Palm Desert City Council - Regular Meeting, February 12, 2026

Transcript text

AI transcript text.

[00:11:54] Mayor Trouy: Okay, welcome everybody. I am now going to call to order our regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, the successor agency to the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency, the Palm Desert Housing Authority, and the Palm Desert Board of Library Trustees for Thursday, February 12th, 2026 at 4:10 p.m. Let's have a roll call, please.
[00:12:16] City Clerk: Council Member Harnick,
[00:12:18] Council Member Harnick: Here.
[00:12:19] City Clerk: Council Member Nandi,
[00:12:20] Council Member Nandi: Here.
[00:12:20] City Clerk: Council Member Quintanilla,
[00:12:22] Council Member Quintanilla: Present.
[00:12:22] City Clerk: Mayor Pro Tem,
[00:12:25] Mayor Pro Tem: Here.
[00:12:25] City Clerk: And Mayor Pro Tem, could you please state the nature of your need to remote participate?
[00:12:32] Mayor Pro Tem: Illness.
[00:12:33] City Clerk: And is there anyone over the age of 18 present in your meeting room?
[00:12:37] Mayor Pro Tem: No.
[00:12:38] City Clerk: Thank you.
[00:12:38] Mayor Trouy: And Mayor Trouy here. Okay. Uh, Council Member Nandi, would you please lead us in the pledge of allegiance?
[00:12:43] Council Member Nandi: To the flag of the United States... and justice for all.
[00:13:10] Mayor Trouy: And I now invite Mayor Pro Tem to provide us with words of inspiration.
[00:13:15] Mayor Pro Tem: As we conduct the people's business today, may we do so with wisdom and good judgment.
[00:13:24] Mayor Trouy: Thank you very much. Ask for a report of closed session, please.
[00:13:31] City Attorney: Thank you, Mayor. No reportable actions were taken in closed session this afternoon.
[00:13:34] Mayor Trouy: Okay. Terrific. Next up, we are on to awards presentations and appointments. Item 9A, Visit Greater Palm Springs update, please. Now we have Mr. Scott White.
[00:13:47] Scott White: Good afternoon, Mayor, members of the Council, and city staff. We appreciate the opportunity to present today. I'm here with Colleen Pace, our Chief Sales and Marketing Officer, and Davis Meyer, our Vice President of Government and Industry Relations. And before we start the presentation, I just kind of wanted to make a quick note to thank Council Member Harnick for all of her years serving on the JPA Executive Committee. It's, your insight, your wisdom, and your representation has always been so fabulous. We're going to miss you. You have big shoes to fill, Mayor Trouy. So, just putting it out there...
[00:14:17] Mayor Trouy: Literally and figuratively.
[00:14:18] Scott White: No, no, no. So, we appreciate that. And just also want to say that we just returned yesterday from New York. We were there celebrating the Palm Desert Food and Wine. It was a promotion at the James Beard Foundation event with Palm Springs Life. It was a sold-out event. So, great, great exposure for the destination in that particular event. The non-stop flight on Alaska from Palm Springs to New York and back was sold out, maximum capacity. Ironically, some of the people that were at the Super Bowl in San Francisco actually used Palm Springs as a hub because it was very expensive to fly from San Francisco to New York. So, they actually flew down here and connected through. So, I thought that was kind of interesting that we're turning into a little bit of a hub. Okay. So, the first one I just want to give an update on is the economic impact for the Coachella Valley. We do this every year. We use a third-party firm called Tourism Economics. They're part of Oxford Economics, and it's nice to show that we've certainly come back to our peak performances with 14.5 million visitors. State and local taxes at 897 million. I think one of the things that we always really like to reiterate is the fact that tourism is really driving the tax requirements for our citizens lower. So, Tourism Economics estimates that without tourism at the level they are today, each household would have to contribute an additional $5,900 in order to maintain the service levels that we currently see across the Coachella Valley, which holds true for all of our cities. 51,000 jobs sustained, and it generates about 9 billion for the local economy. We also measure vacation rentals, and this is a valley-wide overview. Vacation rentals generate 1.1 billion in total business sales and also drive 1.22 million visitors. Vacation rental guests basically spend $2.5 million each day throughout the valley, support 4,400 jobs, and really are vital to our industry. And then this is a specific snapshot for the City of Palm Desert: 163 million in visitor spending, 199 million in business sales, supports 861 jobs, and generates over $19 million for state and local tax revenues. And then we also did a survey in 2023 which shows that support for vacation rentals has gone up significantly from 2023 from 69% to 81%. And that's an attribute to you, the city staff, for what you've done to really manage the vacation rental industry across the board. And I think a lot of the work that Davis has done with the vacation rental industries about renting responsibly and really working both with the visitors that are coming in and also the homeowners and the agencies to make sure that we're constantly recognizing the importance of being a good neighbor and conducting ourselves in the right way. So, it's an ongoing work, but I think it's an important one for our destination, and we appreciate everything that you do for us. The stewardship plan, we just finished. We had a 10-year plan. We did that in 2016. It really helps guide us as an industry, what we need to focus in on and prioritize. As an example, back in 2016, one of the priorities was growing air service, growing off-peak demand for the summertime, and trying to develop ways that we can continue to improve the destination and industry overall. We're now embarking on a new plan. We've hired or are in the process of contracting with Hunden Partners, which will do the next 10-year plan for us. One of the things that we're going to do a little bit different this time is we're actually going to create nine city-specific master plans. So, we expanded the scope and we're going to fund that. So, there's no cost to the city. We're paying for that. But what we felt like we wanted to do a little bit differently from the first time was really come back with some actionable items that the city can then work with Hunden Partners on in terms of what does tourism look like and diversify the economy going forward in the future. So, we want this to be a plan that not only has a nice vision and aspirations, but is also actionable and measurable. We also do a lot of research throughout the year. I just wanted to highlight some of the key ones we're doing. We're in the middle of or conducting the resident sentiment study for tourism. We always do an image and awareness study. Colleen works on that with SMAR to really understand how our marketing and our advertising tracks brand awareness, destination perception. We just finished a visitor intercept study, so we'll have those details here shortly. Of course, we'll do the economic impact study again, both for the general and then for vacation rentals. We're going to do a new study this year on meetings. We're going to have a Restaurant Week survey. As you know, a number of years ago, we took that over from Palm Springs Life, and we look at that as an opportunity to grow business during the summertime. And then we've entered into an agreement with a new organization called Rove, which we're going to have dashboards that allow us to aggregate all of our data and have real-time access to kind of what's happening within trends, not only within our organization, but outside of our organization as well. And every two years, we sit down with the JPA and the Board of Directors, and we set areas of focus. And so, what we heard loud and clear from everybody is how do we increase demand not only in the summertime, but other portions of the year we have an opportunity to fill need periods. As an example, going into the fourth quarter of 2025, we heard early in that year that the hotels were a little soft, and so we did extra efforts, marketing, other opportunities to drive business for the fourth quarter. We were able to recoup quite a bit, and I think Colleen's going to talk a little bit about that in her presentation. And of course, regional collaboration, air service, and then new for us is economic diversity. So, we've taken that on, and we're going to talk a little bit about that here in a minute. And then stewardship, you know, talking about sustainability, cultural heritage, accessibility, community engagement, and of course advocacy. So, air service, just real quick, few updates on what's happening this year. And for those of you that don't understand why maybe we're involved with air service, the airport is really governed by the FAA on what they can do and enter into contracts with the airlines, and we don't have any of those limitations. So if the airport creates a...
[00:20:03] Scott: ...incentive for airlines to come into the destination, it has to be the same incentive available for all airlines. We can do specific agreements with an airline. So as an example, last year we entered into agreement with United to get a non-stop flight from Washington DC. DC is one of our biggest group markets. We had no service from there. So we entered in an agreement with United. The airport would not be able to do that. We also support a lot and do marketing agreements with those. But you can see on the slide there that we have some new service, some expanded service coming into the destination. New is Charlotte. Chicago is expanded, new service to Austin, JFK, which I talked about. We also have Newark as well from New York. And then Delta added service on JFK as well on Saturdays. So really good. I mean, if people can't get here and they can't get here easily, they're not going to come. So it remains a priority for us. And with that, I'm going to turn it over to Colleen.
[00:20:57] Colleen: Good afternoon. Thank you, Scott. All right. I'm going to share a little bit about our convention sales efforts in 2025. So you can see here the number of room nights that our team was able to bring into the destination, over 262,000 room nights. This is the highest mark that we've seen since 2018. So, we're really excited to have a record year in 2025. That's 428 meetings, 1,600 plus leads that we sent to hotels and the economic impact is 238 million for the destination. In terms, Scott mentioned about our priority of booking business into off peak and shoulder periods. And you can see here we set goals in 2025 to each of those periods, May and September, summer and Q4 as identified by our directors of sales and marketing partners. And so we have the goal set there to the right and then the performance from the team. So you can see we exceeded all the goals set in each of those areas: May and September, summer and Q4. For Palm Desert specifically hotels, we booked 16,689 into Q4, 5,336 into summer, and 9,500 plus into May and September. For Palm Desert specifically, we had over a thousand leads that were sent to Palm Desert Hotels, 56 bookings, almost for 53,000 room nights that generated an estimated 1.3 million in TOT in economic impact. Here are some of our goals and objectives for 2026. So we have again our off-peak focus for 2026 focusing on those need periods. Our partnership and collaborations, you can see here some of the partnerships that we have and strategic partners. You see the logos listed here, but people like Smart Meetings, ASAPE, PCMA, Conference Direct, MPI, all of the individual partners we align with so we can have access to the clientele that they have and also greater exposure to the meetings market. We also are creating a sports market committee. So that will be happening so we can attract more sports marketing, our sports group destination to our destination. So that will be put together in 2026. We'll also be doing a customer advisory board. We haven't had one since before the pandemic. So, we're excited to bring that back. We're going to do a mentor-mentee structure. So, younger generation planners with older generation planners so we can really learn some of those generational differences and behaviors on how they're booking business, but also provide a learning experience for both parties. So, that'll be a really successful program for us. And then, of course, our strategic marketing partners to get our word out there from a marketing standpoint. All right, on to destination marketing. So, you can see here all of the seasonal and always-on campaigns that we run throughout the year. There's 16 total campaigns that you see here highlighting all of our unique experiences and pillars for the destination including health and wellness, outdoor experiences, arts and entertainment, dining and shopping, cultural heritage, and LGBTQ plus. Here are the results from 2025. So, we had 30.8 billion impressions in 2025. That's the most that we've ever had. 2.3 million television spots, 22 million convention sales impressions, 2.7 million website users, over 425,000 total social media followers, and 28.5 million video views that we received in 2025. So that was a record-setting year for us. We also prioritize event support. So here are some of the events that we support in Palm Desert specifically. Obviously, food and wine that Scott was mentioning earlier, fashion week. You can see El Paseo, and then we have the Living Desert Wild Lights event. I think it's a video.
