Palm Desert City Council - Regular Meeting, June 11, 2026

Transcript text

AI transcript text.

[00:04:48] Speaker: Okay.
[00:04:49] Speaker: Okay, welcome everyone. I would now call
[00:04:51] Speaker: to order
[00:04:52] Speaker: the regular meeting of the Palm Desert
[00:04:54] Speaker: City Council, the Successor Agency to
[00:04:56] Speaker: the Palm Desert Redevelopment Agency,
[00:04:58] Speaker: the Palm Desert Housing Authority, and
[00:05:01] Mayor Trubee: The Palm Desert Board of Library Trustees for Thursday, June 11th, 2026. May we please have the roll call.
[00:05:09] Mayor Trubee: Councilmember Harnik.
[00:05:11] Councilmember Harnik: Uh, I am traveling for government business.
[00:05:15] Mayor Trubee: And is there anyone over the age of 18 present in your meeting room?
[00:05:19] Councilmember Harnik: Only me.
[00:05:20] Mayor Trubee: All right. Councilmember Moreno.
[00:05:23] Councilmember Moreno: Present.
[00:05:25] Mayor Trubee: Councilmember Nestande.
[00:05:26] Councilmember Nestande: Here.
[00:05:27] Mayor Trubee: Mayor Pro Tem Peredo.
[00:05:28] Mayor Pro Tem Peredo: Here.
[00:05:29] Mayor Trubee: And Mayor Trubee.
[00:05:30] Mayor Trubee: Here.
[00:05:30] Mayor Trubee: All councils present. Okay. I will now ask Councilmember Harnik if she, from remote, to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.
[00:05:40] Councilmember Harnik: Um, Mayor, I'm happy to do that, but I just think it's more effective if you do it in the room, so please give someone else that honor, and thank you.
[00:05:48] Mayor Trubee: I just want to give you the option. Okay, I'll ask Councilmember Nestande.
[00:05:52] Councilmember Nestande: I would be honored, so please join me as we honor our country and our flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
[00:06:16] Mayor Trubee: All right, thank you very much. And now we will turn to Mayor Pro Tem Peredo for some words of inspiration.
[00:06:23] Mayor Pro Tem Peredo: As we do the work of the people, let us set our intentions to be good stewards, to exercise good judgment, and to do so with grace and humility, and maybe some humor.
[00:06:37] Mayor Trubee: All right, thank you very much. And there was no closed session, so item number four will skip over. And on item number five, which is a proclamation recognizing Pollinator Week, and I will ask staff member Shawn Moyer to join me at the podium.
[00:07:06] Mayor Trubee: Uh-oh, reading glasses. Sorry, everybody. I'm an old guy who thinks he's a young guy. Keep on forgetting reading glasses. All right. I'll read. Thank you.
[00:07:22] Mayor Trubee: Okay, we are celebrating Pollinator Week. Whereas, the monarch butterfly is an iconic North American species whose multi-generational migration and transformation has long inspired people across the continent. And whereas both the eastern and western monarch butterfly populations have experienced steep declines due to habitat loss, climate change, pesticide use, and other environmental threats. And whereas pollinators such as monarchs, honeybees, native bees, birds, and bats are vital to the health of our ecosystem, supporting biodiversity and playing an essential role in the production of fruits, vegetables, nuts, and other crops. And whereas the City of Palm Desert recognizes the urgent need to protect pollinator species and has taken the Mayor's Monarch Pledge, joining communities across the United States in committing to create pollinator-friendly habitats and raise awareness about pollinator conservation. And whereas local governments play an important role in supporting pollinators through the use of parks, open spaces, and community areas to expand and enhance habitat. And whereas the City of Palm Desert is committed to environmental efforts that ensure the benefits of pollinator conservation and green space improvements are shared by all members of our community. And now therefore, be it proclaimed that I, Evan Trubee, Mayor of the City of Palm Desert, California, on behalf of the entire City Council, do hereby proclaim the week of June 15th, next Monday, to June 21st, 2026, as Pollinator Week in the City of Palm Desert. And I urge all citizens to celebrate Pollinator Week and to support efforts to protect and restore habitat for monarch butterflies and other pollinators, assuring that future generations can continue to enjoy their beauty and benefit from the vital ecological services they provide.
[00:09:12] Mayor Trubee: Very good. No? Well, okay, very good. Actually, I'm very, very proud of this. I love seeing the butterflies around. I know they are vital and important. We all recognize that. So, happy Palm Desert's playing their part. And should we get some photos or?
[00:09:29] Mayor Trubee: There we go. There you are, Shawn Moyer. You bet. All right, thank you, everyone.
[00:09:50] Mayor Trubee: And here we are on to item number six. We are going to City Manager comments.
[00:09:54] City Manager: Nothing today, Mayor.
[00:09:56] Mayor Trubee: Thank you very much. Item number seven, Mayor and Councilmember reports and
[00:10:00] Mayor: Request for action. I'm going to
[00:10:02] Mayor: actually ask we begin with Council
[00:10:04] Mayor: member Harnik.
[00:10:05] Councilmember Harnik: Would.
[00:10:10] Councilmember Harnik: Thank you.
[00:10:12] Councilmember Harnik: Uh, just a few things. I know I mentioned
[00:10:14] Councilmember Harnik: at the last meeting that the following
[00:10:16] Councilmember Harnik: day we would be at the ribbon cutting
[00:10:18] Councilmember Harnik: for the smart freeway pilot project on
[00:10:21] Councilmember Harnik: the I-15.
[00:10:23] Councilmember Harnik: And it went swimmingly. Now we're going
[00:10:25] Councilmember Harnik: to see how well it works over time. I
[00:10:28] Councilmember Harnik: did find out one little fact that I
[00:10:30] Councilmember Harnik: thought is interesting and depressing
[00:10:32] Councilmember Harnik: all at the same time. And that's the
[00:10:35] Councilmember Harnik: I-15 when it was originally designed was
[00:10:38] Councilmember Harnik: designed with eight lanes. And I mean
[00:10:41] Councilmember Harnik: eight lanes in each direction. So, thank
[00:10:44] Councilmember Harnik: goodness that didn't happen and I hope
[00:10:46] Councilmember Harnik: this smart freeway project shows us what
[00:10:49] Councilmember Harnik: we can do when we work intelligently
[00:10:51] Councilmember Harnik: with situations like that.
[00:10:54] Councilmember Harnik: Uh,
[00:10:54] Councilmember Harnik: I also with the California Council of
[00:10:56] Councilmember Harnik: Governments,
[00:10:58] Councilmember Harnik: uh, did some work up in Sacramento last
[00:11:01] Councilmember Harnik: week and also uh, at and we got we heard
[00:11:05] Councilmember Harnik: from
[00:11:07] Councilmember Harnik: everybody's favorite project that they
[00:11:09] Councilmember Harnik: love to hate.
[00:11:11] Councilmember Harnik: And that's the high-speed rail.
[00:11:14] Councilmember Harnik: And uh, it's moving along very well.
[00:11:19] Councilmember Harnik: And I think the best news and most
[00:11:21] Councilmember Harnik: people I believe will agree
[00:11:23] Councilmember Harnik: is that they are taking on a private
[00:11:25] Councilmember Harnik: partner.
[00:11:27] Councilmember Harnik: So, it will be a public-private
[00:11:29] Councilmember Harnik: partnership and sometimes that moves
[00:11:31] Councilmember Harnik: things along pretty rapidly. And that
[00:11:34] Councilmember Harnik: will be a great asset when it's complete
[00:11:36] Councilmember Harnik: and we know it's a long way off, but it
[00:11:39] Councilmember Harnik: will certainly be done much more quickly
[00:11:43] Councilmember Harnik: with a private partner in that
[00:11:45] Councilmember Harnik: situation.
[00:11:46] Councilmember Harnik: Um, the other thing is yesterday
[00:11:50] Councilmember Harnik: at the Riverside County Transportation
[00:11:52] Councilmember Harnik: Commission, we did go over sales tax
[00:11:55] Councilmember Harnik: revenue and a few other things and uh,
[00:11:58] Councilmember Harnik: about the extension of Measure A, which
[00:12:01] Councilmember Harnik: already is in place, but just extending
[00:12:03] Councilmember Harnik: it more years.
[00:12:05] Councilmember Harnik: And Measure A is uh, we were one of the
[00:12:08] Councilmember Harnik: first counties to put a a
[00:12:11] Councilmember Harnik: tax like that on,
[00:12:14] Councilmember Harnik: and we are a self-help county. We get so
[00:12:17] Councilmember Harnik: much work done that that way and so many
[00:12:20] Councilmember Harnik: of our really important infrastructure
[00:12:22] Councilmember Harnik: projects are funded through Measure A.
[00:12:26] Councilmember Harnik: And Measure A goes back as it is
[00:12:28] Councilmember Harnik: generated by the cities. So, we do very
[00:12:30] Councilmember Harnik: well in Palm Desert with it.
[00:12:33] Councilmember Harnik: Um, and we are just looking to extend the
[00:12:36] Councilmember Harnik: period of time that it's in place, not
[00:12:39] Councilmember Harnik: increase, just extend the period of
[00:12:41] Councilmember Harnik: time.
[00:12:42] Councilmember Harnik: Um, and I thought it was interesting that
[00:12:46] Councilmember Harnik: when you look at all of the cities in
[00:12:48] Councilmember Harnik: Riverside County, Palm Desert is the
[00:12:51] Councilmember Harnik: fifth, that's a five,
[00:12:53] Councilmember Harnik: um, largest generator of sales tax.
[00:12:58] Councilmember Harnik: So, that's a little gem and that's all I
[00:13:00] Councilmember Harnik: have. Thank you.
[00:13:03] Mayor: Thank you very much. I'll turn it over
[00:13:04] Mayor: to Councilmember Nestande.
[00:13:07] Councilmember Nestande: Okay. At the CVAG Energy and
[00:13:10] Councilmember Nestande: Sustainability
[00:13:12] Councilmember Nestande: Committee, uh, they asked each of the
[00:13:14] Councilmember Nestande: representatives to share with their
[00:13:17] Councilmember Nestande: staff at their respective cities and and
[00:13:21] Councilmember Nestande: residents uh,
[00:13:23] Councilmember Nestande: about the energy incentives that they've
[00:13:26] Councilmember Nestande: coordinated with
[00:13:28] Councilmember Nestande: Inland Regional Energy Network. The
[00:13:32] Councilmember Nestande: acronym I-R-E-N.gov.
[00:13:36] Councilmember Nestande: If you go to that website
[00:13:39] Councilmember Nestande: and click on incentives, there's over
[00:13:42] Councilmember Nestande: 150 incentives to save on energy cost
[00:13:46] Councilmember Nestande: anywhere from home improvement to
[00:13:50] Councilmember Nestande: EV charging stations in your home.
[00:13:53] Councilmember Nestande: And there what they've done is they've
[00:13:55] Councilmember Nestande: accumulated, there's over 150
[00:13:58] Councilmember Nestande: rebate uh,
[00:14:00] Councilmember Nestande: rebate programs and tax credits
[00:14:04] Councilmember Nestande: available
[00:14:05] Councilmember Nestande: to all of our residents regardless of
[00:14:08] Councilmember Nestande: income. Some are income dependent,
[00:14:10] Councilmember Nestande: others aren't. But you basically go to
[00:14:12] Councilmember Nestande: this website
[00:14:14] Councilmember Nestande: and you put in your name and your zip
[00:14:17] Councilmember Nestande: code and answer a few more questions and
[00:14:19] Councilmember Nestande: then it will populate all the incentives
[00:14:23] Councilmember Nestande: and rebates, tax credits that you could
[00:14:25] Councilmember Nestande: be eligible for. So, they want staff to
[00:14:27] Councilmember Nestande: know that as well.
[00:14:31] Mayor: Very good. Council member Moreno.
[00:14:35] Councilmember Moreno: Thank you, Mayor, and thank you for your
[00:14:36] Councilmember Moreno: patience while I ran to get my notes.
[00:14:39] Councilmember Moreno: A lot of good stuff happening.
