Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPrelim - CC - 04-11-2013 DRAFT PRELIMINARY MINUTES REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING THURSDAY, APRIL 11, 2013 CIVIC CENTER COUNCIL CHAMBER 73510 FRED WARING DRIVE, PALM DESERT, CA 92260 I. CALL TO ORDER - 3:00 P.M. Mayor Harnik convened the meeting at 3:00 p.m. II. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Pro Tem Jean M. Benson Councilman Robert A. Spiegel arrived at 3:12 p.m. Councilman Van G. Tanner Councilmember Susan Marie Weber arrived at 3:04 p.m. Mayor Jan C. Harnik Also Present: John M. Wohlmuth, City Manager David J. Erwin, City Attorney Rachelle D. Klassen, City Clerk Russell Grance, Director of Building & Safety Lauri Aylaian, Director of Community Development Martin Alvarez, Director of Economic Development Paul S. Gibson, Director of Finance/City Treasurer Janet M. Moore, Director of Housing Mark Greenwood, Director of Public Works Frankie Riddle, Director of Special Programs Stephen Y. Aryan, Risk Manager Casey Hartman, Batt. Chief, Palm Desert Fire/Riverside Co. Fire Dept./Cal Fire Michael Bianco, Admin. Sgt., Palm Desert Police/Riverside Co. Sheriff's Dept. Grace L. Mendoza, Deputy City Clerk Upon inquiry by Mayor Harnik, Ms. Klassen affirmed that the agendas for today's City Council, Successor Agency, and Housing Authority Meetings had all been posted in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act. PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 111. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - A(CLOSED SESSION ITEMS) MS. RUBY CALVERT, KentuckyAvenue, Paim Desert,addressed the City Council, specifically in furtherance of a request she'd made of Councilman Tanner some time ago, as she hadn't received any written or verbal response. Councilman Tanner said he'd referred the matter to City staff regarding an issue of a plumbing back-up in Ms. Calvert's home,which seemed to be a result of tree roots encroaching into her sewer system. Mr. Wohlmuth said he'd referred the matterto Directorof Housing Janet Moore and asked for a followup, which she'd told him that Ms. Calvert had come into City Hall to speak with Housing. MS. CALVERT said she'd spoken to the Housing Department prior to contacting Councilmembers Tanner and Weber. Further responding to Mr. Wohlmuth's comment that he'd learned that she was not interested in another Home Improvement Loan (HIP), she said it was a number of years ago, and the last approach was made to her by the City. Nothing had ever been connected with sewer, water works, or plumbing in her other HIP applications. She asked that her issue be taken back up when officials are back in their offices after today's meeting. IV. ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION Reauest for Closed Session: A. Conference with Real Property Negotiator pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8: 1) Property: 43-878 Portola Avenue (APN 622-200-055), Palm Desert Negotiating Parties: Agency: John M. Wohlmuth/Martin Alvarez/City of Palm Desert Property Owner: Josephine V. Gaudio Trust Under Negotiation: x Price x Terms of Payment B. Conference with Legal Counsel regarding significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2): Number of potential cases: 2 C. Public Employment pursuant to Government Code Section 54957: Title of Position: City Manager Ms. Klassen noted for the record that she wished to correct a typographical error on Property Negotiation Item 1 above (Section IV - Adjourn to Closed Session, Item A[1]). The address of the property was incorrectly listed on the Posted Agenda 2 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 as 48-878 Portola Avenue, and it should have been listed as 43-878 Portola Avenue. With City Council concurrence, Mayor Hamik adjourned the meeting to Closed Session at 3:05 p.m. She reconvened the meeting at 4:04 p.m. V. RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING - 4:00 P.M. A. REPORT ON ACTION FROM CLOSED SESSION. None VI. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THEUNITEDSTATESOFAMERICA- Julien Bloch , Palm Desert Youth Committee Chair VII. INVOCATION - Mayor Pro Tem Jean M. Benson VIII. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - B None IX. AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, AND APPOINTMENTS A. PRESENTATION TO RECOGNIZE M. CONNOR LIMONT FOR HER SERVICE TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT AND ITS PLANNING COMMISSION, 2007 - 2013. Ms. Limont was unable to be present for today's recognition, which will be rescheduled to the meeting of May 9, 2013. 6. PRESENTATION TO RECOGNIZE THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE AND RANCHO MIRAGE PUBLIC LIBRARY, AND THE DESERT RECREATION DISTRICT FOR THEIR INVALUABLE SUPPORT DURING THE PALM DESERT PUBLIC �IBRARY "REFRESH PROJECT" - 2012. On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Harnik presented an engraved travertine plaque to the City of Rancho Mirage and Rancho Mirage Public Library. Rancho Mirage City Councilman Ted Weill and Rancho Mirage Library Director David Bryant accepted the recognition with sincere gratitude. Mr. Bryant commented that being a good neighbor includes many different facets of our friendship. He emphasized that their library is open to Palm Desert residents any time, their cards are free, and he noted that in 3 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 January,they checked out 60,000 books(a rate of 720,000 books/year), and he believed they got a very nice boost from Palm Desert residents being their patrons at that time. He joked that perhaps the award should be given to Palm Desert for this reason, but said they'll take and treasure it dearly. It was their pleasure to be of service at that time and to continue to do so. As Council Liaison to the City's Library, Mayor Pro Tem Benson said she was a visitor to the Rancho Mirage Library every week all summer long, and without fail, she was always asked if she needed help—they were more than helpful, which she greatly appreciated. She added that over the summer she'd met more Palm Desert people there than you would normally expect to see out, and they were, too, always graciously welcomed by the Rancho Mirage Library staff. On behalf of the entire City Council, Mayor Harnik presented the second engraved travertine plaque to the Desert Recreation District. General Manager Kevin Kalman graciously accepted the recognition on behalf of the District. He said it was definitely an unexpected honor. They appreciate being part of the village here - playing their role, enjoying having the Library share their facilities here at Civic Center Park and hoped it would continue, because it's been tremendously successful. C. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DECLARING APRIL 2013 AS "SEXUAL ASSAULT AWARENESS MONTH" IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT. On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Harnik presented the proclamation to Coachella Valley Sexual Assault Services Advocate and Program Assistant Margaret Davis and Advocate Carole Schaudt. Ms. Davis expressed appreciation for recognizing the work they were doing in the community. She said their being there makes a difference in the IivesO of many of the victims - they cannot save everybody, but they can save somebody. Ms. Schaudt added her thanks to Mayor Harnik and City Councilmembers, and she also expressed thanks to the first responders - Palm Desert Police/Riverside County Sheriff's Deputies and to the Palm Desert/Riverside County Fire Department staff. D. PRESENTATION OF PROCLAMATION DECLARING MONDAY,APRIL 15, 2013, AS "DESERT CANCER FOUNDATION DAY" IN THE CITY OF PALM DESERT. On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Harnik presented the proclamation to Desert Cancer Foundation Board Members Louis May, John Hussar, and Executive Director Louise Fasana. 4 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 Desert Cancer Foundation representatives expressed their sincere gratitude for this recognition, noting that they were very proud to be able to do something in this community, which they didn't think was being done anywhere else — providing the money to support people who need cancer treatments, working with hospitals and the wellness community to do so. Ms. Fasana added that April 15 represented the day of their Indian Ridge Golf Tournament, all golfers were invited to join and help support their mission in this way. It was where their Foundation got its start, and the event was still going strong after 19 years. E. PRESENTATION OF "TREE CITY U.S.A." RECOGNITION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT BY CAL FIRE SOUTHERN REGION URBAN FORESTER. Landscape Manager Spencer Knight commented that the City is seeing the fruition of five years' worth of effort with this presentation and today's recognition. He especially thanked Landscape Specialist Diane Hollinger and Public Works Administrative Secretary Beth Longman for their invaluable assistance in gathering all the necessary paperwork and helping him with the application and submission process. He introduced Cal Fire Southern Region Urban Forester Thomas Shoots. Mr. Shoots congratulated the City for its recent designation as a "Tree City U.S.A." He was grateful every day for being able to travel around Southern California and recognize cities that have put in the work and made the effort to achieve this distinction. The program is offered through the National Arbor Day Foundation, and because Cal Fire manages the State's Urban Forestry Program, responsibility for management is passed onto California's Urban Forester. To become a "Tree City U.S.A.," four criteria must be met, the City must: 1) Have a Tree Board/Department; 2) spend $2 per capita on tree care; 3) have a Tree Ordinance to help protect the trees here; 4) have a Tree Proclamation on Arbor Day. He said Palm Desert was obviously making huge efforts, and it was time to be recognized. He added that urban forestry was so important to every city — trees provide stormwater capture and energy savings through shade. He said as he drove around the City, it was obviously a beautiful place to live and was great to see that Palm Desert took its urban forest very seriously. He hoped this effort would continue throughout the years and that the City would even go out for the growth award. On behalf of the National Arbor Day Foundation and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, he was proud to present the City of Palm Desert with the"Tree City U.S.A."for the very first year. On behalf of the City Council, Mayor Harnik graciously accepted the plaque and noted that everyone can easily look around to witness the great efforts 5 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 made by Palm Desert's team. In fact, today they were out planting trees at Palm Desert Charter Middle School, and they truly make a difference here. F. PRESENTATION ON PALM DESERT YOUTH COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES BY COMMITTEE CHAIR JULIEN BLOCH. Chair Bloch said he was also the Subcommittee Chair of their next event,the Youth and Senior Technology Day at the Fountains at the Carlotta on Saturday,April 27. Through this event, theywere trying to bring togetherthe youth and seniors and help in a way that was specific to the Youth Committee, namely the use of technology and electronics. Committee Members will be split into groups having expertise in the different applications - Microsoft, Mac, iPhones, Androids, and will simply help the seniors with any questions they might have and on the use of their devices. The Youth Committee's last event of the year will be a Car Wash with proceeds going to Shelter From The Storm. Responding to question, he said the Car Wash was scheduled for Saturday, May 18, with location yet to be determined. X. CONSENT CALENDAR A. MINUTES of the Regular City Council Meeting of March 28, 2013. Rec: Approve as presented. B. CLAIMS AND DEMANDS AGAINST THE CITY TREASURY - Warrant Nos. 188, 189, 194, and 195. Rec: Approve as presented. C. COMPLIANCE ANALYSIS AND INVESTMENT REPORTS forthe Month of February 2013 (Joint Consideration with the Successor Agency to the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency). Rec: Receive and file. D. APPLICATION FOR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE by Living Desert Gardens, 47900 Portola Avenue, Palm Desert. Rec: Receive and file. 6 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 E. CITY COMMITTEE AND COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES. 1. Art In Public Places Commission Meeting of February 20, 2013. 2. Audit, Investment & Finance Committee Meeting of February 26, 2013. 