[00:25:05] Colleen: For our goals for 2026 on the marketing standpoint, we have some new brand campaigns. The Where You Shine campaign, which is going to be launched internationally and to our LGBTQ plus audiences, as well as tested domestically against our current campaign, which is escape your ordinary. This is launching later this month. We also are promoting our escape video series. So, that is a six-episode series highlighting all of the unique things that you can do in our destination, including culinary, outdoor adventure, health and wellness, all the pillars that I mentioned earlier. We have a new social media series that we're creating as well that'll launch later this year. We're also going to prioritize filming content of the outdoor sports events that happen in the destination so that we can really promote that as well. And then we are in the process of creating a new summer campaign. So we had check-in chill out which evolved to born to chill and this year we are evolving it to play for days. So we're in the process of planning that out. Now, if you'll give me just one second I'm going to make it so the audio will play.
[00:26:03] Unknown Speaker: Oh sure.
[00:26:13] Colleen: I'm so sure I always pop these.
[00:26:15] Unknown Speaker: You should be able to go down.
[00:26:15] Colleen: Okay, great. Thank you. Okay. Continuing on for our goals and objectives, we have the Expedia Ambassador Summit that we're hosting actually next week. I'm hoping the rain does not come like it says it's going to. We have 40 content creators with Expedia coming in. And this is a really unique opportunity for us to get access to all of the content creators, audiences, as well as Expedia. They also partnering with Mattel. So, Ken is going to be joining the fun as one of the influencers. And, I have a fun little video here to...
[00:26:54] Video Audio: What is that? Wait a second. It's a sign. Oops.
[00:27:11] Colleen: So, we'll get to capitalize on the Mattel audience as well, which will be a lot of fun. They'll be experiencing different activities in the destination, including the living desert, which will be great. We also have our expanded TED sponsorship. We're the exclusive travel sponsor for TED, which is in Vancouver. This is the last year that it'll be held in Vancouver, and then it's coming to California in San Diego. So this is a great opportunity for us to highlight our destination. We are going to be sponsoring the restore lounges where people rejuvenate during the conference. The content's very intense and so this is a great time for people to relax and restore and it's aligned definitely with our destination and we also have a custom content program that we're working on with them that will be distributed on the TED channels. We also are focusing on the exposure for the World Cup and the Olympics again the global spotlight that will be on our area and in the state of California. So capitalizing on that as well as co-ops that we work with Brand USA including Canada, Germany, UK as well as China. We just launched our social media channels in China this year as well. And our co-op program is still in full swing. We're going to be working with the Living Desert again. We're actually in production in two weeks for that. And so I just wanted to share the last quote that we did with the living desert, but there's a new spot being produced as I mentioned in a couple of weeks. But here's the one from 2024.
[00:29:03] Colleen: And this is a great value for our partners. They not only get the production, the assets to use as well as the media. They get to pick five markets that this is distributed on. And then we also promote this via our channels on social media as well. And then some more love for Canada. We are going to be launching a toolkit that we're going to provide to all the local businesses in each city, customized for each city to support the Canadian visitors and how much that we welcome them being here. So that's coming out later this month. Moving on to PR communications. Again, another record setting year in 2025. 7.2 billion in circulation. We use a scoring system and we have 11,813 in the scoring system. And what we do is each piece of earned media gets ranked on a scale of 1 to 10 for the quality. So how many partners are mentioned, if there's backlinks to our website and so on, that's how we score the quality of the piece. And so we had a record year again
[00:30:02] Speaker: For the PR earned media, and here's a few examples of some of the media that was placed specific to Palm Desert mentions. And with that, I'm happy to answer questions, but I'm going to turn it over to Davis.
[00:30:23] Davis: All right. In 2025, we launched the economic development initiative, launching a website, LinkedIn channel, monthly newsletter, and advertising. We attended trade shows and conferences, hosted a development tour with our city partners in conjunction with ICSC Western, and began pitching media. And so in 2026, we're looking forward to continuing that work, fully implementing the marketing and creative strategy, and building on that brand awareness for economic development in the region. And we'll be hosting meetings as well and working with our city partners on implementing the Coachella Valley Regional Economic Development Strategic Plan that was done as part of Riverside County's economic development strategic plan late last year. And there's a number of recommendations in there that we'll be looking at supporting, helping to define the partners that are taking the lead on those things, as well as spearheading. A couple that we're looking at in terms of taking the lead on potentially are the business retention task force and industry advisory board for economic development for the region. And then, of course, there's the indoor amateur sports complex. That's a priority for us. It sounds like maybe we found a home for it. In 2025, we had a record-breaking year in terms of participation in restaurant week with 121 restaurants from across the valley. And we also launched the inaugural spa month in September of 2025. So we'll continue to grow these events in 2026, helping to support our pillars of culinary and health and wellness, and support visitation in those need periods of the summer and September, as well as getting some locals out to try our restaurants and enjoy spas. We made some really great progress with workforce development in our foundation and youth engagement in 2025, engaging over 400 students from all three school districts. We trained 252 new destination ambassadors, as well as 184 leadership institute graduates. That's in partnership with College of the Desert that we do the leadership essentials. One of the things that's been really encouraging to see is the number of folks applying for our college scholarships, folks that are saying that they have an interest in a tourism or hospitality career. When we first started this, we had like maybe 10 applicants. It was pulling teeth to get applicants, and now 181 this last year. It's been wonderful to see the growth there. And so looking ahead in terms of workforce development, we'll be launching the sort of next version of that leadership institute program, our visionary leadership certificate program with College of the Desert. We had some help from Thomas Su here on our pilot program. That was great to have him. And we'll also be launching a new fundraising event for the foundation that's a student chef pairing. We'll be working with La Quinta High School and Rancho Mirage High School's culinary programs and pairing them with a homegrown chef to do some fine dining experience for folks. And then we also are going to continue working on our passport to leadership student hospitality day, getting students from across the valley out. And then, of course, last year we were incredibly honored to achieve our destination autism certification. And we'll continue to offer our grant program for businesses to become autism certified, and just so appreciate the city's support of this initiative and really trailblazing partnership alongside us in this. And thank you.
[00:33:58] Speaker: And then that's just a highlight. We have about 62 pages, so we could keep going for another hour or so, but I think you have all of that. It's up on our website as well. So, that's a little highlight, and we're happy to answer any questions.
[00:34:07] Mayor: Terrific. Any questions, comments from my colleagues?
[00:34:11] Council Member: I like data. This helps a lot as we look forward to making future decisions. So, this is very comprehensive, organized. I greatly appreciate you.
[00:34:21] Speaker: Thank you.
[00:34:22] Mayor: Okay, Council Member Hornik.
[00:34:25] Council Member Hornik: Thank you so much for all of that information. And it's like you all took speed talking classes from Linda Evans. It was great. Thank you for all of that information.
[00:34:39] Speaker: Thank you.
[00:34:41] Council Member: I just echo the comments, and I'm just so thankful that we have your organization doing all these wonderful things for our entire Coachella Valley, including Palm Desert. So thank you.
[00:34:55] Mayor: Mayor Pro Tem.
[00:34:57] Mayor Pro Tem: Nothing to add.
[00:34:59] Mayor: Got it. Well, I got to say I've been in the tourism industry since I've lived here 30 years. And the trajectory you've taken this organization, you and the staff, has been amazing, phenomenal. And I know it's a competitive market, and you've put us in the lead against so many other destinations. So, thank you very, very much, Scott. We appreciate you, and thank you.
[00:35:18] Scott: We have a team of 67, so they work very hard. And I get to present, but it's really a lot of work being done by the entire team. So, but thank you all for your support. We appreciate it.
[00:35:26] Mayor: Great job.
[00:35:26] Scott: Thank you.
[00:35:27] Mayor: Thanks, Scott. Okay, next up we have item 10, city manager comments.
[00:35:32] City Manager: Mayor, I'd like to invite up John Ramont so that he can make this special announcement and recognition.
[00:35:43] John Ramont: Good afternoon, Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, and Council. It's my distinct pleasure today to be able to celebrate some recent accomplishments of the Desert Willow team. A few years ago, we started contracting with 59 Club to have mystery shoppers come into the golf course to make sure that we're maintaining those super high standards that our citizens expect. And as a key part of that, this organization is international, and they evaluate golf courses everywhere and lots of them, and each year they present awards. And this year, Desert Willow won a lot of them. And so I'd like to invite Derek and his team up to show and tell you about those awards.
[00:36:42] Derek: All right. I guess that's me. Well, I know some of you were disappointed because I said we were nominated for like eight out of the 14 awards that were available, and they said don't come home unless it's a clean sweep. So, we decided, well, we'll split with everybody else 50/50 and bring home four of the ones we were nominated for. So, I am very proud of these four gentlemen whose names will be on the screen. However, obviously, there's a great number of people that work with them and alongside them to produce the amazing guest experience, the guest experiences across the board at Desert Willow that everybody wants us to portray over there. So the first award you'll see there is a Gold Flag Award. And so the first two years of Secret Shopper, we actually were awarded the Silver Flag, and only five properties nationwide out of about 200 from 59 Club were awarded that. We were thrilled. We're like, you know, we didn't know what to expect from Secret Shoppers, and Silver Flag was great. Here we are, we're in the top, you know, 2% of properties. But, you know, up on that gold board was the Gold Flag. We're like, we know it will be hard, but we'd really love to get a Gold Flag. And this year, we were going into December thinking, man, we think we might have a shot at this Gold Flag. And so they gave out five Gold Flags nationwide. Desert Willow was one of them. I will announce that of the 200 properties nationwide, you can imagine, only properties that care about guest experiences are interested in working with Secret Shopper programs, right? So you're talking about the TPC properties, Whistling Straits, you're talking about We-Ko-Pa out of Arizona. I would actually say there's probably a very small percentage of municipally owned properties that are working with the secret shopper program. So, it's something certainly that I think Council and staff, you guys are amazing at supporting the property in terms of giving us the resources necessary, and because of the hard work by the amazing team we have, we think that we've really done something that everyone should be proud of. As the next award, we'll talk about the four individual awards I think that we've won. We won, and these are more like consistency awards because we won for the whole year. Keith was awarded the Food and Beverage Manager of the Year Award out of all of those properties. Up next, the leading individual golf visit experience. This one happened to be, so for all of the visits they did, the single highest golf visit was scored at Desert Willow. And so we've put Ryan's name up there since he heads up that wonderful team. Up next, Brian Lind. And this was a retail management award. So, we're very thankful. They come in, they ask tons of questions about products that they're interested in, and then it's up to us to talk with them about those and show that we have knowledge and make sure that we greet them and all those kinds of things once they hit the pro shop. Up next, Chris Beian won Superintendent of the Year, and that's for the amazing scores that we received there. And I think if anything, we can all be super proud of the course conditions that exist.