[00:14:42] Councilmember Moreno: One that I know has um,
[00:14:45] Councilmember Moreno: been a key issue in the community is the
[00:14:48] Councilmember Moreno: safety along Highway 74. And that is a
[00:14:51] Councilmember Moreno: topic that came up. Riverside County did
[00:14:54] Councilmember Moreno: a transportation study regarding the
[00:14:56] Councilmember Moreno: large trucks that come down and how many
[00:14:58] Councilmember Moreno: of them have a legitimate use for
[00:15:01] Speaker: business in the area or how many of them
[00:15:03] Speaker: are using it as a cut through. And while
[00:15:05] Speaker: it is difficult to estimate how many
[00:15:07] Speaker: because you pop in your GPS and it'll
[00:15:09] Speaker: say, 'Go this way, it'll save you 15'
[00:15:11] Speaker: minutes, 20 minutes,' etc. The driver
[00:15:14] Speaker: doesn't necessarily know that these are
[00:15:16] Speaker: roads that aren't ideal for them.
[00:15:19] Speaker: Um,
[00:15:20] Speaker: They used a sort of technology to see
[00:15:24] Speaker: how many were there, but their
[00:15:25] Speaker: recommendations, um,
[00:15:27] Speaker: are to restrict it to trucks with three
[00:15:29] Speaker: axles or less and a maximum of 38 feet,
[00:15:33] Speaker: and from there to continue to, um,
[00:15:35] Speaker: take a legislative action and make
[00:15:38] Speaker: this go further. And they're waiting for
[00:15:40] Speaker: Caltrans. Um, Caltrans wants outreach,
[00:15:44] Speaker: uh, signage plan, and they want, um,
[00:15:48] Speaker: RivCo to focus on the number of
[00:15:50] Speaker: accidents that were involving heavy
[00:15:52] Speaker: trucks. They want an economic impact
[00:15:54] Speaker: assessment and an engineering analysis
[00:15:57] Speaker: of the truck turning because of how many
[00:15:59] Speaker: of them are very tight turns.
[00:16:02] Speaker: The county, in turn, says, 'Yes, we
[00:16:04] Speaker: agree that we need signage, and that'll
[00:16:07] Speaker: help reduce the problems.' And once
[00:16:09] Speaker: Caltrans approves the measures, they'll
[00:16:11] Speaker: start with that campaign. And, uh, they
[00:16:14] Speaker: are willing to, um, elaborate on the
[00:16:16] Speaker: economic impact assessment, but they
[00:16:19] Speaker: don't want to do the engineering
[00:16:20] Speaker: assessment because they said, 'We're not
[00:16:22] Speaker: trying to rebuild it. We're not trying
[00:16:24] Speaker: to repair it. We just want policy.' And
[00:16:26] Speaker: that's the update on that. Um,
[00:16:31] Speaker: there was an approval of $140,000 for
[00:16:33] Speaker: drones, um, along the CV Link, and they
[00:16:37] Speaker: will be, um,
[00:16:39] Speaker: housed in Palm Springs, Cathedral City,
[00:16:42] Speaker: and I think Indio. Those three
[00:16:43] Speaker: departments that have their own police
[00:16:45] Speaker: departments will house them, um, and be
[00:16:48] Speaker: able to deploy. They're already sending
[00:16:50] Speaker: them 30 to 40 times a month, and it's
[00:16:54] Speaker: much more effective in time and cost
[00:16:56] Speaker: than to put up security cameras all
[00:16:58] Speaker: along, um, CVAG. I mean, the trails.
[00:17:03] Speaker: And, um,
[00:17:04] Speaker: then, as part of the, um, Environmental
[00:17:07] Speaker: Quality Policy Committee with League of
[00:17:08] Speaker: Cities, the session was extremely
[00:17:11] Speaker: interested in this, something I know
[00:17:12] Speaker: we have talked about. CEQA has become
[00:17:14] Speaker: very important, not only for cities, but
[00:17:17] Speaker: communities are becoming aware, and the
[00:17:19] Speaker: alphabet soup for folks that may not
[00:17:21] Speaker: have heard of it before is the California
[00:17:23] Speaker: Environmental Quality Act.
[00:17:26] Speaker: And, um, this is regarding AB 130,
[00:17:30] Speaker: Building Affordable California Act,
[00:17:32] Speaker: known as BACA.
[00:17:34] Speaker: And, um, the committee decided that we did
[00:17:38] Speaker: not want to support as it stands because
[00:17:40] Speaker: we were getting a lot of conflicting
[00:17:42] Speaker: information from the group that was
[00:17:44] Speaker: supporting and the group that was
[00:17:45] Speaker: opposing. And where it sounds great, who
[00:17:49] Speaker: doesn't want to afford things? This
[00:17:51] Speaker: sounds like a good idea,
[00:17:53] Speaker: but, um,
[00:17:55] Speaker: it actually, in my opinion, limits the
[00:17:58] Speaker: amount of opportunities the cities have.
[00:18:01] Speaker: Right now, if a developer comes and
[00:18:03] Speaker: says, 'I like this,' the city can say,
[00:18:05] Speaker: 'Well,
[00:18:06] Speaker: how about this location? These two may
[00:18:08] Speaker: be a better fit.' Once the developer
[00:18:11] Speaker: submits,
[00:18:12] Speaker: um, a proposal, they select their
[00:18:16] Speaker: alternate location, and the cities are
[00:18:18] Speaker: barred from telling them, 'We think this
[00:18:21] Speaker: is a better fit.'
[00:18:23] Speaker: The, um, tribal, um,
[00:18:26] Speaker: considerations would now only apply to
[00:18:29] Speaker: federally recognized tribes. Um, the
[00:18:32] Speaker: deadlines change. Um,
[00:18:35] Speaker: it really does leave cities open for
[00:18:37] Speaker: twice as much litigation.
[00:18:40] Speaker: And it is sold in terms of, 'You get more
[00:18:42] Speaker: local control,' but in some areas you may
[00:18:45] Speaker: get more control, but I think it has a
[00:18:47] Speaker: lot more liability. So, I think as, um,
[00:18:50] Speaker: we may hear of it in our own different
[00:18:53] Speaker: scopes to keep in mind and filter it
[00:18:56] Speaker: through that lens as it comes about. Um,
[00:18:59] Speaker: Oh, another concern that I had is that
[00:19:03] Speaker: if it were to pass, it would require a
[00:19:05] Speaker: supermajority to amend it.
[00:19:08] Speaker: That's always a big concern. And the
[00:19:11] Speaker: only two ways that you can change it is
[00:19:13] Speaker: to prove that it furthers the purpose.
[00:19:17] Speaker: Again, that doesn't really speak to
[00:19:19] Speaker: allowing people to have additional
[00:19:21] Speaker: ways to support the cities. Um, there
[00:19:25] Speaker: was
[00:19:25] Speaker: conflicting information of whether that
[00:19:28] Speaker: would open the door to
[00:19:30] Speaker: desalination plans, a broadband
[00:19:32] Speaker: infrastructure, CO2 pipelines, data
[00:19:35] Speaker: centers, and highways. So, there's too
[00:19:38] Speaker: many moving parts that we don't know
[00:19:40] Speaker: where it will impact. Um,
[00:19:43] Speaker: At the Coachella Valley Animal
[00:19:47] Speaker: Commission, we got some kudos that were
[00:19:49] Speaker: sent to Palm Desert for being
[00:19:50] Speaker: innovative. So, thank you to staff that
[00:19:53] Speaker: have worked on that and the policies
[00:19:55] Speaker: that we have cultivated. Um,
[00:19:58] Speaker: Finally, after asking for years to have
[00:20:01] Speaker: A subcommittee on finance to really address where the money is, where it's going, why it hasn't been spent. That is coming to fruition. Um, I did double-check again that they have language that says 'lost in care.' And what that means when you misplace an animal, and they said part of that is that the numbers in the data tracking system are problematic. So, these are the kinds of things that will come about. Um, people are still concerned about the number of animals that are still being put down, and whether it's seen as a reasonable margin of error. Somebody saw it that way, and I thought that's an interesting language for it. And they said there's a difference between 'no kill' and 'not killed' here. As far as vetting agencies that take the dogs or cats, they do have free adoption days coming up, but I did forget the date. Um, I had a meeting with the Desert Recreation District, and thank you, Shelby. I'm not sure if I say Shelby, for helping facilitate. The East Valley is having an autism walk on November 21st of this year, and we're hoping to get one in Palm Desert for April 10th of next year. Marketing meeting, that was excellent. I love that it was an opportunity to give us additional language to see why Palm Desert is so popular for folks, how this is a place that you can have it all, because you have choices. Do I want to golf? Do I want to hike? Do I want to do nothing? And how that lets folks do that. My requests for information: If we can have any info to, um, have on anything on social media about the cooling centers, as far as where they are, if they're open. And I know people have been asking if they can take their pets. So that's an important one to mention if we can put that on. Does that question have to go in as a council request, or is that just a
[00:22:12] Speaker: We already have some scheduled, but we'll be sure to boost it. We can handle that.
[00:22:16] Speaker: And then a question that I had for our city manager. This is in regards to a previous, um, a public comment that we had, that a gentleman came and said that as a business owner who follows the sign policies, that he was frustrated that there was inconsistent enforcement on the signs, and he felt that it was detrimental to his business when things were popping up all over the place. And obviously, we want to support people that do things legitimately. And I've seen lots of poop removal signs popping up around the city. I don't think that's consistent with the character and charm of the city. Um, so I know that that had been in process to look at the sign ordinances and cleaning up the language. Well, there you go, pun intended. And wondering if this will align with the current policies that are there for the candidate handbook, or will that be revised after we create that new sign policy?
[00:23:23] Speaker: We can bring something back. I would say for the sign item, we are aware of that issue. We are enforcing it. In fact, our team's preparing an entire commercial enforcement program to come to the council. The ordinance itself is being reviewed, but we can come back at a later date with that information.
[00:23:39] Speaker: So much.
[00:23:41] Speaker: Okay, Mayor Pro Tem. Councilwoman Moreno's comments on AB 130 reminded me. I just saw a video recently with comedian Bill Maher. And he made a couple of observations. Apparently, uh, a black fourth grader in Mississippi is two and a half times more likely to be able to be literate in math and reading than one in California. And he says, 'They're kicking our butts in education, and they're doing it for a lot less money.' And then he mentioned that Texas is also kicking our butts in renewable energy. He said that it takes 3 months to get home solar in Texas. It took them 3 years in California. And then he said that Texas is lapping us on building wind, solar, and energy storage, and despite having no pro-climate policies. And he posited the funniest question I've heard. And it's, um, how is it that our state, despite having the right bumper stickers on our Priuses, is getting its butt kicked in education, equity, and environment from Waffle House states with cars in their front yards?
[00:25:00] Speaker: And, uh, he concluded because they let them build. You know, we heard about the high-speed rail, uh, and then we've talked about, uh, Councilwoman Harnik talked about the the rail from LA to Coachella Valley. Of course, those are economic environmental wins. Of course. But for some reason in California, we've stacked the deck so far that we can't build things that make sense. We're lapping the world in virtue at the same time we're falling behind in real results. It was refreshing to see somebody with a comedic take see what we're looking at. Uh, it's just just an observation of what I think is important to focus on substance rather than symbols. And so, thank you for digging deep and seeing the actual impact of something rather than just the headline of making things more affordable. But other than that, I'm really excited about the Jazz Festival, and I hope everyone comes out this weekend. There's multiple shows starting in the afternoon, the evening. I'm going to bring my daughter, her her, she's not performing, but her school band is, and we're going to have a lot of fun. Hope to see a lot of people there.
[00:26:01] Speaker: Perfect. Thank you. And actually, uh, speaking of McAllen, we did have the coffee with the mayor there on Tuesday. It was a wonderful event. I'm just so grateful to the McAllen for hosting it. It's an incredible venue. Probably most of you have been there. If you haven't, I recommend it. And, uh, the turnout must have had about 30 to 40 guests. There was actually high tea in the afternoon, which, uh, a little different take, but it was wonderful, great. The staff, the volunteers there, excellent job that they did. And what I love so much about coffee with the mayor is, um, having our staff there. We usually have at least one representative from each of our departments. And, um, a lot of good questions from the residents, and I just love the back and forth and the the way they are able to get their questions answered. And also, one notable thing for me, and this is more a pat on the back to the staff and and the the entire team here, but of course, I'm up there in the front getting the kudos. But God, out of the 20 questions or so, five, six, seven of them didn't even have a question. What they said was, "We just love the city and we're so happy to be here and it's so clean and wonderful and safe." And I just, I love that staff is there to to hear that as well because they deserve the lion's share of the credit for all of that, and, um, very very proud, very fun. And if you haven't attended one, we'd love to see you there. And next one is in first week of July. So, that is all for me. Thank you. Oh, on to we are going on to non-agenda public comments, item number eight. 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 3 minutes because the Brown Act does not allow the City Council to act on items not listed on the agenda. Council members may briefly respond or refer the matter to staff for report and recommendation at a future meeting. And, uh, I guess we have a few housekeeping remarks from our city clerk.