3. Citizens' Sustainability Committee Meeting of August 8, 2012. Rec: Receive and file. F. LETTER OF RESIGNATION from Ron Gregory - Architectural Review Commission. Rec: Receive with very sincere regret. G. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL of the Second Annual 2013 Martha's Village & Kitchen Thanksgiving 5K Run/V1/alk Race and EI Paseo Road Closure Between Ocotillo and Lantana. Rec: By Minute Motion, approve: 1) Thursday, November 28, 2013, date for the Second Annual Martha's Village & Kitchen 5K Race; 2)EI Paseo Road Closure between Ocotillo and Lantana for the event— no related fiscal impact. Upon a motion by Tanner, second by Benson, and 5-0 vote of the City Council, the Consent Calendar was approved as presented. XI. CONSENT ITEMS HELD OVER None XII. RESOLUTIONS None XI11. ORDINANCES A. For Introduction: None 7 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 B. For Adoption: 1. ORDINANCE NO. 1256-AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTERS 5.87, 5.90, 25.04, 25.10, AND 25.38 OF THE PALM DESERT MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENTS AND MASSAGE PRACTITIONERS. Councilman Spiegel recused himself from this item and left the Council Chamber. Councilman Tanner moved to waive further reading and adopt Ordinance No. 1256. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 4-0 vote, with Spiegel ABSENT. XIV. NEW BUSINESS A. CONSIDERATION OF THE APPROVAL OF BEGINNING THE PROCESS OF FORMING A LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICT FOR HOMES LOCATED ON THE FAIRWAYS OF PALM DESERT COUNTRY CLUB (PD Golf Operations, LLC, d.b.a. Palm Desert Country Club, Applicant). Senior Management Analyst Ryan Stendell noted the staff report, supporting documentation, and correspondence from community members in the Council's packet.Some important key points were that tonight was not a vote to form a Landscape and Lighting District (LLD), but to consider whether to allow the process of formation to occur, which hinges on a vote of the community before the City Council could accept such an assessment district. Major questions by community members hinged upon community support and timing of the ballot. Staff recommended a 55% threshold for approval, because staff felt that a large amount of community support should be there before taking on this process. Secondly, the timing of the ballots is a concern. Even though the assessed formation requires ballots to be mailed to mailing addresses wherever the permanent tax address would be, staff heard complaints that a summer time vote wasn't ideal. The staff report provided a time line with ballots going out in late May and the voting period going through the middle of July. However, the process can be postponed with the vote taking place in the next fall/winter when everyone was in town. Staff believes these are the two key issues with how to structure the matter if the Council wished to go through with the formation process and allow a vote to go out. He's had about 50 to 75 various contacts from community members in the last several weeks with the largest portion by phone calls, second by emails, and thirdly by letters; copies of emails and letters were provided in CounciPs agenda packet. The majority of emails and letters were negative with the two most common themes being that they liked what PDCC had done by getting the place opened, and the maintenance looked good, but they didn't feel taxation was the right way to go about it. The second 8 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 theme was that it wasn't right in any shape or form to subsidize a private business. In conclusion, he noted the lengthy memo from Wildan Financial Services. He said staff believed the assessment district as proposed by Wildan could fit within the confines of the boundaries of the 1972 Act AD and Proposition 218. He said W ildan's report went into details on how that could happen, and a representative was in attendance to answer any questions. Additionally, owner representation for PDCC, LLC was in attendance and wished to make a statement. Mayor Pro Tem Benson said it would be helpful if staff explained the City's position, because what she has read in the newspaper was not true. She said it would be wise for the community to know the City was not promoting this matter. Mr. Stendell stated the previous owner of the golf course went out of business, and the golf course was not maintained for quite some time. Prior to purchasing the property, the current owners approached the various departments of the City doing their due diligence and going through the normal process, and they had inquired about a potential assessment district. Staff from various departments indicated to the current owners that no purchase should be considered based on an assessment district, because no guarantees could be given. The approach of the current owners at that point was to establish a track record with the community, demonstrate their Iong-term commitment, maintain the facility, and potentially later talk about the formation of an assessment district. He said a bit of time has passed and the ownership has approached the City again inquiring about staff's position for formation of a Landscape and Lighting District (LLD). He said first and foremost staff wants to see significant community support, but if the City didn't have to be involved with this, it would surely be the best solution. However, based on community input, telephone calls, and his communication with the owners, staff has learned the HOA is fractured, it does not include the entire golf course; therefore, that option is out. Sfaff looked at a Community Facility District (CFD), which could work, but it wouldn't fit as well as a Landscape and Lighting District. It turns out that if there is community support for an assessment of some kind, a Landscape and Lighting District involving the City would be the only way to achieve it. Therefore, staff is here today asking whether or not the City should participate in that process. Councilman Tanner stated the Landscape and Lighting District requires an approval of 51%, but staff was proposing 55% of the ballots cast, and the Community Facility District (CFD) requires a 2/3 vote of the total. Mr. Stendell agreed, stating the two major differences befinreen the CFD and LLD, is the simple majority versus 2/3 on the voting requirements. With the LLD, the ballots go to the registered property owner, where as with the CFD 9 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 the ballot went to the tenant. Further responding, he clarified that the votes are based on ballots received in both districts. MR. MOE SIHOTA, Palm Desert Country Club Managing Director, stated he would respond to matters that have been raised, but first noted that if there was a vehicle apart from involving the City, they would have preferred that as well. In fact, they would have preferred going through the HOA, but as staff indicated, the HOA didn't represent the entirety of the homes in the area; therefore, by law, the only other option was to approach the City to administer the vote. He said they were not asking the City to take a position one way or the other, but simply asking for a vote to be held so that the community can express their opinion. The issue today, based on the staff report, is whether the Council should put the assessment question to a vote, which they think it should. They are fully aware of the strong opinions on both sides with regards to an assessment. Some people feel very strongly in the community that there shouldn't be any assistance provided to a business who purchases an asset on their own volition, and there are others in the community who say PDCC has done a good job and is worthy of support from the homeowners. Be that as it may, the community needs to hear those arguments and evaluate the information to make a decision. As a Course owner, they need to plan for future golfing seasons with or without an assessment. However, he read the staff report, and he has a number of concerns and suggestions to offer, most of which relate to the question of timing. His first concern is that there is now new information, as contained in the Wildan r�port, that came out on Monday, which was the first time he saw it. He was sure many hadn't had the opportunity to study or inquire about it, and there will be staff reports and engineering reports to come. Therefore, a lot of fresh information needs to be shared and made accessible and circulated within the time frame noted in the staff report. He said PDCC recently had an Open House, and community members made requests for information about their revenue and expenses. Therefore, PDCC is creating a single web page that will consolidates all the information so that people can make an educated and informed decision. The web page will contain their financial information, because they think it's fair that it is disclosed. The web page will be easily accessed through a link to the existing golf course website. He said community members also asked for their corporate and ownership structure, maintenance, electricity, and water costs, therefore, that information will also be posted. He also received inquires as to how the assessment numbers were arrived at, how one can prevent the assessment from getting bigger over time, and how the assessment will work. Therefore, he will post Wildan's report, City staff reports, and other technical information that exist and is to come. Other questions included where PDCC would be putting newwaste bunkers,desert landscaping, and impact to their views. Again, all this information will be included in the web page so that people can see the impact it will have on their own individual neighborhoods. Additionally, there will be a Q&A page 10 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 that deals with questions like, "Why can't you just increase revenue?" or "How has the course helped increase property values?" He said PDCC recently sent out a written notice to property owners providing them with a PDCC email address so that community members can propose any question, and he will personally call them back. To date, given the emails received,they have been able to respond within two days. He said, hopefully through that process, they can deal with the issues of information to ensure it is properly and fully shared. However, his concern remains that the engineering report will not be completed until May 9, and he didn't know if it will have errors/omissions and/or raise unforeseen issues. He said it would be unwise to set the date for a vote today and have the ballots go out on May 27tn when the report itself won't be ready until May 9. He said prudence and caution indicates all reports and information should be in hand before setting a date. Although he preferred an early vote, he understood a delay to November could happen, but emphasized the information needs to be final and accurate before proceeding in July ratherthan in November. He is also concerned about the 55%threshold for a vote. Needless to say, if 46%were in favor of an assessment, PDCC wouldn't have thought to approach the City to have that opinion prevail. Yet on the other side of the coin, if 36% voted against, the way the recommendation is structured, that opinion would prevail. He said they preferred, in fairness, to follow the simple majority of 50% plus one, but they understood the decision rested on the City Council, and in spite of their comments on the staff report, they understood the reasoning behind staff's recommendation. He said PDCC will live with whatever determination is made in that regard. Lastly, they used the County Assessor information to mail information to property owners, and about 2°/a of community members indicated they never received anything from PDCC. He hoped there was some mechanism where they can ensure all property owners are contacted and receive their ballots, and hoped City Staff can assist with this issue. Therefore, today from PDCC perspective, it was asking the Council to approve staff's recommendation to hold the vote, reflects and await on the engineer's report before finalizing the date, and reflect on whether the appropriate threshold is 50% or 55%. In the end, the central issue for PDDC is relatively straightforward. The Course was built in the 1960's when land was plentiful and water was cheap: The Course is 170 acres and PDCC maintains it all, and they do it with pride. He noted that most courses in the area average 110 acres. The revenue from the Course is sufficient to maintain 110 acres and provide a reasonable return on investment, and they can maintain 110 acres in a way that preserves the aesthetics for the golfers and provides a great golfing