[00:40:01] Staff Member: At Desert Willow today, if you go over there, it's a different kind of green than I think that should naturally exist in a desert, but it looks phenomenal and the guests think so as well. So, we're super proud to have won, you know, four out of those eight nominations. And we hope that you're just as proud. I will add that just this morning, we participate in an annual survey program where we send out a survey to all of our guests and then they benchmark that data against all the properties that participate with the National Golf Foundation in this survey program nationwide. And Desert Willow just won second most friendly staff out in the nation. We won second place in loyalty awards and then again first place in course conditions. And that's against all properties that are premium properties across the nation in that survey results. So right now we kind of have the rewards are funneling in quickly and we could not be more proud of the team and what they're doing there. So that's it for today.
[00:41:08] Mayor: Any comments? It's all good. All right. Well, I sometimes almost get tired of bragging about Palm Desert, but you just gave me one more thing to brag about. So, thank you so much. So proud of the work you're doing.
[00:41:20] Council Member: Perfect. Good job. Good job. Excellent.
[00:41:23] Staff Member: I'll crack the whip. We've got a sold-out concert to get back to.
[00:41:26] Mayor: Awesome. Enjoy. City Manager, anything else?
[00:41:28] City Manager: Nothing additional.
[00:41:29] Mayor: All right. Thank you very much. Next, we go to item number 11, Mayor and Council Member reports and requests for action. We'll start to my left with Council Member Kinttonia.
[00:41:41] Council Member Kinttonia: Thank you. I think you like letting me go first so I can already take advantage of the events where we are together. Am I finally catching on? All right. Very eventful meeting at the Coachella Valley Animal Campus. We were able to recognize Palm Desert—the committee recognized Palm Desert for our efforts with a backyard breeding ban, and they said that more cities should follow suit. So that got a lot of praise from public comment. And we learned that Desert Hot Springs has banned fireworks, and I know we had had discussions—I believe Mayor Pro Tem and I had had a brief little chat on that, and also with their city manager. And Cathedral City reported that when they incorporated a drone show where they were expecting maybe some people would be less inclined to go, they actually saw increased participation. In the news, there had been reports that somebody was turned away from fostering an animal because the staff member wasn't available to sign out. So, I want to clarify, since I know that this is an issue that people have been following and I know I've gotten comments on, they said this was an isolated issue in Blythe that has a whole different structure. Children's Museum had the fundraiser. I saw you from across the room, didn't get a chance to say hi. Yesterday, I participated online and watched the two-and-a-half-hour segment of the Board of Supervisors meeting on voter integrity. And that's important to note because a lot of folks, knowing this is an election year, we want people to know that your votes are safe. And the claim was that there were duplicated ballots or that they weren't counted, but long story short, the way that they were counting numbers didn't account for a lot of the reasons that a ballot may have been spoiled or they had to count them in a different way than just looking at numbers issued. And overall, the voter integrity—sorry, the return rate of margin of error for Riverside County was 0.016%, where the state allows a 2% variance. And in contrast, San Diego County has 0.36%. So we're in pretty good shape on that. So I want to assure people that Riverside County is doing an excellent job ensuring that your votes are counted very well. And another highlight of the week was the Desert Arc Foundation luncheon. That was great, the Champions of Change. And I loved that the individual, one of the honored individuals, they call him the Mayor of the Arc Foundation. So getting to see and take pictures of the Mayor of Palm Desert with the Mayor of the Arc Foundation was pretty heartwarming. And from there, I made connections with folks that let me know about a few different events. And these are resources for family-friendly events for kids or loved ones with autism. One is an autism art festival taking place March 22nd at Cathedral City Community Amphitheater, a Palentine Jump night Wednesday, this coming Wednesday the 18th at Zebra World, and a parent support group, which I thought was very interesting because a lot of times we focus on the individual that needs accommodations and not how to support the families. So, this is held the fourth Wednesday of the month at the Bermuda Dunes Desert Recreation Facilities. So, that's it for me.
[00:45:21] Mayor: Council Member Neandi.
[00:45:23] Council Member Neandi: At the Cultural Arts Committee, they originally had over a hundred applicants to put up the new sculpture on the roundabout down the way. And they narrowed it down to four artists. And so yesterday, after the four artists interviewed and displayed their work, they picked the two finalists. And so now for the next 30 days, there's community engagement. I think we also can give our opinion as well on Engage Palm Desert for the next 30 days, which will help determine which artist will be chosen. And it's going to be difficult because they're both just phenomenal pieces of artwork.
[00:46:06] Mayor: Thank you. Council Member Hornick.
[00:46:11] Council Member Hornick: Thank you. We had the annual workshop for Riverside County Transportation Commission. In that workshop, you may have seen it on the news, we had the beginning of the second tier environmental impact report for CV Rail. So, it's moving. Of course, not as fast as we'd like. It's kind of hard to understand why we have—if we have two operational tracks in place right now, why we would need an environmental impact report done to put a third next to it. But nonetheless, that's what CEQA and NEPA say. And so we will be spending $80 million to do that. But it's what we have to do to get that CV Rail coming into our valley. And so I suppose it's worth it. The Secretary of Transportation was here. Secretary was looking at some of the issues that are on Varner Road on the infrastructure and some of the dangers that have been kind of increased in the last few years, which is good news because when he's here, that means something will be done when he takes his time. And we had the head of Caltrans, the head of CalSTA, and of course CVAG, and we were there looking at the issues that are created. There was a very unfortunate incident that had occurred on the 10 near Cabazon. There were two semis that had jackknifed. Now, it was unfortunate, but in a sense, it was okay because the Secretary of Transportation was caught in that traffic for hours and came to the realization that there's one way in and out of this valley and we need a bypass. So, we must take advantage of that incident and do the best for this valley that we can. The other issue is Southern California Association of Governments, and this is something certainly we'll share with Visit Greater Palm Springs, is developing a toolkit for viewing parties for LA28 that we will be able to use in our cities. And keeping in mind it is July, so it will be hot. So it'll have to be in indoor venues, but we will be having viewing parties for the Olympics as soon as they develop these. Just—this is how we got San Pablo started is with a toolkit from SCAG, and we will have great things from the toolkits for the LA Olympics. That's it.
[00:48:49] Mayor: Mayor Pro Tem, no reports tonight? Okay, very good. I've got a couple items I'd like to mention. It was, I guess, I don't know, in the last week or two, USA Today ran a big story about Palm Desert winning second place among the most welcoming cities in the country. We lost to Fredericksburg, Texas. I don't know what they have that we don't, but I'm awfully proud of Palm Desert being listed as a welcoming city on Booking.com. Just another, again, thing to brag about. I am so proud of this city. This past week, I did attend a luncheon for the Variety Club Women of Wonder, where our very own Jan Hornick, who was reluctant to brag about herself, but I'll brag for her, was named as a Woman of Wonder. And that's a great organization, raised a ton of money at the event, but I think her accomplishments were basically contributing to everything because during her career, she has, and she's made a huge impact here in our city and even regionally. So, thank you so much, Jan, and well-deserved. Good job. And I've got a request for action, which staff may already be working on. It's been brought to my attention by a couple of residents and my own personal experience kind of—
[00:50:00] Council Member: ...bears it out. That intersection at El Paso and 74, where if you're going eastbound on El Paso and then you want to go right turn southbound on Monterey or 74, I guess, there's a little bit of a curve, a little bit of, you know, cars are going fairly fast and it's been pointed out as being a potentially dangerous intersection. You know, folks are going uphill, maybe they're starting off kind of slow, and anyway, a lot of near misses or even accidents there. And I just wanted to see what we could do. Maybe no right on red or any options we have available. I don't know if staff's already working on it, but for sure I'd like to see something move on that, if I have a second.
[00:50:38] Council Member: You do, because I have heard the same, and there's some significant delays sometimes in the traffic lights, and I just think a complete study would benefit the community.
[00:50:49] Mayor: Terrific. All right. Thank you very much. So that's all for our comments and RF—request for action, rather—and we will move on to item number 12, non-agenda public comments. This time has been set aside for the public to address the City Council on issues that are not on the agenda for up to three minutes. Speakers may utilize one of the three options listed on the first page of the agenda. Because the Brown Act does not allow the City Council to act on items not listed on the agenda, members may briefly respond or refer the matter to staff for a report and recommendation at a future meeting. I have three blue speaker cards on non-agenda items. First up, if we could have Mr. Chris Christensen, please.
[00:51:41] Chris Christensen: Good afternoon, Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, and other council members. I'm Chris Christensen with the Desert Healthcare District and Foundation. I'm the CEO of the organization, and many of you have probably heard of the Desert Healthcare District in many ways—good, bad, indifferent. But we are the organization that owns Desert Regional Medical Center and have the lease with Tenet on that property. And then also, for the last 30 years, we've been doing extensive grant funding in the community across the entire Coachella Valley. Originally, the healthcare district boundaries were only to Cook Street on the east side, and in 2018 expanded to include the entire Coachella Valley. And so our board is in the process now of working on a new five-year strategic plan. We do have additional extensive resources that we're anticipating working with, with the new hospital lease that will continue beginning in May of 2027. So, we will have the first installment of $100 million of a total of $650 million over the course of the next 30-plus years. Unfortunately, we will lose ownership of the hospital at that time, but our goals are around extending access to healthcare and wellness to our community residents. And so the district board has been engaged in about six months so far with our strategic planning process. We've been working with a very, very good consultant and developing a very robust strategic plan. We are at that point in our strategic planning process where we are taking it on the road. So we are hosting seven different community listening sessions across the valley. We already have conducted four of those sessions last week in Coachella, Desert Hot Springs, Indio, and Palm Springs. We have three additional sessions coming up next week. One of those sessions being here in Palm Desert on the 19th at 11:30, and then we also have Cathedral City on Wednesday, and then La Quinta on Thursday. And these community listening sessions are so important. We're asking for the residents to be able to come to these sessions, to be able to hear their voice on what they feel is missing or any gaps that may need to be incorporated into the strategic plan that is being developed and will be finalized by May of this year and implemented beginning July of 2027. So, complimentary food, $200 gift card, and Spanish translation as well as ASL translation. So, if you have any questions or comments, I'm happy to engage.
