that it's a revenue matter. If they tender the money,we don't have to issue the license, but we can't put them out of business. So that really takes us no place, even though iYs frustrating that it happened, and I'm sure there's frustration at the City Council and here and every plaoe else. But,you know, it's not going to take us any plaoe that we want to get pursuing that lioense issue. I'm not sure that I...I'm certainly frustrated. I'm not sure that I would be embarrassed to, given what we know now that we didn't know before, to pass along a recommendation of a moratorium. I'd like to do it after having seen the two proposed ordinances and then have that attemative because,you know, if you have the iwo ordinances...but w�e know some things now that we didn't know two months ago, which was our last meeting. We know that the County tried to get in that law suit but can't. We know that we got that white paper by the District Attomey that we didn't have, who's told ua, in his opinion at least, akhough that white paper was...l haven't studied it...l know you have, and the people that work with you have, Dave, but it wasn't a model of clarity. It seemed to me there were some inconsistencies or at least some holes in it. But it's there. And we know that the Cour�ty, you know, if you read the minutes and you think about what we talked about, we thought by now the County would have adopted an ordinance, and we wanted to wait and see what the County was gang to do, review what the County was coming up with, and maybe use that as a model or at least something to work with and to compare with whatever proposed ordinance the City Attomey was going to provide. In fact, my understanding was the City Attomey was probably going to look at that County ordinance, and we might make it more restrictive, but we certainty weren't going to be less restric�ive. Sounds like the City of Roseville that you're using as a model is more reafictive than the County ordinancx. DJE Much more. MN So I'm not...white I'm re�lly frustrated because we spent a ton of time on this, and we've all done a!ot of reading on it, I'm not sure that the recommendation to extend the moratorium, given that the County's involvement in a lawsuit is in limbo, given the white paper by the DA which says..and the County's decision there aren't going 16 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMiSS10N NOVEMBER 8, 2006 to be any of these in the County, and given the fact that, you know, the business license, we oouldn't shut them down with that anyway if we had wanted to, and these lawsuits are pending, and it sure would be nice to know what the outcome of the tawsuits are because the courts...presumably, the problem is...they'll probably be appealed no matter what the decision is, and so there's probably not going to be a definfive decision by any court of appeal, and written appellate decision, within the next two years, and w�e'd be lucky to get it in that so, wouldn't you say, Dave... DJE Probably, yes. MN ...by a court of appeal, unless there is a summary judgment motion or something quicker than that. So...the problem is, 1 guess, a moratorium you said c:ould be extended for a year... DJE Yes. MN ...and it e�ires on December 22nd. At the end of that year, then what? DJE That is the end. We cannot go any further. MN That's it. You either have to act...you can't...no more moratorium...you have to act. So a year buys us the possibility of seeing what exactly...what do we find out. If there's a decision in the lawsuit at the trial court level, at least we'd have that. DJE Right. MN The cap...is the Fontana case...iYs not as far along as the one in San Diego... DJE The Garden Grove? MN I mean Garden Grove. DJE No MN It's not as far along (unclear)that's why the County...okay. So, we may have more information in a year than we have now, but not necessarily so. And so, really, to me, the question is do we act now? It wouid be nice to see a couple of possibfe ordinances, altemative ordinances...do we act now o� do we wait and try to have more information given the status quo. Then it comes down to can we live with the status quo for another year? ThaYs really the question...or less than a year because it would be another two or three moriths before the Ciiy Counat is able to act. So it's do we act now or do we �ct in, you know, eight months, six, eight, nine months, so that's really the question it comes down to, I think, and hopefully have more information. So...t only say that because I don't want to... 17 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 (Unc{ear) JL What does the new license extend to, since he got another license? DJE I do not knov+r the date. It would be for one year, so if it was issued in the last couple of weeks... JL (unclear)do anything. He's already got a license, and the City Council's not going to do anything. MN Well, no the... DJE The moratorium is to prohibit any use as a cooperative, dispensary, whatever you want to call it. So that use is now prohibited. JL Alright. MN Would this facility in the City be...if that were to happen, if the City Council were to adopt that ordinance,would that use...could that be shut down, to be blunt about it, or would... DJE If it is to prohibit it,the answer is yes. If it is to restrict it, they have, I believe it's 60 days or 90 days to comply with all of the restrictions. MN And then if they don't, they can... DJE If they don't, they're shut down. MN So the business license doesn't really prevent that from happening. The business license has no bearing on that part. DJE That's correct. MN If an ordinance were passed, they'd have to comply or be shut down... DJE ThaYs correct. MN ...depending on what the ordinance said. DJE Yes. MN And the County stili is issuing the...what are they called? ldentification... ST Medial marijuana ID cards. 