experience. In fact, they were just nominated as one of the best public courses in the Coachella Valley, and they intend to keep it that way, but the remaining 60 acres are maintained to preserve the aesthetic for homeowners and not the golfer. Therefore, by way of survey, they have gone to the homeowners and asked if they liked the way the golf course was maintained today, and 90% of the people who responded said yes. They asked then if they would be 11 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 agreeable to covering some of the maintenance cost, and 70% said yes. They also asked how much they were willing to pay, and 62% responded befinreen $20 and $25; he noted Wildan's report was just outside of that range. He said the survey disclosed that most indicated an assessment would help protect property values and avoid the problems of the past, and PDCC would like confirmation of that by way of vote. If the vote passes,they will maintain the lands for the benefit of both the homeowner and the golfer. If the vote fails, they will maintain it for the benefit of the golfer, and PDCC would just like to know one way or the other so it can plan accordingly. He reiterated PDCC would like to proceed with a vote and get direction from the community one way or the other. Councilman Spiegel asked if PDCC planned to only maintain 110 acres if the vote failed. MR. SIHOTA answered yes, but he wasn't going to be that precise. He said the way the golfing industry is structured here in the Valley, most courses are 110 acres and they do reasonably well, and he knew they could do the same. He said the Club went out of the way this year to demonstrate to the community what can be done, and for the community to decide whether or not they want to go to that extra level. If they do, it will be by way of an assessment. He said they are proud of what they have been able to accomplish. In fact, just yesterday, people stopped and thanked them for what has been accomplished, because they know what the course looked like before and what it is now. Councilman Spiegel asked if it was feasible to take the additional acreage and make it drought tolerant if the vote failed. MR. SIHOTA explained no matter what the vote is, there will have to be a level of desert landscaping and waste bunkers, and those plans will be shared on the website. He said they will also have to deal with the difficult question of the Executive Golf Course that takes up a lot of land and time, which the City asked that it be maintained. Therefore, there will be challenges to face if the vote doesn't go through, but the community likes the way the Course is, and he hopes to get their consent to maintain it with their participation. If it happens, great, but if it didn't, they will have to live with it. Mayor Harnik inquired about the monthly assessment amount. MR. SIHOTA responded the reportfrom Wildan quotes$26.15 of which 10% of that, $2.62, would be Administrative cost of having the City involved. In response to the question as to why the City was involved, he said it was PDCC suggestion to involve the City, because it would be wrong if the money went directly to PDCC to be applied in whatever fashion it wanted, and by having the City receive the funds, it would ensure the assessment 12 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 went for the maintenance, which would be to PDCC benefit in any event. He said it would be better than simply turning cash over to PDCC. Mayor Harnik asked if there was any type of escalator. MR. SIHOTA answered yes, stating it was at the rate of inflation. However, he wasn't persuaded that over a measure of time that would be required. Going back to Councilman Spiegel's question, he said one could argue that if they did a higher level of desert scape and waste bunkering, the actual assessment could drop, but it will depend on what will be put into those areas, which is clearly an exercise that PDCC still had to go through with the community. He said by disclosing their plans at the front end on their web page, they should be able to protect against any increases in the assessment. Mayor Harnik said she was aware of how wide and expansive those greens were and asked if the plan was to bring in the amount of grass and put zero scaping on the sides orjust maintain it with sod. MR. SIHOTA explained the whole Course couldn't be maintained with that much sod, stating that even if one did, given what's happening with water and electricity rates, it was inevitable one wouldn't be able to maintain it tomorrow. To be frank, they knew going into this, they would either have to shrink the course by putting in a lot of waste bunkers and desert scape, shrink the land base further, or go through an assessment where the costs are shared. Therefore, if the assessment were to pass, he envisioned a level of desert scape, waste bunkers, and some green space, stating it was in evitable they would have to go with that design. Councilman Tanner said people in the audience had written letters with concern over having an assessment placed on their real estate tax and questioned whether that was the only way to effectively make this work. MR. SIHOTA replied community members would be assessed twice a year when their property taxes are paid, which was his understanding. He went on to say that one of the reasons they decided to disclose their financial information, is that people need to understand the assessment didn't represent a windfall for PDCC. He said the assessment represented a level of thought on PDCC to try to arrive at a reasonable number that recognized the need on the part of the public to try to maintain some semblance of aesthetics around their homes, as well as recognizing the challenges faced as an operator. He said they felt bad that this had resulted in a level of acrimony in the community, and they will do their best to reduce that temperature by sharing the information that has been requested. He said PDCC will be attentive to what people have to say and look at the results. 13 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 Mayor Harnik noted there were quite a few speaker cards on this matter and asked that comments be limited to three minutes, stating that if a comment/point was already made, it didn't need to be repeated so as to provide everyone an opportunity to speak. She noted she had read all the emails and letters submitted, understanding this was an emotionally charged issue. Therefore, she asked that everyone show courtesy to the speakers and allow them to voice their comments. MS. BARBARA POWERS, KentuckyAvenue, Palm Desert,stated shewants everyone to read the staff report, because the Applicant did a great job with the golf course, but she was concerned about the 15-feet easement that PDCC would like to take. She shared she did neighborhood watch for most of the area, especially the area that's not in the association, and in the past, they have dealt with all kinds of trouble with kids partying, and if the easement becomes public use, homeowners will have to deal with kids, bicycle riders, and dog walkers. She said it was a great neighborhood watch that focused on the front of the house, but if they had to watch the back area, who was going to enforce it, because the wonderful police department helped to get rid of those problems. Therefore, she didn't know how owning 15-feet on both sides of every fairway was going to help. She said the blue area outlined in the map that was included with the staff report represented the 15-feet easement she was talking about, which is to be filled with either desert landscape or grass. Additionally, there are entryways onto the golf course without going through gates, which is where all the kids come through, and once they find out the area is public again, there will be problems. She said at one time there were as many as 200 kids running through her yard, but not since Mr. Sihota has been in charge. MR. BILL COTE, Florida Avenue, Palm Desert, stated that at the last meeting the Applicants held at the Country Club, those in attendance were told that if the assessment wasn't approved, property values would be negatively affected because of the ups and downs in the golf course, which sounded to him like a threat. He said to force the community to do something with a threat was extortion, and he didn't like the City even considering a LLD and putting it to a vote, which was basically rewarding a crime, stating the owners shouldn't be rewarded but arrested. He indicated on the speaker card that his position on this issue was neutral, but that's because he wants to ensure there are limits on the assessment if the vote goes through. He said if the Course becomes so profitable that the community's help is no longer needed, there should be a limit. He said the Applicants are begging the community for money, which was almost like public housing where if the person starts making too much, they are kicked out and no longer provided subsidy. He said it was the same here with PDCC wanting subsidies from the public, so there needs to be a limit on the assessment. 14 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 MR. DAVID GALIE, Texas Avenue, Palm Desert, stated he lives and owns his home of three years and is familiar with the history of Palm Desert Country Club. He questioned if the 55% approval vote meant 840 households or 55% of the number who vote. In other words, if 400 people out of 800 vote, 220 votes would carry the day. Councilman Tanner answered yes, stating that was the way it was explained to him. MR. GALIE said that didn't sound very favorable to his fellow neighbors who probably wouldn't go along with that process, and it was not a representation of democracy. He said the owner promised all these wonderful things, but he hasn't received a response to his written tetter. In fact, he hadn't heard about this 15-feet easement until this morning, and he tries to stay involved. He said the idea that 40%, 70%, or 80% of the people voted in favor by some survey offered by the PDCC management is not a valid number and cannot be accepted. He said the Council will find that opposition is far greater, and the community will hold the City respansible if it persisted with a vote. He said people will assume the Council did it for a reason for going against community wishes, and when ballot time comes, they will vote accordingly. Additionally, the website that this owner is offering is too little too late. He believes the community should have their own meetings, then the community can return to the Gouncil with their decision on whether to double their payments by implementing a self-imposed tax from $25 to $50 per month, or not, but it should be the community communicating with the City and not the owners of the golf course who have their own agenda. MR. RICHARD DODSON, Illinois Avenue, Palm Desert, stated he enjoys a 60-foot frontage along the fairway of the 17`h hole. He attended the evening meeting held at PDCC Clubhouse on March 24. At that meeting, they were informed the golf course was 170 acres, and when compared to the other golf courses averaging 110 acres in area, it was at a competitive disadvantage in terms of the required green space maintenance. At that time, he understood the problem involved the additional maintenance of discreet pockets of green space, which were out of play, and as the presenter said, "never saw a ball." He said it would have been helpful if the presenter had provided a planned graphic indicating exactly the areas considered out of play and unnecessary use to the golf course. Had they done so, ratherthan waving their arms and speaking in generalities, it would have been clear that sandwiched in between the 18 links of the main golf course was a second nine-hole executive golf course, which should have been subtracted from the 170 acres. He found it hard to believe the presenters didn't consider that option and probably ruled it out, preferring to work with the 170 acre number rather than a lesser number. He left that meeting with the impression that it was more smoke and mirrors than one of clarity. Yesterday, he read a neighbor's copy of the City's staff report and 15 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 learned for the first time that a 15-foot easement running along both sides of the fairways was being considered for the basis of the LLD taxation of 180 homeowners fronting the golf course. He questioned how this matter went from street pockets of unnecessary green space to the proposed creation of this taxation easement for partial green space maintenance, and why and how did they arrive at 15 feet. The report also suggests that homeowners paying for the partial grounds maintenance would be