[00:54:59] Mayor: Terrific. All right. Thank you. Unfortunately, we cannot. This is—
[00:55:03] Council Member Hornick: I just have a request. Can we make sure that we get that date out to the community members?
[00:55:08] Chris Christensen: And I have given flyers to the City Clerk and that, and then also you can access our website, dhcd.org.
[00:55:19] Mayor: Great. Thank you. Thank you.
[00:55:20] Council Member: I second Council Member Hornick's call to maybe get Thomas and the crew out there spreading the word.
[00:55:28] Chris Christensen: I think we also have, with our communications director, has reached out to your public information person as well. So thank you. Appreciate your time.
[00:55:39] Mayor: All right. And Anthony, was there a couple housekeeping remarks I missed? Sorry about that.
[00:55:43] Anthony: For those on Zoom, if you want to participate in public comment, please click the raise hand button on your computer or smartphone. And if you're calling in on your phone, please dial star 9 to raise your hand. And when called upon, press star 6 to unmute yourself.
[00:55:55] Mayor: Thank you, sir. All right. Next up, we have Chris Shakar, I believe, or Shockler.
[00:56:07] Chris Shakar: Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor and council members, city staff. My name is Chris Shakar and I am a resident of Palm Desert, and I'm also the owner of Glow Window Cleaning. We're just a local small business here, headquartered proudly out of Palm Desert. Before I begin, I just wanted to thank the city staff people who have helped me so far to date with my issue here—all the code compliance officers who have taken down the illegal signage around the city. It's been a big help, so thank you. And then as a small business owner, I believe in competition, but competition works only when the rules apply equally and the city enforces its own codes consistently. For more than five months, I've documented repeated illegal commercial signage placed throughout Palm Desert. Signs have been removed and then put right back up, sometimes the very next day. This pattern has been reported repeatedly through the city's own systems. In addition, the business connected to this signage has continued advertising and soliciting work within the city despite there being no active Palm Desert business license reflected in public records. I want to be clear about this, though: this is not about trying to eliminate competition. I welcome it. I think it makes business better. And I respect the voluntary compliance as an initial step, but that approach makes sense when the violations are isolated or inadvertent. But when signs are deliberately reinstalled over months, sometimes the very next day, and when operators modify their signage to avoid identification after notice and continue advertising in prohibited locations despite enforcement efforts, voluntary compliance no longer corrects behavior. It becomes a loophole to get around the behavior—or to get around the rules, I should say. At that point, the issue is no longer about one operator. It's the precedent being set throughout the city for every business in Palm Desert. So to put this in perspective, imagine if every home service business followed this same pattern, right? Every single shopping center would be littered in signs, every single median, every single corner. You'd have window cleaning, you'd have pressure washing, handyman, or my new favorite is 'I Scoop,' right, all over the city. It would be an ugly sight. And I don't see this kind of signage in Rancho Mirage. I don't see it in Indian Wells, because consequences work. And when consequences are real, this behavior stops. So my question to the council is very simple: what message does Palm Desert want to send to business owners and residents about how seriously we take our codes and the appearance of our community? I respectfully ask the council to direct staff to establish a clear enforcement threshold for repeat sign violations, so that after notice and removal, reinstallation would trigger consequences rather than another reset to voluntary compliance. Thank you for your time and for considering the impact this has on Palm Desert's credibility, on small businesses trying to operate responsibly in our community.
[00:59:17] Council Member: You know, I actually wouldn't mind seeing us get a little bit of a report on that.
[00:59:21] Staff Member: We'll follow up and look into the matter.
[00:59:23] Chris Shakar: Thank you.
[00:59:24] Mayor: Okay. And next we have Matthew McCauen.
[00:59:35] Matthew McCauen: Good afternoon, Mayor. Good afternoon, members of the council. My name is Matthew McCauen. I am the owner of Life, a La Quinta-based business operating responsibly since 2017. I hold a master's degree in media psychology and have studied extensively since 2016, including its science, regulation, and the ways media and algorithmic platforms shape public perception.
[01:00:02] Public Speaker: It is important to distinguish pure raw kratom leaf from synthetic derivatives, nor chemically altered products. The product we provide is simply dry ground Mitragyna speciosa, unadulterated and responsibly sourced. Many concerns in the media or policy discussion involve synthetic compounds, not the traditional plant. I fully support thoughtful regulation. This includes restricting sales to adults 21 and older, banning synthetic kratom products, enforcing quality control and labeling. Regulation increases safety. Prohibition does not. From a media psychology perspective, kratom faces unique communication barriers. Major social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and X, restrict or ban kratom-related content under their internal policies. These algorithmic restrictions prevent balanced, evidence-based dialogue from reaching the public, often leaving fear and misinformation to dominate perception. Inaccurate framing can mislead both the public and policymakers about the risks and benefits of the natural plant, creating a distorted understanding of the issue. Removing legal access does not eliminate demand. Instead, it drives adults into unregulated markets with no age verification, no testing, and no accountability, which is far more dangerous. Regulation, on the other hand, protects consumers while preserving responsible access to the natural leaf, which grows in Indonesia as a natural tree. Most people in Indonesia have these trees in their backyard, so it's totally safe. I respectfully urge the council to distinguish between synthetic derivatives and pure raw kratom. Adopt thoughtful, evidence-based regulation that prioritizes public safety without necessarily restricting access for responsible adults. Finally, I want to leave the council with this perspective: Nature, a connection to Mother Earth. When natural plants are made illegal, freedom itself is threatened. Thoughtful regulation can protect communities while still honoring the rights of adults to access the natural world. Nature should not be criminalized. If nature is illegal, there is no freedom. Thank you. Thank you so much for the consideration.
[01:02:30] Mayor Troy: Thank you. And I just suggest you pay attention because we will be addressing the policy here moving forward. So there we are. Thank you very much. Okay.
[01:02:38] Staff: Mr. Mayor, we do have an online comment. Thank you so much. Heather S.
[01:02:50] Staff: Heather, if you can unmute yourself, you can begin.
[01:02:55] Heather S.: Sorry about that. Sorry about that. I'm not used to Zoom this way. Good afternoon, council members. My name is Heather, and I'm here today as someone living with myalgic encephalomyelitis, sometimes known as ME/CFS, a disabling illness that took over my life at 15, over 30 years ago. ME/CFS is pain, cognitive dysfunction, and a level of exhaustion that makes even simple tasks feel impossible. There's no cure, no FDA-approved treatment, and no standard medical pathway for people like me. Every day is about survival and trying to hold on to whatever small pieces of functioning I can. For me, kratom has been one of the only things that gives me any quality of life. It eases my pain. It helps me stay stable enough to do basic things like preparing food, caring for myself, and without it, my world becomes much smaller. I want to be very clear. I use kratom responsibly, carefully, and out of necessity, not recreation. I use raw leaf natural products and not the synthetics. And I'm not alone. Many people with my disease and many others use it for pain and other chronic conditions. I understand the city's concern, and safety matters to all of us. But I want to share something important. The World Health Organization conducted a scientific review and chose not to recommend a global ban. Their Expert Committee on Drug Dependence concluded there was inadequate evidence to justify stricter international control. Another report noted that the WHO voted 11 to 1 against recommending international scheduling after reviewing that data. That matters. It shows that global health authorities, after examining the evidence, did not find kratom to be the kind of public danger that warrants prohibition. And we also know something else from decades of public health research: banning a substance does not stop its use. It simply pushes it underground where it becomes more dangerous and more likely to be misused. If kratom is banned here, it won't stop the misuse, but it will take away one of the tools that people like me have to manage a disabling illness with no treatment options. It will punish responsible users while doing nothing to address the real risks. I'm asking you to consider the human impact, to see the people behind the policy, to understand that for some of us, it is not a luxury but a lifeline. Please don't take away one of the only things that allows me to live with dignity, stability, and some measure of relief. Thank you.
[01:05:19] Mayor Troy: All right. Thank you very much. Any other online comments?
[01:05:22] Staff: No other comments.
[01:05:23] Mayor Troy: Terrific. Thank you. Okay. Next, we move on to our consent calendar. All matters listed on the consent calendar are considered routine and may be approved by one motion. The public may comment on any item on the consent calendar for up to three minutes. I don't have any blue speaker cards about consent items. Anything online?
[01:05:43] Staff: No comments online.
[01:05:45] Mayor Troy: Terrific. All right.
[01:05:46] Council Member Quintanilla: I move approval.
[01:05:47] Mayor Troy: Anybody?
[01:05:48] Council Member: Mr. Mayor, sir, I would like to pull 13G.
[01:05:52] Mayor Troy: Okay. Item 13G, Fiscal Year 2025 midyear budget status and staff allocation update. Anybody else?
[01:06:03] Mayor Troy: All right. Shall we? Um...
[01:06:05] Council Member: I'll make a motion—I mean, I'll second Council Member Quintanilla's motion to approve the remainder.
[01:06:10] City Clerk: Council Member Harnik?
[01:06:14] Council Member Harnik: Yes.
[01:06:14] City Clerk: Council Member Nandi?
[01:06:16] Council Member Nandi: Yes.
[01:06:16] City Clerk: Council Member Quintanilla?
[01:06:17] Council Member Quintanilla: Yes.
[01:06:18] City Clerk: Mayor Pro Tem?
[01:06:19] Mayor Pro Tem: Yes.
[01:06:20] City Clerk: Mayor Troy?
[01:06:20] Mayor Troy: Yes.
[01:06:21] City Clerk: Motion passes 5 to 0.
[01:06:21] Mayor Troy: Okay, now we go on to discussing Item 13G, Fiscal Year 2025 midyear budget status and staff allocation update. Do we have anybody for a staff report?
[01:06:35] Veronica Chavez: Good afternoon, honorable Mayor, members of the City Council. It's Veronica Chavez, your Director of Finance. This year's midyear budget update was just intended to give you the information that we do not need a council approval for an update. We are just transferring between funds. There is substantial budget currently to cover things. We just want to put the items in the correct areas as far as the funding. We are asking for an adjustment on the resolution of staffing, and that's just to coincide with the changes that have happened up until now. If you have any questions, I'm happy to answer them.