[00:27:52] City Clerk: 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 nine to raise your hand. And when called upon, press star six to unmute yourself.
[00:28:04] Speaker: Terrific. Okay, I've got one blue speaker card so far on non-agenda items from my Mr. Michael Piontkowski.
[00:28:18] Michael Piontkowski: Thank you. Good afternoon, Mayor and City Council members. My name is Michael Piontkowski. I live at 288 Serena in Palm Desert. I stood here before you 2 years ago to raise a concern about the traffic signal at Avenida del Sol and Monterey. Um, back today because despite the city's recent traffic system modernization, um, nothing has changed. Here's the issue. Southbound left turns into Monterey Country Club and left turns exiting the club are forced to wait 90 seconds. Uh, this wait happens anytime of the day, any day of the week. You know, I understand that the traffic on Monterey Avenue needs priority. That's not the issue here. What is wrong is when the traffic on Monterey has already been, uh, already had the right-of-way for their 90 seconds, and you arrive at the intersection, you're still forced to wait the full 90 seconds. Um, there's no accounting for the time that the main flow of traffic has already had the priority. It seems only makes sense that the main traffic has had its time, the side traffic should become on demand and allow the to proceed after minimal delay. That seems to be how all the other the traffic lights in the city operate. So, drivers have become so frustrated by this excessive wait that they regularly are seen running the red lights. Besides the safety hazard, leaving and returning just once a day means that you're held hostage at the light for 3 minutes. Uh, doing the math, those 3 minutes a day quickly add up to 90 minutes a month, and believe it or not, that's 18 hours in 1 year. Uh, in the 2 years since I last brought this up, I alone have spent more than a full day of my life at that intersection. There are more than 1,200 homes in
[00:30:00] Speaker: Monterey Country Club, each with the same miserable experience. We don't have a choice. It's their only way in and out of the community.
[00:30:08] Speaker: I've worked the last two years trying to get this fixed with the proper channels. I've met with in person and corresponded with CVAG many times. I've even toured their central command post.
[00:30:19] Speaker: I've done all I can. I'm begging for the council's assistance.
[00:30:22] Speaker: Please make it a priority to work with CVAG and fix this wait time problem once and for all. Thank you.
[00:30:29] Mayor Truby: Okay. And do we have your contact information via email?
[00:30:33] Speaker: On the blue card.
[00:30:35] Mayor Truby: I didn't, I'm sorry, I didn't see email or phone on here.
[00:30:39] Speaker: Add those on for you.
[00:30:39] Mayor Truby: Yeah, if you don't mind, and I'll give that to the clerk, and we'll have someone reach out, and we'll start, hopefully, or continue the conversation. Thank you very much.
[00:30:48] Mayor Truby: Uh, any online non-agenda public comments?
[00:30:52] Staff: No online comments.
[00:30:53] Mayor Truby: All right, terrific.
[00:30:56] Mayor Truby: The now closes the non-agenda public comment section. We are on to item number nine, our consent calendar. The next, all matters, uh sorry, 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.
[00:31:14] Mayor Truby: I don't have any blue cards, uh, on this and no online speakers.
[00:31:19] Staff: No online comments.
[00:31:20] Mayor Truby: Comments, thank you. Um, any council members wish to pull any items?
[00:31:24] Council Member: I would like to, uh, pull item J and move to, uh, move the balance.
[00:31:29] Mayor Truby: Anybody else? Okay.
[00:31:31] Council Member: I'll second.
[00:31:35] Mayor Truby: Council member Harnik.
[00:31:38] Council member Harnik: Yes.
[00:31:38] Mayor Truby: Council member Moreno.
[00:31:40] Council member Moreno: Yes.
[00:31:40] Mayor Truby: Council member Nestande.
[00:31:42] Council member Nestande: Yes.
[00:31:42] Mayor Truby: Mayor Pro Tem Pereda.
[00:31:43] Mayor Pro Tem Pereda: Yes.
[00:31:44] Mayor Truby: Mayor Truby.
[00:31:45] Mayor Truby: Yes.
[00:31:45] Mayor Truby: Motion passes five to zero.
[00:31:48] Mayor Truby: All right. Now open it up on item 9J.
[00:31:55] Mayor Truby: Do. Okay, item 9J is approve Flock Safety Amendment Order Form and authorize continued expansion of the city's public safety camera system under Contract Number C47070.
[00:32:10] Mayor Truby: So, we'll have a staff report on this. Mr. Hurtado, thank you.
[00:32:15] Daniel Hurtado: Good afternoon, Mayor, members of the City Council. Daniel Hurtado, Public Safety Coordinator, here to answer any questions.
[00:32:23] Council Member: Thank you so much. Um, in looking at the number of agencies that are quite lengthy all across the state, um, do you know if the sharing agreements that are there are these agencies have requested information from RSO or RSO requested information from them, or is this an opt-in, check the box if you want to be able to access everybody?
[00:32:51] Daniel Hurtado: Thank you. So, we have around 600 participating law enforcement and public safety agencies statewide, and they don't automatically have access to the Flock data. So, the model is going to be based off of customer control, meaning that we as the owner have access to the information, and that it's not an automatic opt-in, and it can be revoked, but the shared data cannot be reshared without permission. So, essentially, we we do opt in to share that information if they get the request. So, it does have to go through an approval process, and I do have Lieutenant Boris here with the Sheriff's Department if you would like to add any more information on that, unless I answered that correctly.
[00:33:36] Lieutenant Boris: No, that is correct. So, what the list that you were given is agencies that have access to our system, and it's not automatic, just like you mentioned. If somebody asks for our information, we, again, in turn, if we wanted to get their information, we're going to have to ask them also.
[00:33:52] Council Member: So, the list that's there, for example, Citrus Heights Police Department, is that on there because at one point they may have said, "Riverside, we're exploring this theft ring. We've been getting hit at our CVS. Um, we would like to see what's going on in Palm Desert." Or is that way they're there, or is it because we have reached out to them?
[00:34:17] Lieutenant Boris: It's because they asked us, and we said yes. And for example, the other day when we were at Coffee with Amir, we had a incident when somebody stole something from one of our local, our local businesses. Two businesses went in, and as they did that while we were there, they were caught in the City of Cathedral City using the ALPR system. So, in that they were going, they're from out of the county. So, uh, often times, you know, crime has no boundaries. So, that is why the people ask for information from us.
[00:34:49] Council Member: Yeah, I know that's the big concern, so I wanted to be sure to get it out there and get, uh, to fight the misinformation. And some of the agencies like, I think, were great. They're colleges and universities, and we know
[00:35:01] Speaker: That unfortunately, there can be violence around schools. Some of them are like the park systems and public safety. And we need to engage in those that may result in the harm of individuals or corrections. To be sure, you know, there's a lot of good benefit to it. So, I can see both sides of the concern. One question I did have, and I know I had requested some time ago, to see if any of the cameras that are either here or planned for the future be placed in an area that has a concentration of the soft targets. Which would be, for example, here we've got City Hall, the park, the aquatic center, we've got an elementary school, middle school, high school, College of the Desert. Again, schools are a place where we've got those concerns, plus people speeding and, you know, impatient drivers that could result in a hit-and-run, etc. Is that something that's still being considered, or are we just pretty happy with where we've got them now?
[00:36:10] Speaker: So, I'm going to answer the first part and I'll turn it over to Daniel Hurtado, but yes, we're always working with the city staff to see where cameras can be added and better situated. And when we can realize there's a spot that may benefit from the camera system, but I'll turn it over to Daniel Hurtado.
[00:36:25] Speaker: In your opinion, would that make sense as far as soft targets?
[00:36:28] Speaker: Oh, yeah, definitely, it would. And we're already in talks of that. So, but I'll let him finish the conversation on the city staff side.
[00:36:37] Speaker: I do just want to add, that is correct. So, we're being proactive and that is a portion, that's what this staff report amendment will do. It'll allow us to kind of expand the program more as we see success on the program. And any areas within the city that the Sheriff's Department make a recommendation that say, 'Hey, we should, there's a high flux of people in this area. Let's go ahead and move into this area for vehicles, etc.' So, that's the purpose of this. So.
[00:37:00] Speaker: Mhm. Do we know if the Living Desert may have it? Because again, thinking in terms of soft targets, they are also an attraction.
[00:37:10] Speaker: Not necessarily at the Living Desert, but we do have cameras nearby.
[00:37:15] Speaker: Perfect, thank you. And then my last comment is, one of the big concerns, you know, as far as access from federal agencies, and it's glad to see, I'm happy to see that those are not automatically listed on there, which reinforces that RSO does in fact require those warrants. And one of the questions that I had, referring to unauthorized access, I was pleased to see that in the time that since we had implemented it, that there has only been one instance within RSO where somebody had improper or illegal access and it resulted in a termination. So, I'm happy that that can reassure the public that it is flagged and it does have a substantial result for the individual.
[00:38:08] Speaker: It does. And what I'd like to remind the public is, having confidential information from law enforcement, we've had it for a long time. And we have to abide by certain laws and rules. So, when that's broken, there's action taken. And whether it's the ALPR system or any other confidential law enforcement database. So, that's something we're always looking for and making sure that our employees are compliant.
[00:38:31] Speaker: Perfect. Thank you so much. I appreciate you.
[00:38:36] Speaker: Mel, okay. Actually, I just have two questions on this item. The first is, I know I saw that it authorizes a two and a half million dollar spend with just the city manager's authorization. And I thought we had already addressed the issue of sort of a maximum amount that any department can spend without city council approval. And that may be more a question for our finance department.
[00:39:02] Speaker: Yeah, actually, you are correct. However, this agreement has been approved to date in the amount of 2.1 million. So, the increase is only for 400,000. About 80,000 of that is covering the nine cameras that they're replacing. The remainder of about 300,000 is what you would be authorizing for the city manager to approve for the remainder of the five-year agreement.
[00:39:25] Speaker: Okay, that clarifies that. Appreciate it. And then secondly, Flock is also known as ALPR, right? Automatic license plate reader. And in one of the sections here in the background, the last paragraph of the background, it says, 'As Palm Desert grows, both city staff and the Sheriff's office continue to evaluate areas where additional coverage may be needed. These additional coverage areas include parks, roadways, new development areas, commercial corridors, high traffic locations, ingress-egress points, and other areas where public safety coverage gaps are identified.' And so, my concern is that this opens the potential for more than just license plate reading. If
[00:40:00] Mayor Truby: We're in parks and other areas where maybe we're not on a roadway anymore. We're in a place where people are just gathering.
[00:40:06] Mayor Truby: And, um, is there any way we can kind of address that or what's the, uh, are my concerns reasonable and justified?
[00:40:13] Speaker: You're, you are correct. So, the last council meeting when we wanted to expand on the program, we went ahead and implemented 10 live view cameras, and that's going to be along El Paseo. And that's first as our, I'll say, a phase. We want to see what the public's going to see, the success they see all along El Paseo. And we did get recommendation, or I'm sorry, letter of support from the businesses on El Paseo okaying this. And it's actually very similar to the KESQ live El Paseo camera that gets posted on the mornings just to as an idea of a reference of how that looks. So, we wanted to do a phase approach and seeing, um, moving forward if we do want to go with that recommendation to go out and implement those cameras. They most in parks, et cetera. Those would be live views, but as far as ALPR expansion, those are just the generic license plate capturing where we would go towards areas that don't have that, um, near trail heads, et cetera, more like Homewood parks, et cetera. As an example, we would probably want to fill in those areas.
[00:41:11] Mayor Truby: Council have any oversight before those are installed?
[00:41:15] Speaker: We will, yes.
[00:41:17] Mayor Truby: Okay. So, we'll be able to give the thumbs up or thumbs down.
[00:41:19] Speaker: Correct.
[00:41:20] Mayor Truby: All right. That's good. That's all I needed. Thank you.
[00:41:23] Mayor Truby: Anybody else?
[00:41:25] Mayor Truby: All right. Well, I'll move approval of item 9J.
[00:41:30] Mayor Truby: Anybody care to second?
[00:41:34] Speaker: I'll second the motion.
[00:41:37] Mayor Truby: All right. Council member Harnik?
[00:41:39] Council member Harnik: Yes.
[00:41:40] Mayor Truby: Mayor Pro Tem, I'm sorry. Council member Medina?