able to make use of the easement, but it was not specific as to what that use would be. For example, would the 850 paying homeowners allowed to walk theirdogs on the grounds they are maintaining in this easement, which is an activity currently not allowed on the private property of the golf course. He understood the golf course owners were pushing for a vote in May, at a time when many homeowners are out of town, but glad to hear they agree with his view to postpone the vote to November. He said if the vote was proposed now, community members would not have sufficient information or clarity to vote wisely. MR. LOUIS GRINBAUM, Illinois, Palm Desert, pointed out that even though these are golf course homes being discussed, many residents are low-income and on limited funds and cannot afford an extra $25 a month to help out a private business. He came across one lady who couldn't afford air conditioning, and everyone knew how vital that is in the desert; she had to have public subsidy assistance. Therefore, when considering this issue, don't just think about the snow birds who can afford $25 to $30 a month, but those whom this fee will make a big impact. He made the comment that he would be happy to take an extra 15 feet of property and willing to pay property tax on it as well, stating a lot of people would enjoy the same opportunity, which was another option to consider. He said the HOA monitored the golf course, and if it's not up to standards, homeowners do get written up. MR. BRENDAN GORDON, Minnesota Avenue, stated he has lived at his residence since 1977, and he and his neighbor did not receive a survey. He's concerned that the information given out is not including some. Additionally, he is Canadian, and he usually is home by now, but he stayed an extra week to attend this meeting. He said it took two weeks for mail from Palm Desert to arrive in Canada, and another two weeks to return,therefore, he urged the Council to allow for at least six weeks of time to submit a vote. In doing a quick calculation of the assessment at$26.15 per house multiplied by 12 months, it amounts to $265,000 a year of additional revenue to the owners, which raises the value of the golf course up between $3 and $4 million. He asked if there was a way of stopping the taxation if the golf course was sold, because if he personally owned a golf course that could make $3 or$4 million tomorrow, he would sell it. As far as he understood it, there was no way of stopping this taxation. 16 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 MR. CHARLIE ASH, New York Avenue, Palm Desert, stated he was concerned with some of the factors on this matter. He said the easement was a new development to him as he just learned about it yesterday. He posed a question to the City Attorney as to how that would affect the green belt that was established at PDCC over the years, stating that in this last election, property was approved and sold to housing, setting it aside in perpetuity as a green belt. He wondered if this easement affected the green belt or not. He was also concerned this issue was on a fast track, which can cause things to happen or not happen that should. He suggested taking our time in doing this right. Additionally, he pointed out that all of the houses in that area are 6,000 square feet with the exception of the new 1995 homes, which are 5,100 square feet. He said if an assessment is considered, everyone should have the same assessment, because if it's based on the frontage, he had 30 feet, and it would be unfair to someone else that didn't have the same amount of property. He said the survey by PDCC concerned him as well, because many didn't get it. He keeps hearing these percentages based on the survey that indicated 75%voted a certain way, yet who verified its accuracy. He said the City is taking action based on these percentages and wondered if City staff checked them for accuracy. Otherwise, anyone can come to the City with their own survey and the City is willing to believe it. He said more homework was needed before ending this issue, and he agreed that there are a lot of people who can't afford that additional payment. MR. FREDERIK LEEGER, Texas Avenue, stated he was a permanent resident for more than 25 years at Palm Desert Country Club, and he's seen the ups and downs of the golf course. He came to this open forum to express his strong opposition to this taxation, because he and his neighbors are living on parcels adjacent to the golf course. His backyard has a view of the gth hole, which is nice and green like many other golf courses in the Coachella Valley, making the comment that it was a reality show of golf and money. He said PD Golf Operations, LLC, is a Canadian outfit that is self-serving and a moneymaking operation with a staff of lobbyist and financial advisors that are promoting a scheme of assessment to pay for operating expenses. He said it was all about money, and with all due respect, he had a lot of Canadian friends and people that enjoyed that. Indirectly, they get support from the HOA, because there are a few people that like to play golf and they like to play it on the cheap. He said feedback from a phoney survey claimed there was great support for an assessment in the majority of local golfers. Who else, but the golfers that voted in this phoney survey, and he was one of the exceptions to oppose it, but many of his neighbors never opened their mail. He said many of the homeowners are residents and non-golfers. He questioned, who did PDCC, LLC, think they were, because there are plenty of golf courses in the Coachella Valley. Thanks to plenty of water and sunshine there is plenty of play as long as you pay the price. The business community in the Valley welcomes the snow birds from all over the Country, 17 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 and it supports local economy. As a non-golfer, he will not pay any assessment or tax to support the money hungry management company out of Canada. MS. CONNIE SWANSON, Florida, Palm Desert,thanked the CityCouncil for having this meeting. She expressed concern about a special district for landscape and lighting, stating that if this was allowed for a private golf course, even a private owner for a public golf course,what is to keep the City from another district like a shopping mall that needs painting and landscaping,will the homeowners be assessed again. She couldn't see how citizens could be assessed for a private corporation, stating it was a conundrum. She said if the golf club can no longer maintain the 60 acres, she suggested the club give those acres to the City as the residents are already taxpayers paying higher fees because they live on the golf course. She said if the City owned the property, it will have an interest in this public course and to clean is parks and recreation facilities. The City will then have a right to assess. She said if the golf club didn't want to deed the 60 acres to the City, they might consider deeding it to the property owners. However, deeding it to property owners could be a myth with all the assessments and bickering. She said the acres belonged to the City, and the Council as elected officials are trusted by the community, and they had the power and capability to solve this problem. MR. JIM LAWSER, New York Avenue, Palm Desert, provided a photograph of the area behind his fence, the grass that is nonexistent, demonstrating what a poor job they've done of maintaining eight feet of dead grass. Additionally, when the grass is mowed, it throws dead head sticker onto his yard. Therefore, since they did a bad job of maintaining the area thus far, it would do no good to have PDCC#ake it over and be reimbursed for it, stating the City would get more complaints than its worth. He also disagreed with Mr. Sihota's assessment of the suryey that most people are in favor of an assessment, because he had a copy of it and most who were in the majority was conditional, but the conditions are not mentioned so he didn't think it was valid. There were suggestions like free golf to be included in the package, and Mr. Sihota didn't include it in the assessment. Therefore, the survey included a lot of people that are not actually for it. He said the City shouldn't be involved in something this controversial. MS. TERESA LAWSER, New York Avenue, Palm Desert, thanked the Council, City Attorney, City Manager, and especially Ryan Stendell who has been amazingly professional in this process. She understood everyone had very hard jobs as she and her husband worked for state govemment in Colorado for nearly 30 years. She has crossed out a lot of items off her list, stating there was a better understanding on the time line with the concern over a vote in the summer. The LLD was touched upon by Mr. Stendell on whether Proposition 218 was the right vehicle, but it was something that will 18 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 be figWred out. She was not in favor of the assessment, but read a LLD is established for offsetting cost to beautify neighborhoods, and could also be expanded and allowed for a broader assessment if there was a broader benefit found. In other words, at a minimum, all the houses in Palm Desert County Club should be assessed and not jusf the ones bordering the golf course, because the house across the street will have the value of their home go up. She said there is a broader community benefit, therefore, the wealth or the debt should be shared. She pointed out that an annual $300 assessment would pay for finro months of her husband's Parkinson's medicine, stating that was a lot of money for her household. She said if there was a ballot sent out, it ought to be by the City for accountability. She said she's filed open record requests with Mr. Stendell, and he was great in responding. However, if the ballot is mailed out by the Country Club, it would need to be mailed certified registered mail. MR.JIM REITHOPPER, Illinois Avenue, Palm Desert, stated this golf course has been in existence for more than 50 years, and while it's been up and down, it's all been caused by the overwhelming financial burden against the property, particularly the prior owners with the multimillion dollar renovation. He said the current owners were lucky enough to purchase this prime Coachella Valley golf course for $1,140,000, and unlike most of his neighbors, County records show they have no mortgage with the exception of a recently filed mechanic lean for $44,000 for work in repairing the state-of-the-art watering system. He didn't know how this investment company could buy for 6 '/2 cents on the dollar, hold the property mortgage free, and not make a huge profit, And to try to get an assessment to offset their cost of water, for the most part, from poor, working class, and fixed-income seniors living in their 50-year-old, 1100 square-foot, and $150,000 homes, was unconscionable. He asked that this whole procedure be slowed down, stating it was going at a heliacal pace that it was head- turning. He never received any survey and he has talked to others who didn't receive it as well. Therefore, whatever information the Council was given to lead it to believe there was some consensus is totally bogus. Additionally, this special assessment issue should not go on the ballot. He said PDCC promised a social membership, which should be in writing if community members end up being stuck with an assessment. MS. DANIELLE WRIGHT, Florida Avenue, Palm Desert, stated she purchased her home last summer, and prior to purchasing it, she investigated what her property taxes and homeowners association fees would be, and what her expenses would run for electricity, etc., doing her due diligence to make sure she could cover the costs. She said this company had to know what their operating expenses were going to be with regard to water for their maintenance, electricity, and all the things that are incurred in operating a business. If they could not foresee operating under standard goff course fees,then they shouldn't have invested in that property, 19 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 and shouldn't have planned to operate the business banking on putting forward an assessment on surrounding citizens to support their business. It isn't right, and she didn't think the assessment should go through or even go to a vote, because it's not the community members' problem. MR. TERRY ARCHER, Michigan Drive, Palm Desert, stated he purchased his home in 1990. Since then, he's watched the condition of this golf course go up and down like a yo-yo, and he's never seen the golf course in better condition. He didn't like the idea of an assessment, but he didn'twantto see a vacant and dead golf course,with