[01:07:15] Mayor Troy: Any questions? Okay.
[01:07:18] Council Member: Mayor, for the public—
[01:07:19] Mayor Troy: Go ahead.
[01:07:20] Council Member: If I may, for the public, this sounds pretty boring, but this is a big win. Managing budgets is not an easy thing to do, and staff has so far this year kept in line. That's not an easy job to do. And I want to give kudos to the City Manager and staff for keeping everything in line and aligned with our direction.
[01:07:45] Mayor Troy: Thank you. Well, I'll make a motion to move 13G.
[01:07:49] Council Member: Second.
[01:07:53] City Clerk: Council Member Harnik?
[01:07:54] Council Member Harnik: Yes.
[01:07:55] City Clerk: Council Member Nandi?
[01:07:56] Council Member Nandi: Yes.
[01:07:56] City Clerk: Council Member Quintanilla?
[01:07:58] Council Member Quintanilla: Yes.
[01:07:58] City Clerk: Mayor Pro Tem?
[01:08:00] Mayor Pro Tem: Yes.
[01:08:00] City Clerk: Mayor Troy?
[01:08:01] Mayor Troy: Yes.
[01:08:02] City Clerk: Motion passes 5 to 0.
[01:08:03] Mayor Troy: Terrific. Moving on to Item number 14, our action calendar. Item 14A, resolutions adopting amendments to the city's conflict of interest code and designating certain appointed bodies and officials for travel reimbursement and applicable ethics and fiscal training requirements.
[01:08:25] Staff: Honorable Mayor and City Council, this item brings forward two resolutions to align the city's policies with recent changes in state law regarding ethics and fiscal training. First, under AB 1234, ongoing ethics training is required only for appointed officials who receive compensation or are eligible for reimbursement. None of our appointed bodies receive compensation, and historically none of them have received travel reimbursement. The proposed update clarifies that only the Planning Commission, Architectural Review Commission, Finance Committee, and Historic Preservation Committee would be eligible for reimbursement if needed and ties the biennial ethics renewal to that designation. All other appointed members will still complete ethics training upon appointment. Second, SB 827 establishes a new biennial fiscal training requirement for officials with fiscal oversight responsibility, and staff recommends designating the City Council, City Manager, department directors, deputy directors of finance, and the Finance Committee members. And I'm available for any questions.
[01:09:26] Mayor Troy: All right. Any questions from my colleagues?
[01:09:28] Council Member: I do have a question. So you say that they have to do AB 1234 upon appointment. Does that mean every time their term comes up?
[01:09:39] Staff: It would be a one-and-done. So upon their appointment the first time, they would do the ethics training. However, if council's direction is that you want them to do it every time they're reappointed, we can also do that.
[01:09:51] Council Member: I would recommend that. Sure. It's good for a reminder, and so many things change that it's nice to be able to be brought up to date.
[01:09:59] Staff: Absolutely.
[01:10:01] Council Member: I support that recommendation to have it be an annual or upon appointment.
[01:10:08] Council Member: And let me ask, some of our terms are four. Are all of them four years or so?
[01:10:13] Staff: All of the terms are four years.
[01:10:15] Council Member: Okay. Thank you.
[01:10:19] Mayor Triy: Okay, terrific. Any public comment? No. No blue cards, nothing online.
[01:10:28] City Clerk: No online public comments.
[01:10:29] Mayor Triy: Very good. Okay, got it. Anybody care to make a motion?
[01:10:33] Council Member: I move approval.
[01:10:34] Council Member: I will second that.
[01:10:36] City Clerk: I just clarify the move approval with the change.
[01:10:40] Council Member: I beg your pardon. Yes.
[01:10:41] City Clerk: Okay. Thank you.
[01:10:43] City Clerk: Council Member Hearnick?
[01:10:44] Council Member Hearnick: Yes.
[01:10:44] City Clerk: Council Member Nisti?
[01:10:46] Council Member Nisti: Yes.
[01:10:46] City Clerk: Council Member Kintania?
[01:10:47] Council Member Kintania: Yes.
[01:10:47] City Clerk: Mayor Pro Tem Peretto?
[01:10:49] Mayor Pro Tem Peretto: Yes.
[01:10:50] City Clerk: And Mayor Triy?
[01:10:51] Mayor Triy: Yes. Motion passes 5 to zero.
[01:10:53] Mayor Triy: Excellent. Okay, on to Item Number 15, Public Hearings. The public may comment on individual public hearing items within the three-minute time limit. The applicant and appellant will be provided with up to 10 minutes to make their presentations following public testimony. The appellant and applicant will be given an opportunity to offer rebuttal comments for up to three additional minutes. And Item 15A will be the first one we'll take on. Here it is: the approval of proposed plan for bond issuance by the California Municipal Finance Authority for the Palm Desert Family Housing Project located at the northwest corner of Cook Street and Frank Sinatra Drive, superseding Resolution Number 2026-1. And we have a staff report.
[01:11:39] Staff: Good afternoon, Mayor, City Council. [Unclear], Development Services. Staff is here this afternoon to conduct a public hearing required under the federal Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act, also known as TEFRA, and to consider approval of the proposed financing. Compass for Affordable Housing has requested that the California Municipal Finance Authority, or CMFA, issue tax-exempt facility bonds not to exceed $50 million for a multi-family rental housing project at the northwest corner of Cook Street and Frank Sinatra. The bonds would be issued by CMFA, not the City. Repayment is solely the borrower's responsibility with no City financial or legal obligation. Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution approving CMFA's issuance of tax-exempt facility bonds for the borrower to satisfy TEFRA, the Internal Revenue Code, and California Government Code Section 6500. And with that, I'll turn it over to Jared Suzuki from CMFA, who's joining us via Zoom.
[01:12:46] Jared Suzuki: Good afternoon.
[01:12:52] Mayor Triy: Uh, you can proceed.
[01:13:02] Jared Suzuki: Can the Council hear me?
[01:13:05] Mayor Triy: Uh, we are breaking up. We're not able to. Can you try again?
[01:13:12] Jared Suzuki: Does that sound better?
[01:13:14] Mayor Triy: Yes.
[01:13:17] Jared Suzuki: Awesome. Good afternoon. Yes, my name is Jared Suzuki. I was present in the chambers last month with the same item. To resummarize, we are here to conduct a public hearing under the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act. Just to summarize what I stated, the City will have no financial responsibility or obligation with the repayment of this debt, and all the bond documents will carry disclaimers stating that as well. I would love to answer any questions should there be any.
[01:13:52] Mayor Triy: Okay. Any questions from my colleagues?
[01:13:56] Mayor Triy: All right. Very good. We are going to open the public hearing. I don't have any blue cards. Do we have any speakers online?
[01:14:04] City Clerk: No online speakers.
[01:14:05] Mayor Triy: All righty. Well, then I guess I'm going to close the public hearing. All right. All right, any other clarifying questions? Any comments on this issue?
[01:14:15] Council Member: Okay.
[01:14:15] Council Member: Move approval.
[01:14:17] Council Member: I will second.
[01:14:19] City Clerk: Council Member Hearnick?
[01:14:20] Council Member Hearnick: Yes.
[01:14:20] City Clerk: Council Member Nandi?
[01:14:22] Council Member Nandi: Yes.
[01:14:22] City Clerk: Council Member Kinttonia?
[01:14:23] Council Member Kinttonia: Yes.
[01:14:23] City Clerk: Mayor Pro Tem Predetto?
[01:14:25] Mayor Pro Tem Predetto: Yes.
[01:14:25] City Clerk: And Mayor Trippy?
[01:14:27] Mayor Trippy: Yes.
[01:14:27] City Clerk: Motion passes five to zero.
[01:14:29] Mayor Trippy: Okay. Moving on to Item 15B, appeal of decision of the Planning Commission adopting a mitigated negative declaration, finding the project exempt from CEQA under guidelines Section 15183, and approving a precise plan for the Katavina residential project. Can we have a staff report, please?
[01:15:11] Rosie Lua: Good evening, Mayor and members of the City Council. Rosie Lua, Director of Development Services, presenting today the appeal of the Planning Commission decision of the Katavina development project. This is a continued public hearing item from January 8th, 2026. This evening, we will provide a brief overview of the project, a summary of the Planning Commission action, the basis for the appeal, responses to key issues raised during and prior, prior and after the public hearing, as well as our requests to City Council to make a decision.
[01:15:50] Rosie Lua: The Katavina project provides additional residential housing consistent with the City's general plan and the applicable development standards. Throughout the review process, the applicant worked with City staff to address planning, environmental, and community considerations.
[01:16:06] Rosie Lua: The applicant conducted community meetings as required for a project of this size. The project has undergone environmental review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The Planning Commission determined that that analysis was adequate and the project met the City's requirements.
[01:16:24] Rosie Lua: Post the Planning Commission meeting, both applicant and appellant have submitted additional documents for the CEQA record, including comment letters as recent as today, which the City has responded formally. This evening, staff requests...
[01:16:50] Rosie Lua: All righty. Give me one second.
[01:16:59] Rosie Lua: One second.
[01:17:05] Rosie Lua: Trying to get back to my presentation.
[01:17:12] Rosie Lua: Oh goodness. Okay.
[01:17:18] Mayor Trippy: You know what slide you want?
[01:17:19] Rosie Lua: Yep, second slide. All right. This evening, staff respectfully requests that the City Council consider the complete administrative record, including the environmental document, technical studies, public testimony received, and accept staff's recommendation to deny the appeal, uphold the Planning Commission approval, and confirm adoption of the initial study, mitigated negative declaration (the MND), and the CEQA streamlining under the guidelines 15183 consistent with the general plan and the approval of the precise plan for the 546 single-family homes.
[01:17:54] Rosie Lua: Next,
[01:17:57] Rosie Lua: jumping into the project approvals. On November 18, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the Katavina project by the applicant, Blue Fern West. Staff and the applicant presented the project, the environmental analysis, and responded to commissioner questions. Several residents spoke in opposition, citing concerns related to traffic, density, compatibility with the adjacent 55-and-over community, noise, setbacks, as well as related impacts.