[00:41:43] Council member Medina: Yes.
[00:41:44] Mayor Truby: Council member Nestande?
[00:41:45] Council member Nestande: Yes.
[00:41:45] Mayor Truby: Mayor Pro Tem Perdeto?
[00:41:47] Mayor Pro Tem Perdeto: Yes.
[00:41:47] Mayor Truby: And Mayor Truby?
[00:41:48] Mayor Truby: Yes. Motion passes 5-0.
[00:41:50] Mayor Truby: All right. Thank you. On to item 10, our action calendar, and we begin with item 10A, which is the establishment of live scan fingerprinting services at the Palm Desert Library, and we have a staff report from Ms. Hodges.
[00:42:05] Angeli Cajes: All right.
[00:42:17] Angeli Cajes: There we go.
[00:42:18] Angeli Cajes: Good afternoon, Mayor and members of the City Council. Angeli Cajes, management analyst with the library with library services.
[00:42:25] Angeli Cajes: The item before you today is a receive and file report regarding staff's work toward establishing the library as a DOJ or Department of Justice authorized live scan location.
[00:42:40] Angeli Cajes: The pilot program idea originated from the city's need to address longer wait times for internal fingerprinting services due to the limited availability in the surrounding areas.
[00:42:54] Angeli Cajes: As the city needs have grown through our new, through a new employees being hired, internships, and the increase in the library volunteers, staff identified an opportunity to create a more convenient, efficient, and customer-focused solution for city operations with an eventual goal of service to the broader community.
[00:43:20] Angeli Cajes: Uh, library and human resources recently began the fingerprinting process as a the first step toward getting certified.
[00:43:30] Angeli Cajes: Once that step's complete, then we can apply to be a provider agency.
[00:43:37] Angeli Cajes: Startup costs are anticipated to be 15,000, and or excuse me, estimated at 15,000, and are anticipated to be supported through current year one-time cost savings from HR in the amount of 15,000.
[00:43:51] Angeli Cajes: And that that money will be reallocated to our, um, innovation reserve fund, which will, uh, those new funds will be reprogrammed, uh, to support efficiency, the ongoing costs, uh, excuse me. Efficiency and the ongoing costs may be offset through future fee, uh, service fees, uh, upon a successful pilot. But, we will bring that back to, uh, to council if that is, uh, for, uh, consideration.
[00:44:24] Angeli Cajes: As staff continues to evaluate the library's operational model, the service represents a thoughtful enhancement that addresses internal city needs while further expanding the library's role, uh, as a community-focused facility. That concludes my report, and I'm happy to answer any questions.
[00:44:44] Mayor Truby: Perfect. Thank you, Ms. Hodges. Um, any questions from my colleagues?
[00:44:50] Mayor Truby: Council Member Moreno.
[00:44:52] Council Member Moreno: Would these services be available during certain hours only or during the hours of operation for the library?
[00:45:01] Speaker 1: We still are in the preliminary phase and planning. Um, I'll know more once we become a provider site. Um, nothing is off the table when it comes to that, so we're open to having days or certain time frames.
[00:45:16] Speaker 2: Yeah, I think it would be very beneficial if there was at least one night where it would be open a little bit past that for folks that have that 9:00 to 5:00 or whatever time they get out in the evenings that may not allow them to go to other current locations, um, because especially if there are future employees or interns, I think that would be a great community benefit. And I love the idea of having it at the library where we know that individuals are going to get a positive experience. It's not always a, um, I've had negative experiences, unfortunately, with some of the vendors, and knowing the kind of quality, approachable service that we're going to have really would be a great service. So, thanks for looking into this. I think this would be a good asset.
[00:46:05] Speaker 1: Okay. We will keep your idea in mind when it comes to that afternoon availability.
[00:46:12] Speaker 2: Thank you.
[00:46:13] Speaker 1: Is there any other question?
[00:46:14] Speaker 3: No question. I just kudos on using the innovation fund. Yeah, and actually my question, I think, was probably for the city manager. This side, I noticed the fund is coming from the innovation fund. Is this the first use of the innovation fund?
[00:46:27] Speaker 4: This is the second one. The first one was the pet adoption gift cards.
[00:46:31] Speaker 3: Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. I love it. I think that is such a clever idea to use savings from the budget and let them come up with. I love it. It's just working perfectly. So, great job, and I love the idea that the library is a community center, and this augments that. So,
[00:46:45] Speaker 5: Yeah, it seems like a great idea. We're all in alignment, it seems. Staff has seen a void, and they have the solution to fix it.
[00:46:53] Speaker 6: I move approval.
[00:46:54] Speaker 7: I will second.
[00:46:57] Speaker 8: I think it's, isn't it a receive and file?
[00:47:01] Speaker 4: That is correct.
[00:47:03] Speaker 8: I beg your pardon. There we go. Okay.
[00:47:05] Speaker 9: Shows we're excited.
[00:47:06] Speaker 8: Yeah, I want to vote on it. All right, here we go. On to item 10B, which is consideration of an International Surfing Association Para Surfing Championship sponsorship. And we have Ms. Amy Lawrence with the staff report.
[00:47:24] Amy Lawrence: Good afternoon, honorable mayor, members of the city council. I'm Amy Lawrence, deputy director of economic development. And there it is. Uh, this is a request to approve a sponsorship contribution of $75,000 for the 2026 International Surfing Association, or ISA World Para Surfing, uh, championship. The proposed sponsorship includes a matching contribution of $75,000 from Visit Greater Palm Springs and a contribution of $150,000 from Desert Surf and its partners for a total contribution package sponsorship package of $300,000. This is not working. Here we go. Technical difficulties, or maybe it's the operator. Sorry. Okay. I'm not going to touch the button again. Sorry about that. The ISA World Para Surfing Championship is an international adaptive surf surfing competition that brings together athletes from around the world and supports the ISA's efforts to include para surfing in the 2032 Paralympic Games in Brisbane. ISA is the International Olympic Committee's recognized world governing body for surfing. The event is proposed to take place at Desert Surf from November 19th through November 22nd, 2026, which is a period when hotel occupancy is typically lower than peak season levels. Activities include athlete training, competition, and opening and closing ceremonies, which attract competitors, coaches, officials, support staff, and spectators from around the world. The 2024 and 2025 championships in Oceanside featured nearly 150 competitors representing 25 nations. Okay, let's try this. It worked. According to the ISA, the 2025 championship generated approximately 760,000 webcast views, 16 million social media views, 300,000 social media interactions, 85,000 website visits, and an estimated earned media value of 1.8 million.
[00:50:05] Speaker: As part of the sponsorship package, the
[00:50:07] Speaker: city and Visit Greater Palm Springs
[00:50:09] Speaker: would be recognized as official gold
[00:50:10] Speaker: sponsors and receive marketing and
[00:50:13] Speaker: promotional benefits, including prominent
[00:50:15] Speaker: name and logo placement, website advert,
[00:50:18] Speaker: webcast advertising, social media
[00:50:20] Speaker: integrations, event activation space,
[00:50:23] Speaker: and announcer mentions during the
[00:50:24] Speaker: webcast.
[00:50:32] Speaker: Before I conclude, hosting an
[00:50:34] Speaker: international championship at Desert
[00:50:36] Speaker: Surf in its first few months of opening
[00:50:38] Speaker: may provide an opportunity to introduce
[00:50:40] Speaker: the venue to a global audience and
[00:50:42] Speaker: further establish Palm Desert as a
[00:50:43] Speaker: destination for sports tourism and
[00:50:46] Speaker: recreation. This concludes my
[00:50:48] Speaker: presentation, and I'd be happy to answer
[00:50:50] Speaker: any questions. We also have
[00:50:51] Speaker: representatives of Desert Surf here, and
[00:50:53] Speaker: I believe we have a representative from
[00:50:55] Speaker: ISA available on Zoom for questions.
[00:51:00] Speaker: Thank you very much. Any questions from
[00:51:02] Speaker: my colleagues?
[00:51:04] Speaker: No.
[00:51:05] Speaker: James?
[00:51:05] James: What is the total cost to put this
[00:51:08] James: program on? Do you have any idea?
[00:51:11] Speaker: I I don't know the total cost to put the
[00:51:13] Speaker: program on. I know that Desert Surf will
[00:51:15] Speaker: be working to get additional sponsors
[00:51:18] Speaker: for the event.
[00:51:24] Speaker: All right. Any comments?
[00:51:26] Speaker: Well,
[00:51:26] Speaker: Oh, still questions. Beg your pardon.
[00:51:28] Speaker: Oh, no, I don't have a question. Um, my
[00:51:30] Speaker: question is, um, I know there was the the
[00:51:32] Speaker: note that were as as exciting as this
[00:51:35] Speaker: would be, there is a possibility that we
[00:51:37] Speaker: may not be able to help accommodate
[00:51:38] Speaker: opening ceremonies and all of the pomp
[00:51:41] Speaker: and circumstance that an event like this
[00:51:43] Speaker: deserves. Understandably,
[00:51:46] Speaker: is that, um, because of a financial
[00:51:50] Speaker: um, issue, a timeline issue, staff, uh,
[00:51:54] Speaker: resource issue?
[00:51:55] Speaker: So, I think what what that meant was
[00:51:58] Speaker: that we might not be able to host a
[00:51:59] Speaker: parade that closes down El Paseo or
[00:52:01] Speaker: something like that. We may be able to
[00:52:03] Speaker: host something at the park. So, it just
[00:52:05] Speaker: really depends on the magnitude of it.
[00:52:07] Speaker: And it also depends on if they wanted to
[00:52:10] Speaker: uh, host the opening and closing
[00:52:11] Speaker: ceremonies at Desert Surf. So, it really
[00:52:13] Speaker: depends on the logistics that they're
[00:52:15] Speaker: requesting.
[00:52:16] Speaker: Okay. So, it may be possible. Okay.
[00:52:18] Speaker: Be possible, yeah. And that's what that
[00:52:19] Speaker: that meant in the report.
[00:52:21] Speaker: Perfect. Just it's the just-in-case CYA.
[00:52:23] Speaker: I got you.
[00:52:23] Speaker: Yes.
[00:52:24] Speaker: And the other part is, it said in the
[00:52:26] Speaker: report that this would be a contingent
[00:52:29] Speaker: upon the additional support. Um,
[00:52:32] Speaker: let's see. Where did that say? Um,
[00:52:36] Speaker: contingent upon a matching sponsorship
[00:52:38] Speaker: contribution from uh, Visit Greater Palm
[00:52:40] Speaker: Springs and Desert Surf. Do we know when
[00:52:43] Speaker: that timeline would be for us to know
[00:52:45] Speaker: yes, it happened, or no, it didn't
[00:52:46] Speaker: happen?
[00:52:47] Speaker: Visit Greater Palm Springs has committed
[00:52:50] Speaker: to the sponsorship, and as has Desert
[00:52:52] Speaker: Surf.
[00:52:53] Speaker: All right. So, we're secure. Okay. Thank
[00:52:55] Speaker: you so much.
[00:52:58] Speaker: Any other questions?
[00:53:00] Speaker: Okay. On to comments.
[00:53:03] Speaker: I think it would be an honor for our
[00:53:04] Speaker: city to benefit from hosting this
[00:53:08] Speaker: wonderful event. And again, as Amy
[00:53:11] Speaker: Lawrence said, it would introduce Palm
[00:53:12] Speaker: Desert to a global audience. It seems
[00:53:15] Speaker: like a win-win. So, I'm I'm very
[00:53:19] Speaker: supportive.
[00:53:22] Speaker: I concur.
[00:53:23] Speaker: Councilmember Harnik, anything?
[00:53:25] Councilmember Harnik: Thank you, Mayor.
[00:53:27] Councilmember Harnik: Uh, it, it, it, I'm going to piggyback on
[00:53:30] Councilmember Harnik: what Councilmember Medina said about the
[00:53:33] Councilmember Harnik: marketing meeting, and they talked all
[00:53:35] Councilmember Harnik: about branding and how we can reach out
[00:53:38] Councilmember Harnik: to further markets. And this is an
[00:53:40] Councilmember Harnik: opportunity, especially with the
[00:53:42] Councilmember Harnik: Paralympics coming up in, uh,
[00:53:45] Councilmember Harnik: in 2028, this is an opportunity for us
[00:53:49] Councilmember Harnik: to have greater impact with the Palm
[00:53:51] Councilmember Harnik: Desert brand
[00:53:53] Councilmember Harnik: and to do the right thing. And this is
[00:53:55] Councilmember Harnik: really exciting. And as we go forward
[00:53:59] Councilmember Harnik: with this asset in our community,
[00:54:02] Councilmember Harnik: the branding of Palm Desert is going to
[00:54:05] Councilmember Harnik: be elevated.