foreclosed homes, increased crime rate, and reduced property values by 60 to 70 percent. He'd much preferred an assessment to those types of conditions experienced three years ago. It's obvious, by the comments made, the information needs to be better presented to the members of the community for accuracy and to give everyone an equal opportunity to assess and make a choice. He didn't know if the voting percentage was based on an Ordinance, but to increase it from the normal rules of 50% plus one, to this 55%was unfair to the golf course. He believed the set percentage was a standard rule and regulation, and it's unfair to change it. He was in favor of the assessment, but an extended amount of time was in order to get better information out to the community and for the City's involvement. What he didn't want to see, which is happening now to Palm Springs Country Club and soon Santa Rosa, is that condominiums are going in, and he didn't want houses or condominiums in his back yard, he wants a golf course. MR. BOB LUDWIG, Indiana Avenue, Palm Desert, stated he's lived in his home since 1961. He has several issues with this matter, stating that in the golf course glory days, it used to hold the Bob Hope Classic, now known as Humana. He agreed water was more expensive, but it was great water in 1961;water now has a lot of minerals. The Club is now asking for$26+, and when he first heard about this, it was $23. He said the amount has already gone up 10% and the community hasn't even voted. He suggested turning the golf course into a desert. At the open house they were told that if the golf course was 90 to 110 acres, the owners wouldn't even be talking to the community and there would be no discussion of an assessment. He believed the owner is a business man out to make money; however, many like him are on a fixed income. He pointed out the Club is making a quarter of a million dollars for the 50 or 60 acres. He reiterated this was not drinkable water; its potable water. He agrees the golf course was green, but at what cost. His property is on Indiana Avenue, and his fence is 80 to 100 feet and it borders the golf course. In the early days, the people that ran the property would use spreaders around everyone's property, so that the seed didn't fall onto one's property. He has stone around his property, and it's difficult to move 300 square feet of stone to pull the weeds, stating he should bill the club owners for his cost of round up and his time to keep his yard looking the way the HOA wants it. He is concerned that a private business 20 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 who has only been operating for a year is now begging for money, and it almost sounded like the owners were already in bed with the City, however, he hadn't heard what the Council had to say. He questioned how a private corporation can come in after one year's time and want to assess the community for water and electricity. He commented the company wants to double his assessment by offering a social membership of 10%. However, $3,000 had to be spent to get that 10% to equal the assessment, which would give them an additional $2,700, which didn't make sense. MR. DAVE MOURHESS, Colorado Street, Palm Desert, stated he and his wife Karen live in the PDCC community. He developed the top ten reasons to reject the LLD forthe community,which include: property owners have not been invited to be investors; public funds to subsidize operations of a private enterprise is unwarranted; assessments would create an ideological divide about the practice of subsidizing for a profit entity; the LLC hopefully conducted sufficient due diligence priorto the acquisition of the golf course, and the Pro Forma of financial forecast to project revenue and expenses for near and long-term horizons should have been analyzed; if LLC requires a capital infusion to fund their operation, they should consider equity/debt financing like every other business; currently PDCC residents pay an annual assessment,with many of them paying an additional monthly assessment to the Esperanza HOA; a business back stop program working with local lenders would be more acceptable to fund the LLC requirement for ongoing operational commitments; an assessment lasts forever. He strongly urged the Council to reject the golf courses request to establish a LLD. MS. REGINA GONZALES, Indiana Avenue, Palm Desert, thanked the Council for the opportunity to speak, stating her comments would be brief, because many items have already been discussed. She pointed out that Palm Desert Country Club was not a gated community, it is not a private entity, and community members are not paying for security#here. However, residents do pay property taxes, and the bill indicates what it covers, which is to take care of the area. Therefore, she did not see why an additional assessment was needed for a private company. She said it was a public golf course run by a private company, and she didn't know how that worked and would like someone to explain that aspect. She said this was a private company that came and made the community better, but the community should not have to pay into the company to make it nice, because it was a benefit that came with it. As previously mentioned by others, if the company needs additional income, being a private company, they should consider getting stockholders, but not ask the community to contribute. She said many are living on a day to day basis and don't have the money to be paying extra expenses. 21 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 MR. CHARLES HANNA, Warner Trail, Palm Desert, brought a flyer that indicated the golf course was for sale,which was displayed forthe audience. He said if that was the case, what would the long-term deal be with this tax bill. One of his concerns was the cost per square footage, and if it would be based on the frontage of the house or the golf course proportion, because each place is different regarding how many feet the frontage is to the golf course. He said if the assessment was $26 for 40 feet, and he has 60 or 80 feet, then he would be paying $50 or$60 a month. The other issue is that if the golf course is sold, who will be responsible for keeping up the golf course, and would there still be a tax bill that residents couldn't get rid of. However, if the community pays the assessment, he would like for the course to remain nice, but if not kept up and it went back to the way it was two years ago, can they remove the assessment or was it indefinitely. Additionally, if the golf course is sold, will the new owners have to accept what the City has established with the assessment, or can they suggest something else again. Mayor Harnik inquired about the date of the flyer, and a member of the audience clarified it was the original bank sale ad. MS. KATHRYN CULVER,Oregon Circle, Palm Desert,stated other speakers already covered PDCC was a private entity for profit. She asked for the website address that Mr. Sihota said was available for information, which he wouldn't answer about at the open house. MR. SIHOTA responded the web page hasn't been created, but there will be a link through the main website, which is palmdesertgolf.com. MS. CULVER pointed out there was a mailing list floating around. She inquired about the staff report that many referenced with the information about the easement, and a community member offered to give her a copy. She noted there was a letter sent out by Palm Desert Country Club on April 2, and in the last paragraph of the first page, it states, "People have asked that if the assessment isn't approved, it would mean some lands adjacent to homeowner properties would not be maintained."She was confident the City of Palm Desert would not allow that to happen, questioning the Council if it will make sure PDCC maintains the property, although, at this point, they have already admitted that regardless of whether the assessment went through or not, they will change a lot of the property to desert landscape. Councilman Spiegel responded Palm Desert County Club could do that. MS. CULVER agreed, but PDCC made a threat to say, or offered not to do what was said in the letter if they got the assessment. 22 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 Councilman Spiegel stated the City's Code Compliance Department enforced the last owner to keep the course up, which was very difficult and it cost the City a lot of money. However, he did keep it up and he finally sold the course. He said the City will make sure the course remains up, but it will cost the City a lot of money. Mayor Harnik stated the Council had to look at the whole picture, and as closely as the Council worked with Code Compliance, everyone needed to think about the state of that golf course not too long ago. MS. CULVER said she understood, because she's lived at PDCC since 1973, and she has seen the ups and downs. She asked how much will it cost the City to send out the ballots for a vote, and is the City prepared to follow through that process. Councilman Spiegel said the City was not at that point yet. MS. CULVER asked what was the Council then deciding. Mayor Harnik encouraged Mr. Culver to read the staff report, which will be very helpful for her. MS. MARY BAGHBODORIAN, Louisiana Street, Palm Desert, stated it concerned her that the City had been working on the matter for a while, noting a financial consultant was hired to come up with a report, yet no one contacted the homeowners who will be affected by this. Therefore, the City had already spent money to help the other party. She said they had to dig through information and asked Mr. Stendell to have PDCC to announce the meeting. She said if it wasn't for the homeowners association sending a letter to inform the homeowners, the residents wouldn't have known. Therefore, she felt the Citywasn't doing anything to protect the homeowners, and they are the voters, which the Council had to remember. Mayor Harnik agreed, stating that is why there is a meeting, and the Council wants to hear from everybody. She explained that if the City didn't gather some amount of information, there would be nothing to talk about, which is why everyone here will provide even more information. MS. BAGHBODORIAN said she understood, but the information obtained regarding the homeowners is from the other party who has a vested interest to give the Council any information it wants to hear. She said the surveys didn't have names or addresses, so anyone from PDCC could have filled out as many surveys and come up with any number. She said the City should have had a lot more responsibility when it came to the survey, and the homeowners want more consideration from the City. She said if a company has paid cents on a dollar to obtain the property, they are not financially 23 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 vested. The community would like to see them more vested financially, before they ask residents to pay. She said the previous owners made$7 or $8 billion selling land, and now homeowners are to subsidize the current ones; she wonders what will be next. She said the City should stay out of this matter, because business is supposed to take care of itself. MS. MARILYN MORENO, California Drive, Palm Desert,explained thatwhen she bought her home 25 years ago, she had a beautiful view of the 17ch fairway, then the course was sold and then owners put in a beautiful lake. She and her husband were jumping up and down with joy with the thought of having a lakefront property. A previous speaker said, "share the wealth," well, she would have loved to share the wealth, but unfortunately, she has the pump house in her back yard and no view. She couldn't sell her house even if she wanted to, because someone can go down three houses and get a house with a view of the lake. Her concern about the assessment is that she will be assessed the same as everyone else, when her property is in the 60% of what is referred to as "seldom comes into play." She said her property has a pump house and it seldom comes into play. She asked what will happen if the owners don't want to maintain a property that seldom comes into play. Additionally, the HOA sends her letters to clean up her property,which she does, but will she have the same recourse to ensure that her property, which seldom comes into play, is maintained. She asked the Council to take that into consideration and possibly consider a waiver for people with the same problem. MR. FRANK TAYLOR, stated that most of his comments have already been answered, but wished to emphasize the need to build trust and a partnership with the community as a whole, which hadn't been done at this point. He said there has only been one community