18 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 MN Medical marijuana cards. ST The understanding is the County of Riverside is still following the law and following the law, as vaguely as iYs written on the books right now. The argument is whether dispensary should be used or not. The advocates will tell you in the verbiage of the law, it says °store". They are taking that as a broad term to allow them to operate dispensaries. The County didn't see it that way and based on the white paper of the District Attomey, they chose to deaUaddress the issue of dispensar+es only, and they agreed with the DA saying that dispensaries aren't written into the law, therefore we won't follow the law other than what's written right now, and we'll challenge the law through the courts, but the couldn't get in. MN When you say they won't follow the taw, they will follow the law, but there are no dispensaries allowed, so therefore w�e're not going to allow any dispensaries. ST Right. (Unclear) tollow the law as +t exists right now. MN Yeah. I know you had two or three realty important issues in this regard. Short of outlawing this,one was medical marijuana cards being a requirement. This guy has signed a...he has signed a oontract, an agreement, with the City that he wilt require that, correct? ST No. DJE Correct. MN Hasn't he? ST Well, how do we enforce it? If we find out that he's selling to people that don't have medical marijuana ID cards, what' the enforcement option for the City? DJE Basicalty at that point, I think we coutd say he's violating the agreement, which right now we consider he's operating under that agreement, without the benefit of anything in our zoning ordinance. And I think w�'ll take a different position than our Planning Department and attempt to close him down. ST At this point, Mr. Hochanagel is doing everything he can to make sure he stays within the iines as they a� vaguely written right now. So as I understand, he's selling to medical marijuana ID card patients solely. We haven't come across anybody he's selting to recenUy that isn't a medicaf marijuana ID carc! holder, so I should say it's not that he has violated the ordinanoe at this point...we haven't contacted him as such yet. MN So that was....(unclear) thinking about the status quo for a minute. The medical marijuana cards, I know, is a big issue with law enforcement. 19 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 ST Well, hold on a second. Keep in mind, all that does for your Palm Desert Police Department, is it puts a regulation upon this business only. !t has nothing to do with anybody once they walk out of that business. if they're outside that business and they don't tell us where they bought it, we're still in the same boat, okay. They're in the City of Palm Desert, in possession of marijuana, and we have to determine is it a violation of the law,or can they legitimately have it? So the medical marijuana ID card regulation that we put upon Canna Help only deals with them on property and (unclear) our recourse toward them for them being able to distribute. It has nothing to do with us dealing with other people out in the field, whether they bought it from Palm Springs, whether they bought it on the street, whether they're growing it in their ovm home, okay. There's no regulation at this point in the City of Palm Desert saying they have to...the user, the person in possession of it, has to have a medical marijuana ID card. The only regulation we put upon the dispensary... MN So frame the issue for us, Captain. You stop somebody, one of your officers stops somebody for whatever reason, probable cause,and they have marijuana on them, and it's a violation of the law... ST We have to determine...is it medical marijuana or is it not? MN So they say, oh medical marijuana...if it's not... (unclear) ST If they say, no I don't have medical marijuana, iYs not medical marijuana, then we arrest them. MN Yeah. If they say it is, then... ST If they say it is, now we're in the conundrum of determining how do we determine that. If they went by the option that's available to them, and they went down to the Department of Health, and they obtained a Riverside County medical marijuana ID card, and they show that to us, and we run that number through a system that we can acc�ss 24 hours a day, and it comes badc as a valid card, we hand them their "medicine"and their card, and we send them on their way, okay. We haven't come across that. We've oome across people that have a letter of recommendation, which is clearly within what the law says they can do, but yet that law doesrt't tetl us exactly what format that letter is supposed to be in. It doesn't tell us what that card looks like. It doesn't tetl us how we're supposed to verify that letter. As a matter of fact,they're photocopies with different types of writing on them. And the other issue that we have for regulation, sinoe we're on the iasues, is that medical marijuana r�ecommendation letter we're finding now has three different colored dots on it. And we talk to them and say well, what's this. Well, that's because this yetlow dot is when 1 registered at Canna Help, and this green dot is when I registered at Palm Springs Care Givers, and this red dot is when I registered over here. RL But who's the primary care giver'? 