[00:54:07] Councilmember Harnik: And this is a great way to introduce and
[00:54:11] Councilmember Harnik: raise awareness of Desert Surf under the
[00:54:14] Councilmember Harnik: best of circumstances. I I love the
[00:54:17] Councilmember Harnik: idea.
[00:54:19] Councilmember Harnik: Thank you.
[00:54:21] Speaker: Absolutely. I will and will make. Oh,
[00:54:24] Speaker: Councilmember Moreno.
[00:54:25] Councilmember Moreno: Um, my comment is that I I concur. This
[00:54:28] Councilmember Moreno: is something that, um,
[00:54:31] Councilmember Moreno: Palm Desert is going to be in the
[00:54:33] Councilmember Moreno: spotlight for it, and I think it speaks
[00:54:36] Councilmember Moreno: to our ongoing commitment to embracing
[00:54:39] Councilmember Moreno: people with all different abilities. And
[00:54:42] Councilmember Moreno: another opportunity to thank staff for
[00:54:44] Councilmember Moreno: continuing and renewing the autism
[00:54:46] Councilmember Moreno: certification. Um, thank you for for that
[00:54:50] Councilmember Moreno: commitment that is recognized beyond our
[00:54:53] Councilmember Moreno: our state. And we're going to be put on
[00:54:57] Councilmember Moreno: the global map for something else. I
[00:54:59] Councilmember Moreno: love that as much as we think that the
[00:55:01] Speaker: holiday season, everybody travels. It's at that end of the year where we're going to give people the opportunity to keep up that revenue. Um, this is win-win all around, and um, I just hope that since we're providing a sponsorship that we get tickets to see some of that, too. Because obviously, I know that we would all want to go support. So, maybe that ask is in there that, you know, we support the the sponsor or the the um, event contribution as long as we get tickets to be able to continue to support. Unless they're ridiculously expensive, and it would require a conflict of interest declaration. And I move approval if there aren't comments.
[00:55:41] Speaker: Second.
[00:55:45] Chair: Council member Harnik.
[00:55:47] Council member Harnik: [clears throat] Yes.
[00:55:48] Chair: Council member Moreno.
[00:55:50] Council member Moreno: Yes.
[00:55:50] Chair: Council member Nestande.
[00:55:51] Council member Nestande: Yes.
[00:55:52] Chair: Mayor Pro Tem Perdeto.
[00:55:53] Mayor Pro Tem Perdeto: Yes.
[00:55:54] Chair: And Mayor Trubee.
[00:55:55] Mayor Trubee: Yes.
[00:55:55] Chair: Motion passes 5 to 0. Thank you very much. On to item number 10C, approve a professional services agreement with Jewish Family Service of San Diego for homeless outreach and engagement services. It looks like we have a staff report from Mr. Ivan Tenorio.
[00:56:11] Ivan Tenorio: Uh, good afternoon, Mayor, City Council. Uh, Ivan Tenorio, Pedro Rodriguez with the Homeless Services. Um, tonight we're, uh, we'll be presenting the proposed agreement with Jewish Family Service of San Diego for homeless outreach and engagement services. Uh, this agreement is part of the city's ongoing effort to maintain homeless outreach services in Palm Desert. Um, the city has contracted for home, uh, outreach services since 2019, beginning with the county's homeless outreach program. In 2023, the city moved to a more direct service outreach model and selected CityNet as its, uh, dedicated outreach provider. Uh, CityNet has been a, uh, a valued partner. However, the current agreement has no remaining renewal options after June 30th of this month. Uh, and staff knew service costs were going to, um, increase, and staff wanted to make sure that we did not have an interruption in services, uh, in this upcoming fiscal year. So, in December of, uh, of last year, staff issued a formal request for proposals, and that process has led us to tonight. The RFP process maintained the same scope of core services the city has had with CityNet, uh, two full outreach workers covering street outreach, case management, housing navigation, and service referrals. Um, the city received, uh, six proposals, three were interviewed, and with Jewish Family Services, uh, being selected. The annual, also, we set the the budget to not to exceed amount of 200,000, funded through the city's opioid settlement fund with no reduction in services. The, and just for added context, kind of the operational hours, the service hours are staying the same. Both CityNet and Jewish Family Services are structured around the 40 hours a week, Monday through Friday, with a small difference with in the Jewish Family Service agreement schedules include flexibility as coordinated by the city, which gives us more ability to adjust coverage when community needs come up. And, you know, through this RFP process, staff evaluated which provider was the best fit for the city's next phase of outreach. And Jewish Family Services was selected based on all the the overall strength of the proposal, including its staffing model, its service approach, regional experience, and the ability to coordinate with staff and service partners. And with that, I will pass it over to Pedro.
[00:58:41] Pedro Rodriguez: Good afternoon, Mayor, members of the City Council. Pedro Rodriguez, Code Compliance and Support Services Manager. I'd like to touch on the improvements and field responses. So, over the last 3 years of working with our outreach teams, we've learned that there are some areas where we can improve and our opportunities to strengthen our homeless outreach efforts. So, as a result of that, we're strengthening coordination with Code Compliance, Public Safety, and the outreach teams to ensure a more effective and consistent coordinated response throughout the community. We're also strengthening that partnership with our law enforcement teams for the outreach teams to have a collaborative outreach that addresses the community concerns while ensuring that individuals experiencing homelessness are connected with their services and resources, and it promotes a much safer and efficient coordinated field operations, because there are times where, uh, are just a little bit more resistant to services in there, um, the need for law enforcement to come by and also just keep the peace while the outreach workers conduct their work and provide the outreach services that are necessary. And sometimes that's effective, having law enforcement out there to keep the peace while they they do the work. It's an important function to have our law enforcement partners out there with us. So, um, with this approach as we move forward, uh, the city will continue to evaluate the program outcomes and strengthen our partnerships and identify any opportunities to improve over the next 3 years with our new service provider. Um,
[01:00:01] Staff: In object, the obviously the city's objective is to maintain a balanced and consistent response that supports the compassionate outreach while preserving the public health and safety of the quality of life for the community.
[01:00:14] Staff: And, uh, this. Sorry. Oops.
[01:00:23] Staff: So, staff is requesting approval of the Jewish Family Services of the San Diego Professional Service Agreement in the amount not to exceed $200,000 annually with the two optional one-year extensions.
[01:00:38] Mayor: Very good. Thank you for the report, and before I open up to, um, council comment and discussion, um, going to ask for public comment. I don't have any blue cards. Are there any online?
[01:00:50] Staff: No online comments.
[01:00:51] Mayor: All right, very good. So we will start with council discussion or questions, rather, for our staff, if you have any.
[01:01:00] Councilmember: I see the scope of services includes a by-name list. Does CityNet do that, or is have they kept a by-name list as well?
[01:01:09] Staff: Yes.
[01:01:10] Councilmember: Oh, they have? All right. I was just, just curious.
[01:01:16] Mayor: Councilmember Moreno.
[01:01:17] Councilmember Moreno: Thank you, Mayor. Um, I was wondering, um, the reason that this RFP did not require the lowest cost proposal to be, um, accepted. I know that's standard, so this one just stuck out a little for me.
[01:01:30] Staff: Yeah. No, I, I think it was not necessarily based on who's the best, the lowest proposal. It was just overall score and who had the best service.
[01:01:37] Councilmember Moreno: Okay. And in, in terms of, of that, I did notice, um, right before the meeting started, I was going through, and I noticed that it was only a two-point difference between the top two scores that were awarded. Um, and whereas, you know, Jewish Family Services has an excellent reputation. My family's used their services. A lot of loved ones have used their services. I did think it was, um, kind of peculiar, um, that if we look at our agenda, it is, where is it? It's page 528 on our agenda, and I think it's on page two of the provider qualifications list. And they were requested to provide, um, it says reference, 'Provide a list of contracts similar in scope and function, including brief program description, participation name, contact info, etc.' Uh, first one listed is C-VAG, uh, for providing residents and permanent supportive housing program. So, we know, for example, Housing First, IEHP for providing, um, support to homeless IEHP members that IEHP referred to them. And the third one is Jewish Family Services of the Desert. And that seemed a little odd to me because if you've had 20 years of, of service, um, I don't know, I imagine there's a list of, I don't know, like 182 or something that you would know these are trusted partners, especially if you've worked within Riverside and, uh, San Diego counties. Um, so that seems a little interesting that their scope there, it says that they provide behavioral services to program participants, as well as training staff with behavioral health supports training. So that seems to me like it's just cross-training from one division to another. Is there a reason that they weren't required to provide somebody that's external? I think it said that they've been working with the Palm Springs, they cited 2011, 2016 ongoing, which says they have a long history in the desert in their application, but I, it just didn't sit right with me. So, do you have any insight on that, or is from the applicant that you can help elaborate?
[01:04:07] Staff: So, Jewish Family Services of San Diego and Jewish Family Services of the Desert are two completely different entities.
[01:04:13] Councilmember Moreno: Okay. They are not the same. Okay. So, they are in no way affiliated?
[01:04:18] Staff: No.
[01:04:18] Councilmember Moreno: Okay. Yeah, it still strikes me as interesting that their references are somebody that provides training for them, not the same kind of scope where you're asking for outreach to homeless individuals, because you should already be training your own staff. So, that did stick out to me. Would that have made, um, is the scoring of the references a factor that could have shifted those two points?
[01:04:52] Staff: No, I don't, I, I don't believe so in, in this case.
[01:04:55] Councilmember Moreno: Okay. Thank you.
[01:04:58] Mayor: Okay. Any other questions for my
[01:05:00] Speaker: colleagues?
[01:05:01] Speaker: Oh. Councilmember Harnik.
[01:05:04] Councilmember Harnik: I, I apologize. I was just going to say
[01:05:06] Councilmember Harnik: what Mr. Tenorio said. The fact is, those
[01:05:08] Councilmember Harnik: are two separate entities completely.
[01:05:11] Councilmember Harnik: But I, I was having trouble with my, uh,
[01:05:13] Councilmember Harnik: computer putting that hand down, but he
[01:05:16] Councilmember Harnik: answered it perfectly.
[01:05:18] Speaker: Terrific. Any comments from my
[01:05:20] Speaker: colleagues?
[01:05:21] Speaker: I'm glad you guys worked out some
[01:05:23] Speaker: flexible hours to include
[01:05:26] Speaker: times when that's necessary.
[01:05:30] Speaker: I think it's, it would be a wonderful, uh,
[01:05:32] Speaker: opportunity to
[01:05:34] Speaker: work with the Jewish Community Center.
[01:05:37] Speaker: All right. Well, then I will, uh, move
[01:05:38] Speaker: approval.
[01:05:39] Speaker: Second.
[01:05:41] Speaker: Councilmember Harnik.
[01:05:42] Councilmember Harnik: Yes.
[01:05:43] Speaker: Councilmember Marino.
[01:05:44] Councilmember Marino: Yes.
[01:05:45] Speaker: Councilmember Nestande.
[01:05:46] Councilmember Nestande: Yes.
[01:05:47] Speaker: Mayor Pro Tem Perdeto.
[01:05:48] Mayor Pro Tem Perdeto: Yes.
[01:05:48] Speaker: And Mayor Trub.
[01:05:49] Mayor Trub: Yes.
[01:05:49] Speaker: Motion passes 5 to 0. All right. On to
[01:05:52] Speaker: item 10D, which is consideration of an
[01:05:55] Speaker: extension to the temporary outdoor
[01:05:56] Speaker: dining deck program and direction to
[01:05:59] Speaker: evaluate a permanent outdoor dining
[01:06:01] Speaker: program. We have a staff report from Mr.
[01:06:04] Speaker: Carlos Flores.
[01:06:06] Carlos Flores: Good evening, honorable mayor, members
[01:06:08] Carlos Flores: of the council. Carlos Flores,
[01:06:09] Carlos Flores: Development Services, here to
[01:06:12] Carlos Flores: provide an update on our outdoor dining
[01:06:15] Carlos Flores: program.