meeting accomplished. Also, as a resident of PDCC for 28 years and living on the fairway, he didn't get the survey until he spoke to Mr. Sihota at the City's study session. He spoke with Mr Sihota about fixing that aspect and, as of two days ago, it still hadn't been fixed, because he didn't receive the latest letter where the owners made the comment that properties wouldn't be maintained if the homeowner didn't pay. From working with the Council and serving as theirAssistant Chief of Police before retiring, he knew the City had been at the forefront in ensuring the PDCC property was kept up to Code, even through the foreclosure process, and thanked Councii and staff for that support. He asked that the vote be delayed until November, stating more time was needed for eonducting community meetings and sharing of information, including the web page, instead of rushing this through. He was up for discussions regarding any type of assessment, because he wants to do whaYs best for the community. He recalled going through many meetings when discussing undergrounding electricity in the area, which was a lengthy process with many community meetings. He believed the same process needed to be followed here to avoid any unknowns and having hundreds of 24 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 people at Council meetings being upset. He said everyone should be able to come to a meeting in partnership and trusting each other, with eventually following through on what the community wants. MR. JOHN STANFORD, Louisiana Street, stated a lot of negatives have been said, which he felt were appropriate, stating the presentation offered was poorly organized and presented.The one issue he felt has been glossed over is the idea of a LLD, which is interesting, but the Club is about 20 years behind the times. The owners have irrigated the course like never before, stating there is grass in his area wall to wall. Everyone agrees the course looks great, but water is an issue in the desert. In the last 10 or 15 years, the emphasis by the cities and the water district has been to limit the water and limit the amount of turf being irrigated. He heard the comment that the plan is to get this capital and shift over to desert landscaping so what was the point. He said this was a business deal and businesses need to adjust to the realities, stating most don't have the option of having a governmental entity raise fund to do things for its business. It seemed to him the business was asking for the money, and the flip side is that the company will do what it should have done initially. MS. DIANA IPPOLITO, California Drive, Palm Desert, stated she owns two home on California Drive and has lived there since 1996. When she purchased her homes, she knew it was a mix bag considering the ups and downs of the economy,which is the same with the golf course. She believed the current owners bought the golf course without doing their homework and are now having buyers' remorse. Therefore, based on what she has seen in the survey and all,the owners underestimated the homeowners, and what they are capable of and not; she believed the company is looking to the community to solve their problem. Additionally,the property next door to her home has had many violations, and the City and HOA has been out there. It turns out the property is owned by the owners of the golf course, and they also purchased quite a few homes there. Therefore, if the City is building trust, she is looking at flipped up shingles on the roof of the house next to hers, and a yard that has weeds knee high. She reiterated the people that own that home are the owners of the golf course. Responding to question from the audience, Mayor Harnik said any property owner, based on the staff report, would be a voter. Councilman Spiegel stated the City has been through this before and it appeared it was going through it again. He said the City loves Palm Desert Country Club and loved it when it annexed it,which was a few years ago. He noted the City has done a lot of good there, and Terry Archer and Charlie Ash could vouch as they served on the Project Area 4 Committee. When the City had Redevelopment funds coming in, Project Area 4 Committee would decide how the money would be spent in that area, and it worked out pretty 25 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 well. Unfortunately, there have been ownerships that have gone up and down. He agreed it was too soon to do anything this evening, which is why he will propose continuing this item until at least September and decide whether or not to send out a vote. In the meantime, he suggested that Mr. Sihota follow through with his suggestions for informing the community on what is going on and why he needs the money. The City wants the golf course to be maintained, because it's in Palm Desert, and is considered just like any other golf course in a gated community. He didn't believe it would be appropriate to bring anything to a vote at this time, and a continuation of the item would give the owners a chance to spend more time with the people who live there and share their information. Councilman Tanner concurred with Councilman Spiegel's comments. He encouraged Mr. Sihota to be very transparent, stating he came before the City Council and people who have purchased their homes, some who have lived there since 1973. He encouraged him to show his financials and ask/answer their questions. He certainly agreed this issue needed to go back to the residents of Palm Desert Country Club to make a decision on whether or not they wished to go through with an assessment. However, today was not the time, and it will happen when everyone is back in town for all their questions to be answered. Councilmember Weber agreed with Councilman Spiegel that this item should be delayed, because it concerned herthat many indicated they didn't receive a notice or mailing, even after advising Mr. Sihota about it. However, she also heard Mr. Sihota say he was going to check on the property ownership tax rolls to make sure addresses are correct. She was baffled that those who have lived in these properties for a long time didn't receive notification. Therefore, she was in favor of continuing this item. Mayor Pro Tem Benson stated more time was needed to get the web page up, primarily for the financials, as she and Councilman Spiegel have been through this so many times, that it felt like they owned a golf course. She believed in more transparency on why the assessment was needed, and there is probably good reason for it, but the people need to know the facts if they are assessed, and if iYs the right amount. She was in favor of putting this off until at least the beginning of November or September so that the vote can be during that season. Mayor Harnik thanked everyone for their patience, because she understood this was frustrating and difficult. She said great questions, great points, and valid concerns were made. One thing heard loud and clear was that better communication was needed, as it had fallen short. However, this wasn't the first time homeowners have said they didn't get what they believed was sent out according to property tax rolls, and it won't be the last, but she agreed better communication was needed. She heard a couple of times that PDCC 26 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 was a public golf course, but it's not, the course is privately owned. She is concerned about the golf course, because as mentioned by one gentleman, in Palm Springs they are getting rid of a golf course and putting in homes. She pointed out there is a shift in the trend with golfing, which had to be factored into the thinking, because people don't golf as much, and the popularity of golf is waning. Most importantly, there were questions and points made that have to be addressed with better communication, and the website was a great way to start. In the end, she agreed that everyone deserved to know what is going on, quite literally, in their own back yard. Councilman Spiegel moved to continue the matter to October. Motion was seconded by Tanner and carried by a 5-0 vote. With City Council concurrence, Mayor Harnik called for a recess at 6:06 p.m. She reconvened the meeting at 6:12 p.m. B. REQUEST FOR DIRECTION TO STAFF CONCERNING ANNEXATION OF AREAS NORTH OF INTERSTATE 10. Mayor Harnik recused herself from this item and turned the meeting over to Mayor Pro Tem Benson, and left the Council Chamber. Ms. Aylaian displayed an area map for reference, and she noted the staff report included background information, Palm Desert's analysis that was done a year ago on various areas north of I-10 for potential annexation, and a report done by Cathedral City recently when they were looking at annexation of certain areas north of I-10 as well. She said a couple of new pieces of information had come in since the staff report was put together, which she will cover as well as what the City's options might be. One new item is a letter from Cal Fire from the Fire Chief and Division Chief, urging Palm Desert to either oppose the area Cathedral City is proposing to annex or have Palm Desert consider annexing it. Secondly, there is an email/message received from Andy Hall, who is the City Manager for Cathedral City, point out relevant history about their proposal to annex all of Thousand Palms(TP). What he points out, rightly, is that Cathedral City was directed by Local Agency Formation Commission(LAFCO)to keep the entire TP area together. Therefore, this was not an intentional effort on Cathedral City's part to encroach into something that is just north of Palm Desert. Also, Cathedral City Council asked their staff to review the potential annexation with a sub-committee and then report back before making a decision to submit their application to LAFCO. The reason this was relevant, is that it meant the application wasn't being accelerated as it may have appeared. She said Palm Desert staff has looked at the issue of potential annexation and its sphere of influence (SOI) north of I-10 a number of times in recent years, and it was now looking for Council direction. Staff would like to know if there are particular areas they would like staff to pursue or investigate 27 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 further, or if the Council wasn't interested in embracing the idea any time in the near future. Again, this was relevant because Cathedral City was proposing to annex the area, that on the map is shown in yellow, which is four or five miles on the northern border of the common line there. Options available to Palm Desert City Council as staff is looking for direction are: 1)Do nothing. The City has done a great job of providing excellent services to City residents within the city limits and there may be no desire to expand those limits; 2) Retain a consultant to analyze Cathedral City's Fiscal Impact Analysis. The idea being that, even if Palm Desert was not interested in expanding its own boundaries, it was material to the City to know what kind of financial health an adjoining jurisdiction was in. For instance, if the study was not well founded with errors that made it more favorably financially than what is the reality, Palm Desert could be bound to a city that is in financial straights, which would impact Palm Desert and calls for mutual aide. She was certain Cathedral City was not interested in annexing any area that would not be revenue neutral/positive, or interested in having an area that failed. Therefore, if Council wants an assurance as to the financial health of a neighbor, it can direct staff to review or retain a consultant to study Cathedral City's report. She said a consultant can also be retained to better understand the disparity in the result between the two studies. She understands the studies were done under different geographical areas; however, there is much common territory. One study shows it to be a drain/burden on the General Fund, while the other shows a strong positive cash flow at build out. Both studies are relatively technical and detailed, and if the Council wanted, it can direct staff to tease out where the differences are coming from and then revisit it to see if it changed how it thought about the areas north of the City. The City Council could also direct staffto restudy the area north of I-10 that's in Palm Desert's SOI, which is Sun City and adjacent commercial areas also referred to as Scenario A in Palm Desert's study. Staff can also restudy Scenario B, which included lands to the west, which are now proposed to be annexed into Cathedral City. She said staff can reviewto see if it could be revenue neutral or if different revenue sources can be identified that would offset the $3 to $5 million negative impact that was determined in Palm Desert's cursory study. Finally, if the Council wanted, it can direct staff to initiate an annexation activity by retaining a consultant and preparing fiscal analysis or plan for services for either Scenario A or B. She said there was a whole range of options available to the Palm Desert's City Council depending on what its feelings are toward potential growth or toward protecting the borders of the City so that it is not potentially weighted down by a city that has some struggles financially. Councilman Spiegel asked when Cathedral City's request will go to LAFCO. Ms. Aylaian responded she would guess the application will be submitted within several months. She noted a representative from Cathedral City Council was in attendance who might be able to opine on the matter. 