20 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 ST Exactly the point...primary care giver, you know. So there's the other part. And then the third part of the problem that we have is a business operating for profit selling a controlled substance by Federal standards. If you want to call it a medicine, fine, but he's dispensing medication at his own cost that he's setting the price, and he's making money hand over fist. RL Sure he is. ST So, if there's a way to regulate that, that would be interesting to know as well. Our biggest problem on the street is the medical marijuana ID card and our ability for our o�cer to make a determination right now. We're not going to stand...per the direction of the Sheriff, we'r�e going to abide by the law, so w�e're not going to make a moral judgment upon that person if they're abiding by the law. The problem we have is how do we know if they're abiding by the law or not. ThaYs our problem. MN Of your three situations here, if they don't say anything about med+cal marijuana and they're arrested, if they show you a card...medical marijuana, and they show you a card, and you let them go and give them badc their "medicine," and...the tough situaaon is they don't have a medical marijuana card, but they claim medical marijuana, so thaYs w�at...in the short run, we really need to address that, if there's a way to do it. DJE I would apologize to the Commission. I know that I missed your last meeting. RL I hope you enjoyed the cruise, though. DJE I did, very much so. I would apologize. I did not understand you wanted to see the ordinances. I can get them to you immediately. MN t don't know that we've seen the agreement. Maybe it was in the papers you gave us originally. DJE I'll be happy to get that for you. MN Can you get a copy of that agreement that this guy has? 1'd like to see what he agreed to and didn't agree to, and maybe... JL You mean the most cument agreement? MN Weil, he has an agreement he signed in the spring or something? ?? Better part of a year ago. RSK I have a question. 21 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 RL Yes. RSK If the Commission here is going to make a recommendation as to whether the moratorium should be continued or not, don't they have to do that tonight in order for the Council to have a recommendation whe� they make a decision? DJE The Council will be acting December 14�'. PS The answer is yes. RSK So if the Commission wants to be included in that decision, we need to get its recommendation tonight. MN If there's a recommendation...forget our recommendation. If the Council decides to extend the moratorium, that doesn't mean that any time in that next year...or let me rephrase that...at any time during the next year... RSK We can do (unclear) in between. MN ...you can adopt an ordinanc�. A month later, or six months later... RSK Yes. MN Okay. So, then, I don't think there's any choice if we're going to have any input to the Council, I think given where the situation stands and given the flux, the change, since our last meeting, I think that the recommendation has to be to adopt a moratorium but then ask staff and the City Attomey to provide us with alternative ordinances, draft ordinances, as well as that agreement for us to consider at the next meeting or maybe finro months hence, given the December issues, and then we can make a recommendation to the Council, and the Council will decide...if we recommend just leave it as it is and wait{onger, fine. If we recommend one of the two ordinances, then the Counal will consider our recommendation and take whatever action it deems appropriate. I think we would almost have no choice where we're at, frustrating as it may be. RL Comments? JB Does the moratorium have to be extended tor a year, or can it be... DJE They can act at any time. The maximum period of time is a year. JB A year, okay. DJE And normally when we do that, we extend it for the maximum time, with the understanding that we can act at any tirne during that period of time. 22 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 ST (unclear) we come across a case where they've sold to somebody with just a recommendation letter, which is violation of the agreement they made, thaYs enough grounds, one case, for us to go ahead and shut them down? DJE Yes. PS Marty, was that a motion? MN Shall I make...does that sound...shall 1 make that motion? GK Are we...the Commission's...our original position, I believe, the Commission's position was originally to prohibit. Are we pretty much all... JL A year ago. GK A year ago, right. Where are we today? JB I haven't changed. JL I haven't changed, either. MN 1'd sure like to see the two...l mean, prohibition is a reasonable possibility. I'm sure I like the idea a lot. But I'd sure like to see the alternatives and see what kind of , ordinance...what kind of serious restrictions can be put on...especially one as detailed as perhaps this one that we're hearing about now or detailed in the County's. I'd kind of like to see that before I... JB We could be comfortable saying we had two drafts. MN I think so. GK Could we make our mation to extend the moratorium for six months rather than for a year, or does it make any difference? ?? It doesn't make any difference. DJE You can come up with a recommendation to the Council requesting that they act next month or one month tater. RL However, if we do make the recommendation that they would only extend the moratorium for six months,then that would mean at the end of that six month period of time, the Council would have to take action (unclear) or another. GK Right. 