[01:06:18] Carlos Flores: All right. Today staff is asking for, uh,
[01:06:20] Carlos Flores: two actions from the City Council. The
[01:06:22] Carlos Flores: first one being to direct staff to
[01:06:25] Carlos Flores: evaluate a permanent outdoor dining
[01:06:27] Carlos Flores: program
[01:06:28] Carlos Flores: and then to extend our temporary program
[01:06:31] Carlos Flores: for existing compliant operators through
[01:06:33] Carlos Flores: June 30th of 2027. I, I, I wanted to start
[01:06:38] Carlos Flores: um, just by saying, reiterating that when
[01:06:40] Carlos Flores: we're talking about the program today
[01:06:42] Carlos Flores: and our temporary program, we're talking
[01:06:44] Carlos Flores: specifically about the temporary program
[01:06:45] Carlos Flores: that started in 2020 as a COVID-related
[01:06:48] Carlos Flores: response and applies only to outdoor
[01:06:51] Carlos Flores: dining, um, within the public
[01:06:53] Carlos Flores: right-of-way. This is, um,
[01:06:55] Carlos Flores: Insofar as outdoor dining on private
[01:06:57] Carlos Flores: property, that not only exists but will
[01:07:00] Carlos Flores: continue to exist, um,
[01:07:02] Carlos Flores: not just in our downtown areas, but also,
[01:07:05] Carlos Flores: if you've seen, up on Cook Street in the
[01:07:07] Carlos Flores: University Village area, um, outdoor
[01:07:09] Carlos Flores: dining will continue to remain and have
[01:07:11] Carlos Flores: processes within our system, within our
[01:07:14] Carlos Flores: um, city, sorry. But today we were
[01:07:16] Carlos Flores: talking about our temporary program that
[01:07:18] Carlos Flores: is within public right-of-way.
[01:07:20] Carlos Flores: So, here is just a timeline that was in
[01:07:22] Carlos Flores: your report. Um, you know, throughout the
[01:07:25] Carlos Flores: the past several years since 2020,
[01:07:27] Carlos Flores: Council has extended the program a
[01:07:28] Carlos Flores: couple times. The, um, existing expiration
[01:07:32] Carlos Flores: date of our temporary program is June
[01:07:34] Carlos Flores: 30th of 2026, so just a few weeks from
[01:07:38] Carlos Flores: now.
[01:07:39] Carlos Flores: Um, back in March, the City Council
[01:07:41] Carlos Flores: received an update on the program.
[01:07:43] Carlos Flores: Subsequent to that, the subcommittee met
[01:07:46] Carlos Flores: with city staff, um, a few times to talk
[01:07:48] Carlos Flores: through a permanent program. And, um, made
[01:07:52] Carlos Flores: some headways on the possibilities of, of,
[01:07:54] Carlos Flores: a permanent program, and so we're here
[01:07:55] Carlos Flores: today to talk through that and see if an
[01:07:58] Carlos Flores: extension of our temporary program
[01:08:00] Carlos Flores: um, would suffice afterwards.
[01:08:04] Carlos Flores: So again, staff, um, a- along the
[01:08:07] Carlos Flores: subcommittee made progress on a, um,
[01:08:11] Speaker: Actually, I'm going to pause you for a
[01:08:12] Speaker: moment. I see Councilmember Harnik has
[01:08:14] Speaker: her hand raised.
[01:08:15] Councilmember Harnik: Sorry.
[01:08:18] Speaker: Is that the old one?
[01:08:19] Councilmember Harnik: Yeah.
[01:08:19] Speaker: Oh, okay. Well, then I guess, sorry.
[01:08:22] Speaker: Sorry, Jen, I guess I'll ignore the hand
[01:08:24] Speaker: up. Okay.
[01:08:25] Speaker: Sorry, Carlos, please proceed.
[01:08:27] Carlos Flores: All right. So the, the permanent program,
[01:08:30] Carlos Flores: which again, today in front of you, we're
[01:08:32] Carlos Flores: not asking for, um, full formal approval
[01:08:35] Carlos Flores: of a permanent program, but more
[01:08:36] Carlos Flores: direction to proceed in exploring it. Um,
[01:08:40] Carlos Flores: the, the term for it that we're looking
[01:08:41] Carlos Flores: at is a pedestal paver system.
[01:08:44] Carlos Flores: And it would be focused solely on Paseo.
[01:08:46] Carlos Flores: What this is, you see some examples of
[01:08:48] Carlos Flores: what we're talking about here, um, with
[01:08:50] Carlos Flores: the pedestal paver system that doesn't
[01:08:54] Carlos Flores: require, um, drilling into the street or
[01:08:56] Carlos Flores: into the sidewalk, but instead is a
[01:08:58] Carlos Flores: system that allows drainage underneath.
[01:09:00] Carlos Flores: Um, if we are to explore this, it would
[01:09:03] Carlos Flores: take about 9 to 12 months for staff to
[01:09:05] Carlos Flores: look at designs, standards,
[01:09:06] Carlos Flores: accessibility, drainage, um, and also
[01:09:09] Carlos Flores: looking at all of our agreements and
[01:09:11] Carlos Flores: lease rates to make sure that, um, we
[01:09:13] Carlos Flores: reduce the city liability. One of the
[01:09:15] Carlos Flores: early challenges that we looked at is
[01:09:17] Carlos Flores: how the edge material would look at
[01:09:19] Carlos Flores: would look like on this system. And
[01:09:21] Carlos Flores: again, reiterating, this would only be
[01:09:23] Carlos Flores: for outdoor dining that requires, um, a
[01:09:26] Carlos Flores: restaurant to encroach into our right of
[01:09:28] Carlos Flores: way.
[01:09:29] Carlos Flores: Here are some, um, other examples of
[01:09:31] Carlos Flores: what we're talking about here. So, on
[01:09:32] Carlos Flores: the left-hand side, you see, um, you
[01:09:36] Carlos Flores: a an example of extension of our
[01:09:38] Carlos Flores: sidewalk of a sidewalk, um, to allow for
[01:09:41] Carlos Flores: outdoor dining. On the right-hand side,
[01:09:43] Carlos Flores: you see, um, this is actually a Kitchen
[01:09:45] Carlos Flores: 86. Um, it's not exactly the system that
[01:09:49] Carlos Flores: would be installed, but an idea of what
[01:09:51] Carlos Flores: it looks like to stick out the sidewalk
[01:09:53] Carlos Flores: to accommodate for outdoor dining.
[01:09:56] Carlos Flores: So, current program status. So,
[01:09:58] Carlos Flores: highlighting three of three restaurant
[01:10:00] Speaker: operators. So, Kitchen 86, located on El Paseo, is currently compliant and operational. Pizza Vino had a compliant, um, temporary use permit, but has now been taken down. And Little Bar, located on Highway 111, um, has a, um, dining deck up, but still some final items and application, uh, to be deemed compliant.
[01:10:22] Speaker: So, our, um, request and suggestion today is that if council is to proceed with direction on a permanent program, that in order to continue past June 30th, um, and anyone, so Kitchen 86 or Little Bar, if they want to continue, they would have to, um, resatisfy all application requirements and get property owner approval by June 30th, 2026.
[01:10:44] Speaker: If they do not get it by June 30th, our recommendation would be that they would have to, um, remove it starting in July.
[01:10:52] Speaker: So, our recommendation here. So, uh, the first recommendation would be to direct staff to evaluate a permanent outdoor dining program within the public right-of-way and if so, to extend the temporary program for existing compliant operators through June 30th of next year.
[01:11:07] Speaker: If approved, our next steps would be working with Kitchen 86 and Little Bar, and if they meet the necessary approvals and agreements, then extend their approvals until June 30th of next year.
[01:11:21] Speaker: In the meantime, staff would work on exploring a permanent design and meet with our subcommittee with recommendations and a program framework, and ultimately, if we have a formal proposal that we want to move forward with, come back to the city council for approval.
[01:11:37] Speaker: It concludes my presentation. Happy to answer any questions.
[01:11:42] Speaker: Okay, before I turn it back to council questions and discussion, I'm going to open up for public comment, and I do have one blue card here from Mr. Skip Page.
[01:11:59] Skip Page: Hi, good afternoon.
[01:12:01] Skip Page: So, um, I know most of you. My name is Skip Page. I own Little Bar on Highway 111 there.
[01:12:09] Skip Page: Um, I want to keep the deck. It's awesome. I know you guys know this. You got a hundred emails from people that love going there.
[01:12:18] Skip Page: When we first built the deck in 2021, I built it to code. I built it exactly like they wanted it. They approved, the city approved it. There was no problem.
[01:12:31] Skip Page: On November of 2023, the program was extended through the end of this month, okay? And some certain deck guidelines were adopted.
[01:12:48] Skip Page: That was 3 years ago. Here's the deck guidelines. I built my deck exactly to these guidelines, exactly to these guidelines, okay? All good.
[01:12:58] Skip Page: Two years go by. Every year they come out, they inspect my deck, they approve, I get a permit, I pay a fee.
[01:13:05] Skip Page: And then in October, I get an email from Carlos Flores that says he's reaching out and that the city council approved an extension of the dining deck program to 2026, and that we need an updated application and fees and insurances. He says, "I do not anticipate a significant revision to your deck as it currently stands. However, we do need the updated application and requirements, including insurances, to continue to allow it." I immediately pay the fee. I immediately get the insurance, send it to the city. All good. 30 days later, I got to tear my deck down because I'm not compliant. I don't. The barriers I use are not approved, but they are because I have the design guidelines, and it was approved for 2 years before.
[01:13:54] Skip Page: And I got to tear my deck down. So, you know, we all spent the last 6 months fighting, and which I don't love, but fighting. I got an email from the city attorney that says, "You got to take your deck down June 30th."
[01:14:08] Skip Page: So, I give in to it. Okay, I got to take my deck down. Nobody wants me to take deck down. Everybody loves that thing, right?
[01:14:14] Skip Page: Uh, couple weeks ago, I get a call from Kitchen 86. He says, "Hey, Carlos called, said don't tear the deck down. They're going to reconsider and extend it for 1 year." And I go, "Oh, how, why did nobody ask me?"
[01:14:26] Skip Page: So, after a couple phone calls, I find out that, you know, nobody asked me because they said I wanted to take the deck down, and I don't have approval of my landlord. That's not true. I got approval of my landlord. Right? My landlord is 90 years old. He doesn't want any responsibility or anything. He's cool with the deck. He hasn't complained in 5 years about the deck.
[01:14:48] Skip Page: So, my landlord's cool. So, I feel like I'm just being treated unfairly.
[01:14:55] Skip Page: Uh, people like what I have. I operate. I'm a good operator. I keep it clean. It's well-maintained. I pay my fees.
[01:15:02] Speaker: But, I'm not getting a fair shake. And I
[01:15:05] Speaker: I want the deck. And here's the thing,
[01:15:07] Speaker: I'll pay rent.
[01:15:07] Speaker: We have the 3-minute.
[01:15:08] Speaker: Okay.
[01:15:09] Speaker: Thank you, Mr. Page.
[01:15:10] Speaker: Thanks.
[01:15:10] Speaker: Appreciate it.
[01:15:11] Speaker: Okay. Any online comments?
[01:15:16] Speaker: No online comments.
[01:15:18] Speaker: All right. Thank you very much. And I
[01:15:20] Speaker: will now open it up to questions from my
[01:15:23] Speaker: colleagues. I see
[01:15:24] Speaker: Council Member Harnik has her hand
[01:15:26] Speaker: raised. I think this is.
[01:15:28] Council Member Harnik: Thank you. And this is just a
[01:15:30] Council Member Harnik: question. I know that we have
[01:15:32] Council Member Harnik: uh, we've extended it. Every actually, you
[01:15:35] Council Member Harnik: know, Skip gave a pretty
[01:15:36] Council Member Harnik: pretty good recount of
[01:15:38] Council Member Harnik: of the timeline. But, my question is, we
[01:15:41] Council Member Harnik: keep asking,
[01:15:43] Council Member Harnik: what's the state going to do? We can do
[01:15:45] Council Member Harnik: whatever we want. If the state flips on
[01:15:48] Council Member Harnik: us, where do we go? And I didn't see
[01:15:51] Council Member Harnik: anything, and maybe I missed it, in the
[01:15:53] Council Member Harnik: staff report about where we are
[01:15:56] Council Member Harnik: legislatively
[01:15:57] Council Member Harnik: on the on the decks.
[01:16:02] Speaker: Yes, so the state did, um, extend the, um,
[01:16:06] Speaker: allowance for this until 2029.
[01:16:09] Council Member Harnik: Oh, okay. You know, I may have just
[01:16:12] Council Member Harnik: skimmed over and missed that. Okay.
[01:16:14] Council Member Harnik: Thank you.