[01:18:26] Rosie Lua: After deliberation, the Planning Commission proceeded to approve the item, voting 3-0 with one recusal due to a potential conflict of interest. The approvals included the adoption of an initial study, mitigated negative declaration in compliance with CEQA, the approval of the precise plan for 546 single-family lots, and two subdivision maps. An action by the Planning Commission, as we are here today, is subject to an appeal before the City Council. Next,
[01:19:01] Rosie Lua: as far as location and the surrounding context of this project, the Katavina development site is located west of Portola and south of Frank Sinatra, encompassing approximately 81 acres. The site is the former Santa Rosa Golf Course, which closed in 2015 and is currently vacant. The site is designated Town Center Neighborhood in our general plan, which allows...
[01:19:26] Rosie Lua: up to—I'm sorry, between seven and 40 dwelling units per acre, and Planned Residential with a maximum of 22 units per acre. The current proposed project of 546 single-family lots results in an overall density of seven dwelling units per acre with a mix of one- and two-story homes, and it's restricting two-story homes on the edges of this project. The proposed precise plan establishes density, lot sizes, open space, street drainage, but no architectural design was proposed at...
[01:20:01] Staff: Proposed lot layout area ranges from 2,120 feet to approximately 5,000 square feet. The surrounding land uses include single-family residential neighborhoods to the north, south, and west, with Palm Greens mainly surrounding this project. The project to the east is a vacant site. The project is designed to provide the appropriate transition to adjacent uses through setbacks, landscape buffers, and compatible building heights. Next.
[01:20:36] Staff: So what is being appealed? The appeal has been filed by Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility, or SAFER. The appellant challenges the project through the CEQA challenge, asserting that the mitigated negative declaration is inadequate and a full environmental impact report is required. SAFER cites CEQA's fair argument standard, asserting that substantial evidence exists suggesting the project could have significant environmental impacts. Specific concerns raised include potential impacts to air quality, GHG emissions, biological resources, and indoor air quality. Under the Palm Desert Municipal Code, the City Council reviews appeals de novo, meaning the City Council holds a new hearing. The City is not limited to issues considered by the Planning Commission, so any new evidence, information, or arguments can be introduced. The Council may confirm, modify, or reverse the Planning Commission's action in whole or in part, and may add or condition as deemed appropriate. The Council's decision is final and cannot be further appealed. Next.
[01:21:50] Staff: So for the CEQA record, we have an initial study, mitigated negative declaration, and supporting technical studies. There was a public review from October 1st to October 20th. There were two agency records, one from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and one from the California Department of Toxic Substances Control. There were responses that were included in the record. Updates to that mitigated negative declaration did not require recirculation of this document. There are appellant comments from November 3rd, 2026, as well as a mitigation monitoring and reporting program. So I will focus on the two letters, which is the crux of the argument for the appellant.
[01:22:37] Staff: The first letter is a letter dated October 2025 from the California Fish and Wildlife, which recommended five new or modified mitigation measures for the project, and it focused on the burrowing owl protection and nighttime lighting. The approved MND was revised to include three of the five measures. Two measures were not incorporated, and this is why those two measures were not incorporated. So, the focused burrowing owl survey that was recommended by the Fish and Wildlife, City staff recommended that it would not be required because an extensive biological survey found no burrowing owl, no suitable burrows, and no evidence of historical use of the highly disturbed site. The MND does, however, require pre-construction surveys to detect any new burrowing owl activity for the construction of this project.
[01:23:37] Staff: Additional nighttime lighting standards: City staff deemed that it was not necessary because the project will comply with the existing City and outdoor lighting resolutions, which already limit construction hours and minimize light impacts to neighbors. So overall, the initial study incorporates the recommendations where appropriate.
[01:24:00] Staff: The second letter is the October 3rd, 2025 letter from the Department of Toxic Substances Control, which recommended testing for the project site for arsenic and organochlorine pesticides and herbicides. The applicant's Phase I Environmental Site Assessment found no evidence of these compounds that had been used on the property. The applicant volunteered to provide a soil sample collected in December 2025 and tested the soil, confirming that arsenic and the organochlorines are not present at levels that pose a risk to workers or future residents. Based on these results, the MND's conclusion was that no significant impact from hazardous substances remained and remained valid.
[01:24:51] Staff: As for the documents that came after the Planning Commission record, there were: November 24th, 2025, that is an appeal application that was filed by SAFER; December 12th, 2025, is a response letter from the applicant relating to the California Fish and Wildlife letter, as well as a subsequent letter on December 15th by the applicant responding to the California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Those two response letters confirmed the City's position.
[01:25:31] Staff: There was then a January 6th letter, and this letter came in right before our January 8th City Council meeting, and this was SAFER's comment providing us additional information. The additional information that was provided included greenhouse gas emissions, a claim for biological resources, indoor air quality, construction air quality, and operational air quality potential significant impacts, again requesting that City Council require an environmental impact report. And so SAFER contended that the MND lacked substantial evidence supporting less than significant findings, and so supporting their position of requiring this EIR.
[01:26:22] Staff: The appellant responded to that SAFER letter, as well as providing a General Plan consistency memorandum. Following this record, on February 12th, the applicant has submitted a response letter to the General Plan consistency memorandum. I'm sorry, the appellant has provided a response letter to the General Plan consistency memorandum, as well as the applicant then subsequently provided a response letter to today's letter, as well as the City has also responded for its formal position that a General Plan consistency memorandum was adequate for this project. And we can go to the next slide.
[01:27:16] Staff: So just in summary, because I know this information is very dense, I will go as quickly as possible but try to provide you as much information as I can. The appeal claims of air quality and GHG, we found in conclusion that the information modeled in the MND was adequate. And the biological resource of requiring extended surveys for the burrowing owl, City staff found that the impacts were less than significant with the mitigation measures of the MMRP.
[01:27:54] Staff: The indoor air quality was addressed through an analysis and compliance with the building codes, and so no significant impact would be identified there. In terms of construction impacts identified by the appellant, construction emissions evaluated were below thresholds, so no site-specific or unusual impacts were identified.
[01:28:20] Staff: In terms of the hazard or toxic materials, the Phase I and then the additional testing confirmed no hazardous materials would be a risk to workers or residents. And adding on the CEQA exemption, which was that the project is consistent with the City's environmental impact report that was certified for the City's General Plan. If we can go to the next slide.
[01:28:45] Staff: And just to give you a bit more on this consistency of the General Plan: The General Plan designates this property as Town Center Neighborhood, and the density that was evaluated in the environmental impact report was for a density of 7 to 40 units per acre. This project is a seven dwelling unit per acre, which states that the environmental impact report analyzed this area at a very much higher impact.
[01:29:18] Staff: So the project, in the City's opinion, is that the project is not as intense as what was analyzed in the impact report, and therefore the CEQA guidelines apply, and the consistency exemption is valid for this project.
[01:29:43] Staff: And therefore, City staff recommend that City Council deny the appeal, confirm the decision of the Planning Commission, approve the project of the 546 single-family units, as well as find the project exempt from CEQA.
[01:30:01] Staff: guidelines Section 15183. The applicant is here with their consultants, legal team, as well as their CEQA consultants, as well as the applicant is on Zoom. I'm sorry, the appellant is on Zoom.
[01:30:19] Mayor: Terrific. Okay, thank you very much. At this time, I will open the public hearing. The applicant will have up to 10 minutes for their presentation, and whoever would like to come up and speak on their behalf, love to hear from you.
[01:30:38] David Hubard: Good evening, Council, Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem. My name is David Hubard. I am CEQA counsel for the project applicant, Blue Fern. As you've heard from staff, this project has been studied extensively, not only by the applicant's consultants, but by city staff as well. In response to the initial round of comments from SAFER, those consultants, the experts from each of those disciplines, prepared detailed responses to every single comment, and in each case, they were able to establish that there was no significant effect that wasn't already being dealt with. What I want to talk about, though, is something that is probably a little new for everyone, which is the general plan consistency exemption that is provided under Section 15183 of the CEQA guidelines, as it provides a separate, complete, and independent ground for denying the appeal. Section 15183 is intended to benefit those projects that are consistent with the general plan, zoning code, and density limitations that you all set when you adopt a general plan, which you did last time in 2016. And you prepared and certified an environmental impact report for that general plan update. And because this project is consistent on all fours with the general plan land use designation, zoning code designation, and density limits, it is entitled to a CEQA exemption. And the only way that anyone can disturb that exemption is if they can demonstrate that there is a significant and peculiar impact of this project that did not come to the attention or was not otherwise addressed in the 2016 EIR. Well, as staff has indicated and as all the documentation shows, there is no such significant and peculiar impact of this project. It is as basic as it gets. If you look at the map that was provided by staff, this is a residential project surrounded by other residential projects. The benefit to the city of applying the Section 15183 exemption, however, is that when it comes to potential litigation, which is certainly possible given the nature of this appeal, a standard of review is what the court uses to determine basically who's got the burden of proof. And when a Section 15183 exemption is applied, the only thing that matters is whether there is substantial evidence to support the city's determinations. The fact that SAFER, the appellant, has information that they think is important, that they think shows an impact, doesn't matter. As long as there is substantial evidence to support the city's determination on the exemption, the city wins. If you don't go forward with the Section 15183 exemption, a different standard of review applies. It's known as the fair argument standard. That one tilts in the exact opposite direction. All the presumptions run in favor of the challenger. It's one of the reasons that the legislature and the resources agency enacted the 15183 exemption. They want to benefit those projects that are consistent with the planning efforts of the agency where they're located. So what we have shown is that there are no significant peculiar impacts of this project, and SAFER hasn't provided anything to disrupt that determination. There has been some recent flurry over mitigation measures. SAFER seems to be under the impression that the mitigation measures that staff has applied to this project somehow disqualify the project from the exemption, and it doesn't. As staff has indicated, most of the measures that have been imposed on the project are primarily preventative and precautionary. They are intended to address situations which we don't anticipate, but in the event that something does happen, we've got something in place. I'll give you an example. One of the most common mitigation measures applied throughout the state of California, and the city of Palm Desert is no different, is that when there's going to be grading or any kind of ground disturbance activities, there's always a potential that you're going to uncover either a paleontological resource, a cultural resource, or a tribal resource. Even though all the investigation up to this point doesn't indicate that that will happen, you don't know what's under the ground. So, as a precaution, you impose a mitigation measure that says, 'Look, if you encounter something, you need to stop. You need to get a monitor. You need to have a plan for how you're going to deal with that.' That's the kind of mitigation measure that SAFER wants you to believe disqualifies this project from the exemption that it is otherwise entitled to. What we want to express today is, first of all, appreciation for staff's help, but we've also run these issues through the city's own special CEQA counsel at Best Best & Krieger. They agree with our analysis. We're here to respond to any questions you might have. But ultimately, our request is that you deny the appeal, that you make findings confirming the decision of the Planning Commission, and that you make a further finding that the project qualifies for Section 15183 exemption and streamlining. Thank you.