28 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 MR. GREGORY S. PETTIS, Councilmember for the City of Cathedral City, answered they planned to submit before the end of the year. He said LAFCO has twice rejected an attempt to partition Thousand Palms and allow cherry picking of more desirable areas, leaving other areas out and undeveloped. He said Cathedral City took LAFCO's request to look at the entirety of Thousand Palms seriously,which is why they made an application for the entire portion of Thousand Palms to be placed into Cathedral City's SOI. He said Thousand Palms is currently in Cathedral City's SOI and they are moving forward toward annexation. Cathedral City's Council subcommittee met and directed staff to begin the pre-zoning process to bring forward the formal application to the Council and onto LAFCO. The residents of Thousand Palms have been clear about staying whole and not being partitioned off and separated into small isolated pockets. LAFCO at one point had asked Palm Desert if they were willing to encompass the entirety of Thousand Palms prior to Cathedral City's application being considered, and Palm Desert at that time said no. Therefore, Cathedral City stepped forward and said they would. They have fully taken in all economic justice and disadvantaged community areas in their outreach and studies over the last two years. They are already in the process of blending residents into its government structure by inviting them onto city commissions, participation in activities with the senior center and Boys and Girls Club and other community activities. Cathedral City is already meeting with property owners who are interested in developing their property and looking for some solid answers about when they can move forward. He believed this was the third time in two years this issue had come before the Palm Desert Council, and it is only serving to continue to confuse the situation and frustrate residents and property owners. He asked the Council to direct staff to seize looking into the area that is in the SOI of Cathedral City and allow them to go forward with their process and see what LAFCO and the residents of Thousand Palms determine what is best. Responding to question, he said their request did not include Sun City, but it did include the Berger Foundation. Ms. Klassen noted Chief Hundley from the Fire Department was called out, but he asked that the letter from County Fire Chief Hawkins, which was distributed to the Council, speak for itself. MR. ROY NOKES, Calle Helene, Thousand Palms, stated he has lived in Thousand Palms since 1968 and managed the Fire Station there until 1985. During that time, he has seen Palm Desert and the cities to the south expand and become nice cities. All that time, Thousand Palms is waiting for a chance to develop, but it's been a constant uphill battle since 1905 when it had a community there. A few years back, there was a meeting with Councilman Spiegel, Mr.Wohlmuth,and another Councilmember,and there was no mention of the SOI north of I-10.Then the Berger Foundation/Classic 29 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 Club,went before�AFCO,which was the only battle won,which was to keep the Foundation in Thousand Palms as part of the whole. He said Thousand Palms has a right to their destiny just like the other cities, which have grown to develop because they were allowed, and Palm Desert has earned the respect from its neighboring cities. He said Thousand Palms has a nice community with nice families who talk to each other. He believed TP should have been a major developed cities' years ago, but all the banks south of Interstate 10 redlined them and wouldn't lend money. When Interstate 10 came through, it took five years for the Bob Hope overpass to go through, which had a major impact. Additionally, they've had one developer after another who has tried to build there. In fact, some did build, because they were courageous and fought the battle and have stayed there. There is a major well developed and nice commercial area, which has upgraded the whole community. He said they probably have some of the nicer streets in � the County, with the exception of a few, and just a few years ago sewer was installed to upgrade the community. He said they also have the Roy Wilson Fire Station and Training Facility, Animal Samaritans, Animal Campus, and a recycling plant. However, there is still a lot of area yet to be developed for the benefit of the community. MS. ANNE LEACH, Sun City, Palm Desert, stated she was on the Sun City Palm Desert Board of Directors, but she was mostly speaking for herself. She said Sun City is interested in Palm Desert decision with regard to the community of about 9,000 residents in Palm Desert's SIO. According to the staff report, there are three possible courses of action, and their preference is for the Council to choose either Option No. 2 or 3, which is to restudy with the hope of detaching certain areas from Cathedral City's SOI and entering into Palm Desert. Theywould preferthat Scenario B, which is Option No. 3, be the area of choice that includes Sun City Palm Desert and the Berger Foundation/Classic Club up to Cook Street. The advantages, as they see for the City of Palm Desert, would be the expansion of the Cook Street educational corridor, with the addition of a little hook on 38`h Street for the Christian School of the Desert who owns property there. She didn't know what the status of their building fund is, but they own the land, along with a strip along Washington for commercial property, because they want to ensure they are in proximity to school children. She said several school administrators came to look at their Board years ago and offered Sun City residents the use of their outdoor track, basketball courts, and their sports booster clubs, inviting the community to yell support. They also thought the high school students community service programs would have an excellent outlet in Sun City Palm Desert,which she thought was a great idea. Another advantage to having Sun City as part of Palm Desert city limits, is that Sun City is a jewel in the Sun City stream of developments all across the sun belt, as well as Chicago and throughout northern California, stating they were the best. She said they spend more money per capita on Palm Desert Sun City, because when it was launched,they were stilling people from the old country 30 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 clubs like The Lakes, and Indian Ridge. She said they operated their own Architectural Review Committee and operate on County rules, and it would be very simple to overlay Palm Desert's rules over their volunteer organization that reviews requests for home improvements. They do their own Code enforcement and do not have problems with weeds, overgrown trees, or trash bins left out on the street, because it's mostly done by volunteer labor. They have gates, guards, and patrols, providing an extremely low-crime rate. She said the HOA owns and operates two golf courses and a putting course with none of the problems heard earlier this evening. Councilman Spiegel asked how many people did Sun City have for security. MS. LEACH responded Sun City contracted with Allied Barton Security, and they have two cars on patrol 24 hours a day, and two people on the gate, stating they are unarmed, but very well trained. MS. PATRICIA SALEH, Chairman of the Thousand Palms Preservation and Action Groups, stated they have spent a Iot of time in the past four years studying the potential annexation of Cathedral City. As a result of the study and town hall meetings, boards of both Thousand Palms County Clubs, Community Council, and the Chamber of Commerce, representing approximately four thousand of the 7,000 to 8,000 residents have voted to allow Cathedral City to proceed annexation if they would keep Thousand Palms whole. Being cut down in size could potentially keep Thousand Palms an orphan of the County forever, limiting their potential for growth, and making it harder to manage for the County. An unincorporated island would create, with the Sun City proposal, two unincorporated islands. If LAFCO would see its way clear to reprove this, it would be very hard on the property owners in Thousand Palms, and could potentially downgrade the area around the Classic Club and Xavier High School. She is hoping the Council votes no to the Sun City proposal and to allow this annexation to go through. There has been a very thorough study done, and she has faith in it, because the Council of Cathedral City has always been pro the idea that they could annex Thousand Palms without a problem and that's what the feasibility shows. MR. ROB BERNHEIMER, Representing H N & Frances C. Berger Foundation, stated it seemed there were a couple of issues before the Council, but from their perspective, they have serious concerns about the proposed annexation by Cathedral City. He said it took Cathedral City over a year to put this study together, and they have only started looking at it. However, the revenue assumptions in this study are wildly optimistic and the costs are very conservative as far as what expenses are going to occur in the future. The Foundation thinks it is an upside down annexation, and that concerns them as one of the largest property owners in the area. He said 31 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 the annexation is nine miles from the current Cathedral City border to the end of the annexation area, which would be a mega annexation nearly doubling the size of Cathedral City. Unfortunately, the Berger Foundation property is at the very end of that geographic point. As a large owner in the property area,they are concerned that if an annexation comes forth, and the projections are wrong, and the costs to Cathedral City are not penciling out, there will be a municipal failure. He said municipal failure translated into a common interest, because it encompassed the entire northern border, and what will that mean to Palm Desert. Again, it will take more time to go through and dig into the study, but a few of the examples he's reviewed, for instance,fire services escalated exponentially compared to Consumer Price Index (CPI), which he believed will sink Cathedral City. He said Cathedral City is only projecting they will have nine miles of city border, but only adding two employees to that area to be serviced. He sympathized with Cathedral City when LAFCO asked them not to partition the area. The intellectual and honest approach is to go back to LAFCO to inform it was studied, and it didn't make fiscal sense at this point. Therefore, they should be allowed to take the yellow shaded area on the map and expand their city in a natural small step, but accurate information needs to be provided. He would be concerned as a potentially neighboring city that this will create a municipal failure. It would be prudent for Palm Desert to authorize staff to review Cathedral City's study to determine, if at the right time, Cathedral City files an application with LAFCO, Palm Desert may want to oppose it, if it believes the fiscal study didn't prove itself out. The Berger Foundation is taking the position in that they will take a hard look at what is put before them, and what they have seen thus far cannot be supported, which they will make known to LAFCO. He thanked the Council for hearing the Foundation's concerns, and if the Council wished to discuss the Foundation's thoughts on a future look by the City,they would be happy to participate in that discussion as well. Councilman Spiegel stated it was important the newer members of the Council visit Sun City, because he and then Councilman Kroonen went out and met with their Board of Directors to explained what they had there and what they were trying to achieve. He said on television, the big RV Park is advertised as being in Palm Desert, but they are