[01:16:14] Speaker: It was not in the staff report,
[01:16:16] Speaker: admittedly. But, that
[01:16:18] Speaker: was something we checked and they did
[01:16:19] Speaker: extend it.
[01:16:20] Council Member Harnik: Okay. So,
[01:16:21] Speaker: Go ahead. Sorry.
[01:16:22] Council Member Harnik: Oh, I have another question I'd like
[01:16:24] Council Member Harnik: to ask.
[01:16:26] Council Member Harnik: And,
[01:16:27] Council Member Harnik: uh,
[01:16:28] Council Member Harnik: And I also have comments. But,
[01:16:31] Council Member Harnik: it kind of seems reasonable to me
[01:16:35] Council Member Harnik: that if someone has a deck that is
[01:16:37] Council Member Harnik: functioning, that is safe, and that is
[01:16:40] Council Member Harnik: aesthetically reasonable,
[01:16:43] Council Member Harnik: that perhaps there is an answer like we
[01:16:47] Council Member Harnik: do use so often in government when there
[01:16:50] Council Member Harnik: are standards changed, we say, "Okay,
[01:16:52] Council Member Harnik: the standards that you currently are
[01:16:54] Council Member Harnik: using now, and you've complied with, that
[01:16:57] Council Member Harnik: we asked you to comply with, are fine
[01:17:00] Council Member Harnik: until you change something, then you
[01:17:03] Council Member Harnik: must go with the new standards."
[01:17:06] Council Member Harnik: And that kind of seems like a reasonable
[01:17:08] Council Member Harnik: way to go. It's just a thought. Now,
[01:17:11] Council Member Harnik: could we do that, or is there a reason?
[01:17:14] Council Member Harnik: Look at, watch me turn this into a
[01:17:15] Council Member Harnik: question: Is there a reason that can't
[01:17:17] Council Member Harnik: be done?
[01:17:23] Speaker: So, is your question that if someone
[01:17:26] Speaker: has an existing?
[01:17:29] Council Member Harnik: Basically, grandfather it until there's
[01:17:31] Council Member Harnik: a change, and then they have to upgrade or change to the new
[01:17:36] Council Member Harnik: standards.
[01:17:37] Speaker: So, um, I'll answer in two parts.
[01:17:40] Speaker: So, there was one,
[01:17:42] Speaker: um,
[01:17:43] Speaker: So, originally, when this program
[01:17:44] Speaker: started, there weren't guidelines, and as
[01:17:46] Speaker: part of the progression of this program,
[01:17:48] Speaker: the direction received was,
[01:17:51] Speaker: um, in updating the guidelines and in
[01:17:53] Speaker: working with operators to meet them,
[01:17:55] Speaker: special, uh, specifically with safety.
[01:17:58] Speaker: That's with the design component, um,
[01:18:00] Speaker: which, yes, working with them.
[01:18:02] Speaker: The other component, though, is on, um,
[01:18:06] Speaker: you know, there's an addition of lease
[01:18:07] Speaker: rates and agreements, and insurance, and a
[01:18:10] Speaker: renewal of applications, which is
[01:18:12] Speaker: another component, which isn't
[01:18:13] Speaker: necessarily
[01:18:15] Speaker: changing the design, but is a
[01:18:17] Speaker: requirement that we still ask all
[01:18:20] Speaker: operators, regardless of, uh, a design
[01:18:23] Speaker: change. That's
[01:18:25] Speaker: It's a long way of saying that it
[01:18:27] Speaker: is technically
[01:18:30] Speaker: new requirements that we felt are still
[01:18:33] Speaker: sufficient because we're not asking for
[01:18:34] Speaker: a redesign, more so than, um,
[01:18:37] Speaker: you know,
[01:18:38] Speaker: increasing our, um,
[01:18:42] Speaker: having more agreements in place for our
[01:18:44] Speaker: liability purposes.
[01:18:48] Council Member Harnik: Okay.
[01:18:50] Speaker: Council Member Harnik, any further
[01:18:52] Speaker: questions?
[01:18:53] Council Member Harnik: Yeah, I
[01:18:55] Council Member Harnik: Really, I'm just not quite clear on the
[01:18:57] Council Member Harnik: answer. Excuse me. Can you
[01:18:59] Council Member Harnik: explain that to me again, please? 'Cause I
[01:19:01] Council Member Harnik: kind of missed it.
[01:19:02] Speaker: Yeah, so your question, if I
[01:19:05] Speaker: understand it correctly, right, is that
[01:19:06] Speaker: if someone had, say, someone had a deck, um,
[01:19:10] Speaker: to, and even though we made updates to
[01:19:13] Speaker: the program,
[01:19:15] Speaker: um, to continue it. Some of the updates
[01:19:18] Speaker: that we made to the program were
[01:19:20] Speaker: design-related. So, once or twice, we
[01:19:23] Speaker: made updates to our design requirements.
[01:19:25] Speaker: Other updates to the program were
[01:19:28] Speaker: more on the, um, renewal of the temporary
[01:19:30] Speaker: use permits, and so those were only at a
[01:19:33] Speaker: annual basis, as well as, um, requiring a
[01:19:37] Speaker: lease and agreements associated with
[01:19:39] Speaker: that, which includes insurances. So,
[01:19:41] Speaker: those were updates to the programs that
[01:19:43] Speaker: we asked all operators to, um, to renew.
[01:19:47] Speaker: That wasn't necessarily
[01:19:49] Speaker: design-related. Um,
[01:19:51] Speaker: Also, one part of this program, right,
[01:19:54] Speaker: was that, uh, specifically on opposite
[01:19:56] Speaker: sale, they all had to take them down and
[01:19:59] Speaker: rebuild.
[01:20:00] Speaker: Right.
[01:20:01] Speaker: Yes, there is certain, and there was a lot of work between staff and operators on the design component where we weren't going out there to try to make them completely redesign even with new guidelines, but we were making sure that all of our agreements were up-to-date, and we were asking for agreements that were different from 2020, um, additional for 2020-2021, um, to reduce liability.
[01:20:25] Speaker: Okay, so what I thought I understood Mr. Page say was the only thing where he wasn't compliant was the design. Am I? Am I wrong there?
[01:20:35] Speaker: There, there was, there are more areas that there's not compliant, and it's not just on the design.
[01:20:41] Speaker: Okay.
[01:20:42] Speaker: If, if I may, Mayor, following up on Councilman Harnik's questions, I think, Carlos, the way I read the recommendation is almost as, as Councilman Harnik suggested, a grandfathering because if they're in compliance, we're grandfathering them for another year. Am I? Is that my understanding?
[01:21:01] Speaker: Correct. There's no recommendation to change design. It's everything as that, as it's existed for years, for years now.
[01:21:08] Speaker: And then I do want to touch on the legislation part. The extension relates to temporary outdoor dining, but the state also passed legislation years ago that the ABC finally passed the regulation that implements a permanent solution. So there's kind of two things going on, right? So we're we're talking about a temporary thing that will eventually go away. The state wants it to go away, but then there's the ABC regulation that has more stringent requirements on line of sight and safety protocols, and that's that's really the long-term we're looking at, right?
[01:21:40] Speaker: Correct on both fronts.
[01:21:41] Speaker: Okay. So the other question I have, and I did talk to Mr. Page about the ownership permission issue, 'cause I think that's the major hurdle of non-compliance, and I did ask staff, why is it important that the land owner take responsibility affirmatively through a letter, not just acknowledging the deck, but saying, "I take responsibility for the deck." Can you, can you talk to, remind me why that's important?
[01:22:15] Speaker: Um, it's, it's important. It's part of the agreements that we have, and it's important in, in so far as, if there's any claim or incident that happens there, that we have to work to make sure that everyone's clear on who, who approved it. Um, that, that's the biggest and most, most straightforward part of it is that our, um, it's an encroachment agreement that we are, um, or, or a like that we're agreeing to, and someone has to take ownership. When we go, um, if something happens on a property or something happens, um, you know, code compliance gets called out for anything and everything, it's the property owner that we are, um, working with, um, and sending notice of violations to, so we have to make sure that they, uh, agree to it.
[01:23:02] Speaker: So since I'm simple here, um, we're we're letting people, we're giving operators permission to serve alcohol on on public property. If something happens on that public property, we'll be amongst the people likely sued or entity sued, right? Is that, and or, or anything else?
[01:23:23] Speaker: be.
[01:23:23] Speaker: And, and if we're on the hook, then we also want some way to have recourse to recover whatever we can, including potentially leaning the real property. Is that?
[01:23:38] Speaker: Correct. We want to reduce our liability, and it's similar to what we do when we, um, offer when we issue encroachment permits. We allow people to work or do something within the public right-of-way, but we are shifting the liability and burden onto the person doing that work.
[01:23:56] Speaker: Council member Destefano.
[01:23:56] Speaker: Yes. Okay, so I'm trying to grasp all this now because the more I hear you explain things and Council member Harnick's questions, um, and hearing the comments from our little bar operator, um, and I know I've been a part of this. When, when did we change the design standard? Was that in October or November or which meeting or approximate?
[01:24:22] Speaker: So, I'm going through here. So, in 2021, Council directed staff, and at that time, they worked with ARC to, um, to do design guidelines at that time. And after
[01:24:39] Speaker: So, it's 2021, approximately then.
[01:24:42] Speaker: That, that was for the design guidelines. After that, there were multiple updates to the program, not just to design, um, but more to the requirements, including like the lease rates and, um, and application requirements.
[01:24:54] Speaker: But in terms of of Little Bar, it's not that his design doesn't meet our
[01:25:00] Council Member: standards, it's these other issues related to insurance, liability. Is that correct?
[01:25:08] Staff: It, it's all. There was a design component that we were working with, um, not just Little Bar, but others at the time to improve the safety specifically around the K-rails.
[01:25:18] Council Member: There's only two restaurants now. So, yeah, so I'm going to focus on the two restaurants. So, uh, Little Bar complied to all the design standards. When did it deviate? When did Little Bar deviate from the design standards?
[01:25:35] Staff: When they renewed their application, um, over the last year. Um, so that was in... They believe they applied November 2025. We got a reapplication for the temporary use permit. Um, and we, um, the K-rails was a specific item we wanted them to add. So, that was a design component, and then the rest of the application component that was not meeting it was more to do with uh, the landlord approval and um, agreements associated with that.
[01:26:10] Council Member: Okay. So, for example then, they need... We need as a city for liability a letter from the landlord. Is that correct?
[01:26:18] Staff: Approving it, correct.
[01:26:18] Council Member: Yes, okay. And potentially we as the city council could grandfather in the design standards that we've already approved.
[01:26:27] Staff: Correct.
[01:26:28] Council Member: So, that helps me clarify Little Bar. Then we're left with Kitchen 86, in my humble opinion.
[01:26:39] Speaker: Councilmember Moreno.
[01:26:41] Councilmember Moreno: So, I think that we've all pretty much heard that it's not anything aesthetic. That what we're looking at are the legal issues and how to protect the city overall. Um, my question on this, um, if Little Bar were to submit their application at 6:30 at 4:58 p.m. since that's the deadline, how long would it take staff to turn around and approve it? Would there be an extension because submitting something versus approval by? How much leeway would the city give the applicant?
[01:27:20] Staff: We, we'd certainly have a grace period. I think the items here honestly does not take staff a lot of time to do an initial completeness review to say, 'Do we have the application requirements that we need?' Um, it would take us some time to go through um, agreements, but we'd have some sort of grace period.
[01:27:38] Councilmember Moreno: So, at this point, if it's just the letter and maybe something minor, it's kind of like a fix-it ticket from your current application?
[01:27:46] Staff: Well, with that...
[01:27:48] Councilmember Moreno: Sorry, not ticket. There's no monetary thing. That was just thinking in terms of fix-it, fix-it. Sorry. Didn't...
[01:27:52] Staff: There is a... There is still a financial component because there's the lease agreement. There's, yeah, there, um, sorry, the lease agreement and the financial part associated with that. Um, so it's not, you know, simply just a landlord approval, although that would be a big item to check off for us to feel comfortable moving forward.
[01:28:13] Councilmember Moreno: Okay. Um, so it's the... So what exactly is outstanding, right? What is it? A list of 30 things and they're just missing three? How close to that completion is it?
[01:28:26] Staff: Give me a quick second.
[01:28:30] Councilmember Moreno: Because up here it sounds pretty simple, right? It's just these... It sounds like just a few things, but I don't know what are all of the details that you're looking for, um, to help make a determination of whether it would pass or not.