[01:37:16] Mayor: Thank you very much. The appellant will now have up to 10 minutes for their presentation, and I believe it's online. Is that correct? Or over the phone?
[01:37:27] Brian Flynn: I am on Zoom. Let me turn on my camera for you. There we are.
[01:37:31] Brian Flynn: All right. Good evening. My name is Brian Flynn. I'm a CEQA attorney with the law firm Lozeau Drury, here on behalf of the appellant, Supporters Alliance for Environmental Responsibility, or SAFER. SAFER is respectfully requesting that the Council grant the appeal and send this back to the Planning Commission for two reasons applied to planning staff. First, this project does not qualify for streamlined review under Section 15183. And second, this project requires an EIR, not a mitigated negative declaration, because there's a fair argument that the project may result in significant impacts. So, I'd like to start with whether this project qualifies for Section 15183. And what Section 15183 says is this: you know, if you have a project that's consistent with the densities established in your general plan—and we're not contesting that this isn't consistent with the densities—and an EIR was prepared with that general plan, you do an initial analysis to see whether you're required to do a more in-depth review in an EIR, MND, or other CEQA document. And you need to do that more in-depth review if your initial analysis reveals that there are impacts that are not substantially mitigated by uniformly applied development standards or policies. So again, if you have a project that's compliant with the density and its impacts are less than significant due to uniformly applied measures, then it qualifies for 15183. But that's not the case here. We know from the MND that this project requires mitigation to get impacts to less than significant levels for biological resources, cultural resources, tribal resources, geology, soils, and transportation. These are impacts that the MND found to be significant unless mitigation was applied. So contrary to the applicant's claim, the MND itself says, 'Hey, this project has particular significant impacts that need to be reduced.' The MND requires eight mitigation measures for these impacts. So the limited question before you right now is: are all eight of these mitigation measures uniformly applied standards that automatically apply to this and other projects in Palm Desert? The answer is no. First, the applicant had claimed that all eight measures come from either the 2016 General Plan EIR or from the city's uniform development standards. They didn't provide any citations. They didn't point to where these standards could be found. But let's start with the 2016 EIR. The written comment goes into more detail that I submitted, but it boils down to...
[01:40:00] Mr. Flynn: This. The mitigation measures required by the MND are not part of the general plan EIR. The MND has mitigation measures for tribal resources and geology and soils. There's no mitigation measures for those impacts in the EIR. The MND has mitigation measures for wildlife, including nest surveys, burrowing owl surveys, and avoidance measures. None of those appear in the EIR. The same thing for cultural resources and transportations. The measures are not part of the EIR. So, I don't understand how there's any credibility to the argument that the MND's measures come from the 2016 EIR when they're simply not there. So, if the measures didn't come from the general plan, well, then 15183 can only apply if the MND's eight mitigation measures come from the city's uniform development standards. In the applicant's response that they submitted today, they've kind of changed their tune and now claimed that the mitigation measures are uniform standards and policies or common preventative requirements. Section 15183 doesn't care whether the requirements are common. It cares about whether the requirements are uniformly applied. So again, there's no credibility that these measures are uniformly applied through the city of Palm Desert or even in an area subset of the city. To use mitigation measures for biological resources as an example, there's no way those measures are uniformly applied. The staff explained this. The draft MND included mitigation measures for wildlife. The Department of Fish and Wildlife commented on the draft MND. They suggested edits to those mitigation measures and recommended additional mitigation measures. Now, one of those additional measures and some of Fish and Wildlife's edits to the other measures were adopted in the final MND. So, those aren't uniformly applied. Those are measures that were crafted specifically for this project in consultation with CDFW. They're not uniformly applied measures. So, 15183 does not apply. I mean, I would urge the council to ask staff or the applicant to go through each of these eight measures and demonstrate how it's a uniformly applied standard. Point us to an ordinance. Point us to a regulation. Point us to some other binding document that says, 'Hey, any project that gets built on this location or built in Palm Desert is going to have this measure applied to it.' I don't think they can do that. And the council therefore can't find that it qualifies for 15183.
[01:42:27] Mr. Flynn: So since 15183 doesn't apply, that brings us to the MND. CEQA has a strong preference for the preparation of an EIR over an MND. That's reflected in what's known as the fair argument standard. Under the fair argument standard, you need to prepare an EIR if there is any substantial evidence in the record that a project may have a significant impact. Importantly, if there's any evidence of potential impacts, you need to prepare an EIR even if there's opposing evidence saying that there won't be impacts. So that means a limited question to the council is, is there any substantial evidence of possible significant impacts here? The council's not being asked to take a position on the project overall, and you're not being asked to weigh safer evidence against the city and the applicant's evidence. You're just being asked whether the project meets CEQA's very low threshold for preparing an EIR, and the evidence that SAFE provided to the council in January, which included reviews of the project by experts in air quality, greenhouse gases, ecology, and in indoor air quality, affirmatively established that the project may result in significant impacts. I can't go into every impact in detail, but just quickly I want to hit a few of the issues.
[01:43:40] Mr. Flynn: For greenhouse gases, a good example, CEQA does allow the city to evaluate greenhouse gases either using a quantitative or a qualitative method. Under a quantitative method, you calculate the GHG emissions and you compare it to a numerical threshold. Under a qualitative approach, you determine whether the project's consistent with applicable plans and policies. Under either approach, this project's emissions are arguably significant. Just under the quantitative approach, the MND admits that the project will have over 10,000 metric tons of CO2 emissions per year. For reference, the most commonly used threshold from the South Coast Air District is 3,000 metric tons. So this project's three and a half times over the numerical threshold. With those kind of numbers, it's not surprising that the MND elects to go with a qualitative approach. But that fails too. The MND claims to evaluate the project's consistency with the State Air Resources Board 2020 scoping plan. One of the standards in this CARB scoping plan is that residential development will have all-electric appliances beginning in 2026. The MND claims that the project is consistent with that all-electric standard, even though the MND plainly states that the project is expected to consist of natural gas heating and/or cooking on site. That's not all-electric appliances. That's natural gas. That's not consistent with the scoping plan. So, because this project exceeds the numerical threshold and it's inconsistent with the scoping plan, there's a fair argument for significant greenhouse gas impacts and you need to prepare an EIR for that impact.
[01:45:21] Mr. Flynn: We also submitted an expert comment from an expert wildlife ecologist, Dr. Sean Smallwood. Based on his review of the MND as well as site visits by his associate, he concluded the MND greatly underestimated the diversity of wildlife on the site. He determined that 10 of the 33 species that he observed—33 species compared to the only 12 species that were detected for the surveys done for the MND—he found that 10 of those species are special status that have heightened protection under CEQA. He found that the MND failed to disclose, analyze, and mitigate numerous impacts to wildlife based on habitat loss, wildlife movement, collisions with traffic and windows, and cumulative impacts. He also found that the MND's mitigation measures were inadequate to conclude that impacts would be less than significant. And it needs to be noted that on mitigation measures, the city refused to adopt or amend some mitigation measures as suggested by Fish and Wildlife, the expert state agency. You know, that's just further evidence that the current mitigation for wildlife isn't adequate. And just as a reminder, the city, the council, the applicant, they may disagree with CDFW and you may disagree with Dr. Smallwood, but a disagreement among experts is not a valid reason for approving an MND because Dr. Smallwood's report and CDFW's comments, between those two, there's a fair argument of significant impacts and so the city needs to prepare an EIR, not an MND. I know this is a very dense project. There's a lot of info here. I appreciate you taking the time to listen to all this. Just in summary for now, again, we're respectfully requesting that you find that Section 15183 does not apply to this project because it does not rely on uniformly applied measures. We want you to find that there's a fair argument of possible significant impacts from this project and grant this appeal so that an EIR can be prepared prior to further consideration of this project. Thank you very much.
[01:47:18] Chairperson: All right. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. I will now open the floor for public testimony. I do not have any blue speaker cards. Do we have any online comments?
[01:47:28] City Clerk: And I have no online comments.
[01:47:30] Chairperson: Terrific. Okay. Now, the appellant will have up to three minutes for rebuttal.
[01:47:38] Staff: So, we'll hear from... We're going to re-elevate Mr. Flynn. Got it.
[01:47:50] Chairperson: Mr. Flynn, do you want to provide a rebuttal?
[01:47:51] Mr. Flynn: I mean, I feel like I just spoke, so I'd be rebutting myself. It's...
[01:47:57] Chairperson: ...the order we're doing it in. I appreciate...
[01:47:59] Mr. Flynn: ...that. That's fine. I don't want... I thought I would have a moment. Um, I think we're okay. I think we have some... and there's disagreement about what the standard is for 15183 right now. And I think based on the letters that have been submitted by both sides, we're kind of talking past each other. I strongly believe that our reading of how 15183 applies is the correct reading. Otherwise, it is not a blanket CEQA exemption for anything that's just consistent with the densities in the general plan. A lot of projects are consistent with the densities in the general plan, so it would just be this broad exemption. That's why there's some guardrails on it. And those guardrails are, hey, you know, if again you have uniformly applied measures, if you have ordinances, regulations, and stuff that's geared towards environmental protection that applies to all projects that are being developed in the city, and that those could come from the general plan EIR, they could come from other sources. If you have those, then you can go ahead and use 15183. I just really want to urge council to consider the fact that this project was found to have impacts that required mitigation. That's why you have a mitigated negative declaration. If there were no impacts, it would just be a negative declaration with no mitigation. So measures were needed to bring those impacts down. Those measures are not uniformly applied throughout the city by any regulation, ordinance, or EIR. And so 15183 does not apply. With that, I will say thank you to everyone at the city. Thank you to staff for your help through this process. You've been great. Thank you. Thank you very much.
[01:49:45] Chairperson: All right. Thank you, Mr. Flynn. Now the applicant will have up to three minutes as well.
[01:49:58] Applicant: I'd like to address one issue.