23 APPROVED MtNUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 DJE That's correct. RL So that would be putting... MN I wouldn't want to put that kind of pressure on them. RL ...it would be putting more pressure on them. MN The Council will act when it feels appropriate anyway. JL I think the Council is tired of hearing about this, too. RL I don't doubt it, I don't doubt it at all. GK Make the motion, Marty, I'll... MN Okay. I think...l guess the motion is that we recommend to the Council that it extend the moratorium for a year, for the maximum period of time, which !guess is a year ftom December 22"�... DJE It would be a year from the 14�'. MN ...a year from the 14"', alright, extend the moratorium for a year, and that in the meantime ask that the City Attomey provide us with altemative ordinances, one outright prohibition consistentwith the law,of course,and a second permitting to the extend consistent with the law, with significant restrictions and we will consider those at our next meeting. GK And a copy of the agreement. MN And a copy of the agreement. ThaYs a request, I don't know if it has to be in the motion. JB Yeah, I'd like to see the agreement, too. MN Really the motion is to extend the moratorium. That's the formal motion. The rest of it, I guess, is a request to staff to provide u�with the information. PS You've got it. RL We have a motion and a second on the floor. All of those in favor... JB Aye GK Aye 24 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 JL Aye RL Aye MN Aye RL Opposed? RSK I think you did the right thing. RL Continuing on with the Agenda, we have a report...... IX. REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL ACTION (S) None X. REPORTS AND REMARKS A. Comments by Public Safety Commissioners 1. Chairman Lebel noted it was his recollection that in 2002 or 2003, the Commission reviewed a proposal by the Sheriff s Department for a new facility that would have been completed and occupied in 2005. He asked for an update on that proposed facility at the neut Commission meeting. 2. Chairman Lebel stated that a presentation was made to the Commission at a meeting in 2003 by Matthew Frymire, Chief Technology Officer for the County of Riverside, relative to public safety communications for County radio communications interoperability. That program was supposed to be in effect in 2004/2005, and he asked for a status report on that program at the next meeting. 3. Chairman Lebel stated that in 2005,the State of California and the Califomia Fire Service developed a proposal (with the California Fire Chiefs and the Fire Districts Association of Califomia, the Califomia State Firef�ghters, the Califomia Professional Firefighters, and the League of California Cities, along with the State Fire Marshals, Metro Chiefs, and the Califomia Service Corps in conjunction with the Govemors Office of Emergency Services and the Califomia Citi2ens Corp�)for a Califomia Fire Corps program pattemed after the National Fire Corps program,designed to provide fire agencies throughout Califomia with resources that can be used to recruit 25 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 volunteers from throughout the community to assist in non- operational positions. He said he had the package of information from the Califomia Fire Chiefs on that and passed it along to the Fire Department for its review and to see whether or not such a program would be viable for the City of Palm Desert. He asked that a report be brought back to the Commission in approximately 60 days relative to the feasibility. B. Update on the Citizens on Patrol Program Ms. Scully noted that there continued to be an operational moratorium on the activities of the Citizens on Patrol (COPS) program. Captain Thetford noted that the Citizens on Patrol program had lost sever�l members who were problematic. The last he had heard from Special Programs Manager Frankie Riddle was that members would be coming back in September, and a meeting was going to be held in October to bring the program back on line. However, he was not sure whether or not that had been done. He noted that the light bar had been changed out on the van, and it was ready whenever the COPS program comes back on line. C. Comments by Police and Fire Departments None D. Comments by Staff 1. Ms. Scully noted that Veterans' Day would be celebrated on Friday, November 10"', with the Navy Jazz Ensemble from the White House to perform at 7 p.m. in the Civic Center Park. This performance was free of charge. She added that it was an honor to have this Ensemble, as it was the group's only Coachella Valley appearance. 2. Ms. Scully reminded the Commission about the Public Safety Appreciation luncheon on Wednesday, November 21, 2006, 11:30 a.m. at Marriott's Desert Springs. She asked Commission members to advise Mary Gates if they were not able to attend. Commissioner Larsh stated that he would not be able to attend. 26 APPROVED MINUTES PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION NOVEMBER 8, 2006 3. Mrs. Gates noted that the City Manager's Office had received fi la carte tickets for the Art of Food �Wine. There were three events: November 10 -general admission to Pink Martini concert November 11 - Pageant of the Casks on EI Paseo November 12 - Grand Tasting at the Marriott She said there were a total of 30 tickets available for each event fordistribution to City Committee/Commission members, and she asked that the Commissioners advise if they were interested in receiving some of these tickets. Mr. Ortega added that they were available on a first come, first served basis. XI. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Larsh moved to �djoum the meeting at 5:30 p.m. Motion was seconded by�ce Chair Kirkwood and carried by a 5-0 vote. Mary P. G e Recording Secretary 27