not, it's in the County. The Classic Club, which is the Berger's Restaurant and Golf Course, is in Palm Desert, but it's actually part of the County. He said these are the things that need to be considered, which is why he will be suggesting this matter be continued until information is received, and the new members of the Council have had a chance to meet with the people of Sun City. Councilmember Weber agreed, stating that most of the people she's spoken within Sun City have all expressed interest in being annexed. She's seen this issue go up and down over the years, but the latest is that they are concerned about being annexed. She said she has always thought of Sun 32 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 City being part of Palm Desert,and those other properties mentioned as well. Therefore, she was in favor of continuing this item. Councilman Tanner stated that after reading the information from 2012 regarding the annexation, then Mayor Pro Tem Kroonen, stated he was not substantially in any type of disagreement, but wanted the matter continued. One of the comments he recalled was that LAFCO would probably not agree to annex Sun City without possibly looking at Bermuda Dunes. If that is the case, he would certainly like to vote to direct staff to do a fiscal responsibility. Because when he looks at Palm Desert's study, it shows a $5 million deficit, and Cathedral City's study shows that after the first year there would be a $168,000 profit. He said there is something dramatically wrong with one or both of these studies. He encouraged the Council to direct staffto do a fiscal responsibility on Sun City, Washington Avenue to Cook Street on the north side of the freeway. Responding to question, Ms. Aylaian said such a study could take two to three months. Mayor Pro Tem Benson stated she was not in favor of studying Sun City again, stating it had been looked at two or three times, and it didn't come up fiscally viable for Palm Desert. She didn't believe Palm Desert should interfere with someone else's SO1, because if Cathedral City wants that area they should be allowed to pursue it, and they did their homework on it. She said Palm Desert has never challenged another city that wanted to do something and it shouldn't start. Palm Desert looked at going across Interstate 10 when it did the 2010 Plan and the community members were not in favor then. She said Palm Desert had enough to do, especially now with the demise of Redevelopment, and it should concentrate more on the City of Palm Desert. She was not opposed to new members of the City Council wanting to figure out if it was feasiblely possible for Palm Desert to take those areas, but Palm Desert should not stop Cathedral City from their request to LAFCO to annex those areas,they deserved that opportunity even though they didn't know if they will get approved. In the meantime, Sun City is another issue, she can recall Sun City coming up at least three or four times, and studies have not shown that they will be profitable. She said money will be tight from here on out, and it was certainly not the time to be taking in some other area that was not needed. Therefore, she was not in favor of stopping Cathedral City. Councilman Spiegel moved to continue the item for two months. Motion died for lack of a second. Councilmember Weber stated it would be rude not to do something right away, because as Mr. Pettis has said, Palm Desert has discussed this issue many times. She said it may take two or three months to look into this,which 33 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 she felt was necessary, because she's seen this issue discussed many times, and a lot has changed economically. Additionally, she believed development will increase and the property will become very valuable to Palm Desert down the road, and basing Council's decision on the way it was ten years ago, would be a disservice to the City, because things have changed tremendously. She didn't think it would hurt to investigate it a little longer, which demonstrated the City's concern about the issue. She totally agreed that the Berger Foundation should also be considered as part, however, she wasn't aware that LAFCO considered Bermuda Dunes as part of that package. Therefore, she would like to know more, but continuing would solve nothing without taking action on getting some numbers. Additionally, she agreed having new Councilmembers visit Sun City would bring everyone up to date. Mayor Pro Tem Benson clarified it was not ten years ago that Palm Desert looked at Sun City, it was only a couple of years ago, and the finances are worse now. She said looking at Sun City at this point would not accomplish anything in her estimation. Ms. Aylaian pointed out the most recent study was just over a year. Councilman Tanner agreed, stating that study was discussed at the March 2012, City Council Meeting. He went on to say he liked the idea of continuing to look at the impact. His suggestion would be to authorize staff to do a fiscal responsibility in a three-month period of time. It was his understanding from Cathedral City their application will go to LAFCO at the end of the year, which will give Palm Desert an opportunity to explore what he is hearing that Sun City, Xavier, and the Classic Club still want to be in the 92211 zip code, which is Palm Desert. He agreed to continue this item, but with a fiscal responsibility study over the course of the next three months. In the meantime, if Cathedral City gets their application and process into LAFCO, then maybe Palm Desert missed out. He noted Mayor Harnik, and Councilmember Weber are somewhat new to the Council, but he is still in favorof progress, because he agreed with CouncilmemberWeberthat Palm Desert will grow in the north side of Interstate 10. He said the growth may not come in the next ten years, but it is coming. Councilman Tanner moved to continue the item three months in order for staff to conduct additional study. Motion was seconded by Spiegel. Ms. Aylaian requested clarification on whether the Council was asking staff to study or for a consultant to be retained, because there aren't any funds budgeted at this point. Councilman Tanner said he wasn't sure that staff was capable of doing a fiscal responsibility study. 34 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 Ms. Wohlmuth stated the City should probably use a consultant, and staff may go back to the City's consultant and compare Cathedral City analysis with Palm Desert's. As of this morning, he received some information from Captain Vest on the police cost. He suggested staff look at the former consultant that did Palm Desert's analysis and have them at least compare it with Cathedral City's and then update Palm Desert's. If the Council was concerned about it, a contract will be brought back,which can be done in the first meeting in May. Councilman Spiegel called for the motion to be voted on. Councilmember Weber stated she was under the impression staff needed clarification on whether or not a consultant will be hired as part of the motion. Councilman Spiegel said that aspect will come back to the Council if there is going to be somebody hired. Mayor Pro Tem Benson called for the vote, and the motion carried on a 3-1 vote, with Benson voting NO and Harnik ABSENT. XV. CONTINUED BUSINESS None XVI. OLD BUSINESS None XVII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED SALE OF THE PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 43840 BLUEBERRY LANE (APN 634-061-038)AND 75455 WILDFLOWER LANE(APN 634-062-028), PALM DESERT, PURSUANT TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 33433(c)(JOINT CONSIDERATION WITH THE PALM DESERT HOUSING AUTHORITY). Ms. Moore explained a public hearing is required anytime property is sold that is owned by the former Redevelopment Agency,which is now owned by the Housing Authority. Therefore, this public hearing is required for the purpose of the sale of the subject homes. She said there was potentially a qualified participant for one of the homes, and staff would like to get it sold as quickly as possible. 35 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 Mayor/Chairman Harnik declared the public hearing open and invited public testimony FAVORING or OPPOSING this matter. With no publictestimonyoffered, she declared the public hearing closed. Councilman/Member Tanner moved to waive further reading and adopt Resolution No. HA - 52 approving sale of the subject properties pursuant to the attached draft Purchase and Sale Agreements at the calculated resale prices of $131,960 for 43840 Blueberry Lane and $107,587 for 75455 Wildflower Lane or the fair market value of the properties, whichever is less. Motion was seconded by Spiegel and carried by a 5-0 vote. Councilman/Member Tanner moved to by Minute Motion of the City Council and Authority Board: 1)Approve silent homebuyer assistance loans not to exceed 40% of the sales price for each home to ensure an affordable housing cost for a qualified low- or moderate-income household from any available funding source restricted forsuch purpose (BEGIN, Housing Mitigation, Agency/Housing Authority program income). 2) authorize payment of transaction costs from the sale proceeds for the purpose of repairs required for closing, fees customary to real estate transactions in Riverside County, including escrow, title, FHA fees, inspections, vermin eradication, commissions, and disclosures; 3) authorize use of the Desert Rose Sales Program and documents, including the restrictive covenant and loan documents for the applicable funding source, in their substantial form as attached to the staff report; 4) authorize the Authority Chairman and/or Authority Executive Director or his designee to finalize and execute the Purchase and Sales Agreements and any ancillary documents necessary to effectuate the sale and actions taken herewith. Motion was seconded by Benson and carried by a 5-0 vote. XVII1. REPORTS AND REMARKS A. CITY MANAGER 1. City Manager Meeting Summaries for the Period of March 18-27, 2013. With City Council concurrence, the Summaries were received and filed. B. CITY ATTORNEY None C. CITY CLERK Ms. Klassen stated that since posting of the agenda, a University Planning Committee Meeting has been scheduled for Thursday, April 25, 2013, at 2:00 p.m. Councilmembers took note of this scheduling. 36 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 D. PUBLIC SAFETY 1. Fire Department None 2. Police Department None E. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL 1. City Council Requests for Action: a) Consideration of Proposed Amendments to the League of California Cities Bylaws. Councilman Spiegel moved to, by Minute Motion, approve of the proposed Amendments and authorize the Mayor to sign and return the ballot accordingly. Motion was seconded by Tanner and carried by a 5-0 vote. 2. City Council Consideration of Travel Requests and Reports: None 3. City Council Committee Reports: None 4. City Council Comments: a) Proposed Legislation SB 7 — Councilman Tanner thanked Mayor Harnik for sending a letter to oppose SB 7,which is the Charter Cities - Public Works Local Determination of Wage Rates. He said this would certainly hurt the City in going to bid on anything that wasn't prevailing wage, would really cut into what Palm Desert believes to be a good business practice, and eliminates many good contractors. b) "Bunny Hop"- Easter Sunday—Mayor Harnik said she went to the 5K event on EI Paseo and wished to commend Public Works, Mr. Wohlmuth and Ms. Riddle, as an issue came up at the last minute prior to the day, and they quickly acted and redirected the route to avoid a lot of potential problems. 37 PRELIMINARY MINUTES DRAFT REGULAR PALM DESERT CITY COUNCIL MEETING APRIL 11, 2013 c)Art In Public Places- Student Art& Essay Contest— Mayor Harnik said this year's Contest was very successful, staff and the students did a great job. The awards ceremony was also very well received and attended, with the Council Chamber being standing room only. d) Palm Desert Chamber of Commerce — Upon question to President/CEO Barbara deBoom, she confirmed that their Board of Directors just received the President's Award from Cal Chamber, and it would be presented next month at an event in Sacramento. Councilmembers congratulated Ms. deBoom and the Chamber of Commerce for this worthy achievement. 5. Suggested Items for Future City Council Meeting Agendas: None XIX. ADJOURNMENT On a motion by Spiegel, second by Weber, and unanimous vote of the City Council, Mayor Harnik adjourned the meeting at 7:12 p.m. JAN C. HARNIK, MAYOR ATTEST: RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, CITY CLERK CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 38