[01:50:03] Speaker: And this relates to Safer's entire mitigation argument, which is a complete red herring, and I'll tell you why. In order for the entire mitigation discussion to even become relevant from a regulatory perspective under Section 15183, there has to be a determination, there has to be evidence that the project creates not just a significant impact, but a significant and peculiar impact that was not studied in the earlier document. There is no evidence, and Safer certainly has not provided any, of any significant impact that is also peculiar to the site or the project. I'll give you an example of what a peculiar impact might be: a project otherwise compliant with the general plan and zoning density, but it's well known that there is military ordnance on site. Well, that's an unusual situation. That's when an impact might be peculiar enough so that the exemption doesn't apply and additional mitigation measures have to be imposed. But until there is a demonstration that there is a significant and peculiar impact, there is no issue as to the mitigation measures, whether they're uniform or not. And I would direct staff, City Attorney, and opposing counsel to review subsection H of Section 15183, which provides as follows, quote, "An environmental effect shall not be considered peculiar to the project or parcel solely because no uniformly applied development policy or standard is applicable to it." So it doesn't matter, all that they're talking about in these mitigation measures is irrelevant. Until they establish that there's a peculiar impact, we're entitled by law to the exemption. Thank you.
[01:52:15] Mayor Trouvy: Terrific. Thank you very much. Okay, I don't have any other speaker cards. Are there any online speakers?
[01:52:21] Staff: No online speakers.
[01:52:22] Mayor Trouvy: Terrific.
[01:52:23] Rosie: Mr. Mayor.
[01:52:24] Mayor Trouvy: Yeah?
[01:52:26] Rosie: Yes, Isra. Sorry,
[01:52:28] Rosie: it's Rosie.
[01:52:29] Mayor Trouvy: Oh,
[01:52:30] Rosie: this way.
[01:52:30] Mayor Trouvy: Oh, you must be a ventriloquist. All right, sorry.
[01:52:36] Rosie: Uh, we have our CEQA legal team online as well. We provided a letter dated today in response to the 15183. If you had any questions, they are available to provide those answers.
[01:52:50] Mayor Trouvy: Terrific. Thank you for that, Rosie. Well, I've now pronounced the public hearing closed, and we'll move over to Council if we have any questions of staff.
[01:53:01] Council Member: Quick question. What was the section that was mentioned? Subsection H, 15183? Okay, perfect. Just Section H. Thank you.
[01:53:18] Mayor Trouvy: Anybody else?
[01:53:20] Mayor Trouvy: We didn't lose Joe, did we?
[01:53:22] Council Member Joe: No, no questions.
[01:53:24] Mayor Trouvy: All right, he's there. Okay, great. Okay. Um, well then I will entertain a motion if anybody cares to make a motion.
[01:53:31] Council Member Joe: You have to close—oh, never mind. Um, I'll, before I make a motion, I'll say that as I have heard both sides speak, I think there's a reason that we have a general plan, and that's to site the kind of development we want, and then we go through an EIR process to evaluate it, and then each specific project goes through additional. That's what happened here. Our Planning Commission heard it and voted to move it forward, and I will move staff recommendation to uphold that decision.
[01:54:09] Mayor Trouvy: Perfect. I apologize if anybody else has any other comments. I know we had questions before comments from anybody.
[01:54:14] Council Member: I do have comments. Um, I can understand that each person may have their opinion on what they would like someone to go above or beyond and claim that something is not sufficiently done. But it was very impactful to hear that the threshold of "peculiar"—I think that is the key word. Um, I know that sometimes CEQA is weaponized when people don't want a particular type of project to go in the vicinity of their home. That was a classic NIMBY argument. And I think that overall, this is pretty clear. We now have the regulations, the specific subsections. Everything seems pretty logical that the threshold is not met when we look at "peculiar". Thank you.
[01:55:00] Council Member: And I would concur with my colleagues. I've been open-minded, I've been listening, and I don't see that the appellant has met the threshold to deny the project.
[01:55:13] Council Member: Well, I have to agree. I see nothing. The "peculiar" is outstanding in this and must be met, and I don't hear it having been met. What we have is the lowest density possible project on that land. And let's not pretend that this is undisturbed land out in the wild. This has been disturbed, been used, and has sat now kind of for a while. So, it's not that this is land that is virgin land, and we've got to make sure—it's never been touched and there's all these relics in there. Let's not pretend that this is in the middle of a city. It has been, it has already been developed, and now it is sitting. This will be a great use, and we will be able to provide people with homes.
[01:56:16] Mayor Trouvy: Terrific. I agree with all my colleagues, and I will second Joe's motion.
[01:56:21] City Clerk: Council Member Harik.
[01:56:23] Council Member Harik: Yes.
[01:56:23] City Clerk: Council Member Nandi.
[01:56:24] Council Member Nandi: Yes.
[01:56:25] City Clerk: Council Member Kintania.
[01:56:26] Council Member Kintania: Yes.
[01:56:26] City Clerk: Mayor Pro Tem Peretto.
[01:56:28] Mayor Pro Tem Peretto: Yes.
[01:56:28] City Clerk: Mayor Trouvy.
[01:56:29] Mayor Trouvy: Yes.
[01:56:30] City Clerk: Motion passes 5 to 0.
[01:56:34] Mayor Trouvy: Very good. Thank you. And next up, Item 15C, Third Amendment to Development Agreement 96-1 with WVC Ranch Mirage, Inc., formerly Starwood, for the Desert Willow, Westin, and CEQA determination. So, we guess we're going to have a staff report here, please.
[01:57:03] Ci Fernandez: Good evening, Mayor, members of the City Council. Ci Fernandez, senior planner here with Development Services, to present on Development Agreement 25-00001. This is a development agreement for Desert Willow. This is amendment number three. So, for the project applicant, that is WVC Ranch Mirage Incorporated. The request is to approve a third amendment to Development Agreement number 96-1 and find the project exempt from California Environmental Quality Act. The project is located southeast of Willow Ridge and Portola Avenue, just north of Country Club Drive. Here's a vicinity map showing the location of the project. The project is an existing—it's approved for 300 timeshare project. This is just north of Country Club, east of Portola Avenue. For the zone, the property is zoned Plan Residential 5 with the general plan designation of Golf Course and Resort Neighborhood. As I mentioned, this is a timeshare project that was approved for 300 units. As of today, 220 units have been built. There are 80 units that are still to be built. So, for this proposal, this includes a six-month extension so that way we're able to coordinate with the applicant as far as a long-term extension. Staff is currently reviewing the performance schedule that has been provided and analyzing the previous entitlements. All terms and conditions would still apply as part of the original development agreement, would remain in effect. So, a little bit of history. This project was approved in 1997 as the original development agreement. Later, it was revised in 2007, which approved the precise plan and conditional use permit as part of the project. From there, 2009 to 2017, the project was under construction, which a total of 220 units have been built. In 2015, they came in for the amendment number two, which allowed for a 10-year extension, which sets the date to expire at the end of this month. So, this is the site and the remaining sites for the five buildings for the 80 units. Here's the original site plan from the precise plan showing the remaining five buildings.
[02:00:01] Staff Member: As far as the development agreement, it's going to remain consistent with the city's general plan and the zoning regulations. The proposed third amendment doesn't alter any of the permitted land uses or intensity of the development and adopted planning policies. So as far as for CEQA, under Section 15061(b)(3), the common sense exemption applies because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity may have a significant effect on the environment. Public noticing went out from the project site 1,000 feet and was also posted in the Desert Sun on January 30th. To date, we haven't received any public comment. Staff's recommendation is that City Council adopt an ordinance finding the project exempt from CEQA and approve the development agreement granting a temporary six-month time extension. That concludes staff's presentation. The applicant is also available via Zoom.
[02:01:10] Mayor Trouy: Okay, terrific. At this time, I will now open the public hearing. And if the applicant would like to use their 10 minutes, they are welcome to.
[02:01:25] Mayor Trouy: Bill Vanos. Let's see.
[02:01:33] Bill Vanos: I apologize. My name is Bill Vanos. I am Senior Vice President, Associate General Counsel for the applicant. I don't have any comments, but I did want to make sure you knew I was available for any questions you might have.
[02:01:46] Mayor Trouy: All right. Thank you very much. And I do not have any blue cards...
[02:01:52] City Clerk: ...and no online comments.
[02:01:53] Mayor Trouy: No online comments. So that means we are closing the public hearing. Thank you very much. Open it up for my colleagues. Any questions for staff or Mr. Vanos?
[02:02:08] Council Member: I have a question.
[02:02:10] Mayor Trouy: Okay.
[02:02:11] Council Member: My question is in regards to having numerous exceptions. This last one seems like it's a six-month exception. Is that correct?
[02:02:22] Staff Member: So, the request is for a six-month time extension. From there, there would be a longer extension that would be coming back. So it just gives us some time to be able to work on it along with the applicant and working on the performance schedule.
[02:02:38] Council Member: Is there any, again, crystal ball, magic wand timeline that you can imagine? Because this has clearly been going on for some time, and there are always unforeseeable circumstances. But what's the guarantee that there isn't going to now be another five-year or ten-year request after we have the six months to evaluate?
[02:03:00] Staff Member: So that's what we're evaluating through the performance schedule. I know we're looking at it as of right now. It looks like they're looking to build within year seven. But I would say that the applicant may have some more information. I know the public hearing is not closed, but I believe the applicant can answer if there's any more information.
[02:03:25] Mayor Trouy: Any applicants back in the Zoom room if you'd like to hear from them?
[02:03:29] Mayor Trouy: Anybody else have questions or any thoughts or comments?
[02:03:33] Mayor Trouy: Okay, very good. Well, I will entertain a motion. I actually do have one comment. I want to see this thing get built out. I look forward to it. Let's bring more tourists to our city. So, anybody care to make a motion?
[02:03:45] Council Member: So moved.
[02:03:47] Council Member: Second.
[02:03:49] City Clerk: And we call for a vote.
[02:03:50] City Clerk: Council Member Harik?
[02:03:52] Council Member Harik: Yes.
[02:03:52] City Clerk: Council Member Neandi?
[02:03:53] Council Member Neandi: Yes.
[02:03:54] City Clerk: Council Member Kinttonia?
[02:03:55] Council Member Kinttonia: Yes.
[02:03:55] City Clerk: Mayor Pro Tem Petto?
[02:03:57] Mayor Pro Tem Petto: Yes.
[02:03:57] City Clerk: Mayor Trouy?
[02:03:58] Mayor Trouy: Yes.
[02:03:59] City Clerk: Motion passes five to zero.
[02:04:01] Mayor Trouy: Terrific. Any other information items we should be aware of from staff? Everything good? Okay. Then at 6:02 p.m., February 12th, the meeting is adjourned. Thank you.