[01:28:49] Staff: Quick second.
[01:28:53] Staff: Mayor and Council, as Carlos gets those additional details, I think that the primary item is if we get the letter of approval from the property owner. If we have that in hand, that gives us indication that we can work through the remaining items.
[01:29:07] Councilmember Moreno: Okay, perfect. Um...
[01:29:10] Staff: Yeah. That's, that's correct, and that... One second. That's the extent of it, and that helps us, um, guide through agreements. Because technically, there's items missing in terms of a lease agreement and all of those, but that all stems from that part. Um, it's not a, it's not an extensive list, as you talked about in terms of design that they have to redesign, and it's not an extensive list.
[01:29:33] Councilmember Moreno: So it's like a good faith step. Okay. Um...
[01:29:39] Councilmember Moreno: And in the subcommittee, there was a comment that there were, um, comments that were received by the community. I don't know if the subcommittee or anybody remembers, was it a little bit? Was it a lot? Similar to what we're getting in email?
[01:29:55] Staff: It was, yeah, that, that's the public comments we received by email, which, um, it's about 45 to 50 comments.
[01:30:01] Speaker: The for the subcommittee meeting?
[01:30:03] Speaker: We didn't get any, um, public comments specific to the subcommittee. It's all just the public comments you get from council.
[01:30:13] Speaker: And as far as the pavers, when I saw here that said edge material may be a challenge, I assume that may have been in terms of the type of material or procurement. So it's aesthetic about how to incorporate it, or what's the challenge?
[01:30:30] Speaker: The challenge is, so if you imagine a sidewalk, right, has a curb edge to it, and that allows for proper drainage. Here on a paver system, it's about how do we design that, that meets drainage but also is aesthetically acceptable. You know, trying to avoid having to build something rather tall. Um, that, you know, maybe something tall serves drainage purposes, but it is not as aesthetically pleasing. But also, you don't want something that isn't allowing for the drainage that's necessary and is still safe for pedestrians as they walk by. So, it's finding that balance. That's kind of where that challenge is at that we have to explore.
[01:31:15] Speaker: And this whole entire cost of the pavers would be then paid by the operator?
[01:31:21] Speaker: That, that's something that we, that's likely our suggestion, but that's something that we want to explore because again, until we get more detail on how much that would cost and what our options are financially. That, that's where I really, where we're looking for today is exploration.
[01:31:37] Speaker: Mhm.
[01:31:38] Speaker: Um, and did the subcommittee discuss the potential of having those, those pavers just all along El Paseo, or was it strictly confined to the discussion of Kitchen 86 or any other El Paseo applicants?
[01:31:54] Speaker: Um, I believe the idea, and I don't want to speak to intent for the subcommittee, but my understanding is, um, would be eligible for anyone on El Paseo if they met the requirements. Um, those operators, um, the idea for Kitchen 86 was basically that they could keep, um, their existing one, and it'd be obviously, since they have one up right now, they'd be one of the operators that we target to see if they're, um, interested in a transition to a permanent program for this.
[01:32:24] Speaker: Okay.
[01:32:24] Speaker: But that, that those details again would be, could be figured out through more subcommittee meetings, as well as coming back to see if you want to make it up and down El Paseo, reduce the parameters, target certain, um, businesses or the like.
[01:32:36] Speaker: And if the program is terminated, would this have created any damage to the street that then the city would have to be responsible for repairing the road work?
[01:32:49] Speaker: So, you're talking about if the program is terminated today?
[01:32:53] Speaker: Correct. Um.
[01:32:54] Speaker: Let's say hypothetically, right? We say, let's move ahead and the pavers are set in place, and then for whatever reason, um, things change and it has to be taken down. Although it said that there is no drilling required, would it still have any damage to the road to where we would then have the additional financial requirement to go and, you know, patch it up with band-aids or what not?
[01:33:20] Speaker: That's, that's, um, a good comment and something that we've wanted to think through and tackle on two fronts. One being, yes, how it's designed, wanted to minimize the, um, the potential damage, but also making sure that all the agreements that an operator, um, agrees to and signs off on has language saying that they are to repair anything that is damaged. So, there, there's, um, two abilities there, as well as any, you know, financial considerations that we can have to, um, to repair as needed.
[01:33:51] Speaker: Okay. And what is the material made of? What are the pavers made of?
[01:33:59] Speaker: We haven't gone into that detail of what, of what type, if we want to be, um, that specific or offer a menu. We, we haven't gotten to that, but that's definitely something we'll think through.
[01:34:11] Speaker: Yeah, perfect. That was, I was just thinking in terms of, you know, extreme heat and if something had already been chosen. So, those are my questions. Thank you so much.
[01:34:21] Speaker: Okay, go back to Council Member Hornik.
[01:34:24] Council Member Hornik: Thank you so much. I, I got, first of, I do want, I'm going to make a quick comment. I think that the, uh, pedestal paver system that you showed us, and I'm on a small computer, so it's hard for me to see with the detail that certainly, um, you have the luxury of in the council chambers. They look great. Um, and I, you know, I would have no objection to that. I, I want to go back, Carlos. I, I'm not clear on the K rail. For my understanding of K rail is that's about safety. So, can you help me understand
[01:35:00] Council Member: What you were saying earlier about K-rail?
[01:35:03] Staff: What I was saying was, um, and it wasn't just with Little Bar, but there was a few other decks that we identified, um, that we wanted to improve the safety and so look at, um, increasing the amount of K-rail or safety barriers around them as we, as we worked on, uh, their updated applications. So, that was one of the items with, um, Little Bar.
[01:35:28] Council Member: So, right now, okay. I, I appreciate that because the safety, as we know, is critically important. Um, so, are we only talking about El Paseo and existing permit holders, which the existing permit holders off of El Paseo, I think it's just the one. Is that accurate?
[01:35:51] Staff: Yes, right now it's just Little Bar, but the, the request today for the temporary program extension would and could include Little Bar.
[01:36:01] Council Member: Okay, so then we are including El Paseo and Little Bar, not beyond that.
[01:36:07] Staff: Correct.
[01:36:09] Council Member: Okay.
[01:36:10] Staff: For the temporary program.
[01:36:12] Council Member: For the temporary. Okay, thank you.
[01:36:16] Mayor: Mayor pro tem, any other questions? Okay. So, as it stands right now, um, we don't have a written letter from the landlord at Little Bar acknowledging and assuming risk.
[01:36:31] Staff: Uh, approving in writing?
[01:36:32] Mayor: Formal to the city.
[01:36:34] Staff: Approving it? No, we do not.
[01:36:36] Mayor: Okay.
[01:36:37] Mayor: And so, so we have until June 30th for him to submit that.
[01:36:41] Staff: Correct.
[01:36:41] Mayor: Which is 19 days to submit something from his landlord. So, as it stands now, without that, the tech, say there's a slip and fall, there's something happens on his deck, taxpayers are on the hook with in terms of liability. It, it, I mean, that theoretically, we are the main risk takers in that endeavor because it's on a public right-of-way. I guess I'll turn it over to maybe the...
[01:37:03] Council Member: Wait, could I just say that if he has a letter with him, he could turn it in to the attorney or to...
[01:37:10] Mayor: Yeah, I mean, what I think what we're in question here is until June 30th. Sure, right. Okay, well, then I don't think we're going to decide, we're not going to make a decision on that right here tonight.
[01:37:20] Council Member: Well, I, I think it's important to hear because we're hearing staff say that he doesn't have permission. Uh, operator's saying he has the landlord's approval. What's the disconnect? And I'm sure if, if Anthony shows the letter to the attorney and the city manager, they could see if it's the one they've seen before.
[01:37:38] Mayor: I'll give Anthony time to bring it over real quick, 'cause they'll let...
[01:37:41] Mayor: If, if I could just read it, it's fairly short. Um, 'I'm the owner of the property located at the address. This letter is to confirm that I'm aware of the outdoor dining deck that has been operating by Little Bar in the parking area in front of the property. The dining deck has been in place and operating for several years in connection with the tenant's business. This letter is provided solely to acknowledge awareness of the existing condition and does not constitute authorization, license, approval, or assumption of responsibility for the dining deck or its operation.' Okay, so I guess I'll turn over to Ezra, but I mean...
[01:38:15] Council Member: That's kind of a two-part situation here, awareness versus assumption.
[01:38:19] City Manager: And that's the, the letter that was received a couple months ago of awareness, uh, where we didn't get clear information that the property owner was approving this use, but I'll defer to Ezra for anything additional.
[01:38:32] City Attorney (Ezra): That's correct. The city manager is correct. Awareness is a little bit different than saying, you know, 'I approve this. I'm okay with it. I grant permission for my lessee to use the property in this way.' And so there, you know, that's an important nuance that you picked up on.
[01:38:48] Mayor: Also, you've had your three minutes. In addition, regarding Kitchen 86, we do have a letter from the landlord that does provide assumption of risk.
[01:39:00] City Manager: That, that is correct. And to continue past June 30th, we'd ask for a new one just to make sure that they're okay because they agreed to it up to June 30th, 2026. So part of our process would be asking for a new one beyond that.
[01:39:14] Mayor: Okay. Very good. Thank you.
[01:39:16] Council Member: And, and one other question, Carlos. We're here talking about a policy proposal and we're not conducting a public hearing on a single operator, right? We're here to talk about policies that affect everyone in the program. And, and at the moment, that's, that's what we're here for.
[01:39:33] City Manager: Correct.
[01:39:33] Council Member: Okay.
[01:39:37] Mayor: Okay. Any other questions? Okay, I guess we move on to comments. Anybody care to weigh in with comments?
[01:39:44] Council Member: If I may, as a member of the subcommittee, just do a little bit of context and, Mayor, if you correct me if I miss anything. I think as a subcommittee, we saw the June 30 timeline looming and...
[01:40:00] Speaker: We wanted to come forward as soon as we can to our colleagues with some directions with aesthetics so that we can kind of get everybody on board, so staff has some certainty to pursue, knowing that it'll take some time to work out the details, which is also why we suggested to staff doing an extra year extension, having us kind of, 'Okay, this is generally a good design direction.' So, let's go this direction while staff figures out the details. We'll give everyone who's in compliance and operating an extra year. I see nothing in the extent, in the requests from staff that would necessitate or guarantee the necessitation, necessary removal of Little Bar's deck. In fact, the way I read it is, all operators in compliance as of June 30th can continue for another year. And I think that in making sure that Little Bar has an opportunity to participate in the iteration as we move forward is important. But at the moment, and I don't know, the city attorney may have to advise us on how we make recommendations to the existing program. But under the existing program today, the landlord has to assume responsibility for the deck. So, that's just one of the guidelines that has existed for a while, and we're proposing, or as I read the staff report, that's what we're proposing to do going forward.
[01:41:36] Speaker: Yeah, agreed. I think, and a good reminder that we discussed during the course of our subcommittee discussions, is that outdoor dining is perfectly well permitted on private property here in the city. This is not a question of whether or not we allow outdoor dining or not. And our job here on council is to represent the public rights of way, the needs of the taxpayer. And so, that's what we're doing. That's what we're sort of, that was, is what we're discussing here, is what we're going to allow in the public right of way and under what circumstances.
[01:42:09] Speaker: Well, I would say I support the comments here. Point one: direct staff to explore the feasibility of establishing a permanent outdoor dining program on El Paseo public right-of-way. So, I am in support of that recommendation, and the number two recommendation to approve an extension of the temporary outdoor dining deck for existing permit holders that remain compliant. I support points one and two.
[01:42:42] Speaker: Okay, and then I think I may be speaking to Mayor Pro Tem's, maybe the question that was embedded in your previous comment when council moves forward recommendation number two, that the subtext there is, should the particular applicants remain compliant, correct? So long as we have that compliance at the staff level completed, then there's an extension for a year.
[01:43:07] Speaker: I guess I'll make the question next question more explicit. Could we make, without having agendized the discussion, could we make a change to the existing program to remove the requirement for landowner assumption of liability if we wanted to?
[01:43:36] Speaker: You might. It's a, you could take it or leave it or adjust it in the middle. You have a consideration of an extension of the program. So, within that, within that recommended action or request to look at that item, Council could decide to terminate at the current date, extended a year forward. You might direct, you might direct staff to adjust the program. I just, I don't, I don't know that we would have the feedback available for you to have, you know, various adjustments made.
[01:44:07] Speaker: I'm not suggesting we do that. I'm just curious the bounds of our abilities right now. In fact, I would, I'm not leaning towards thinking that's a good decision on behalf of the council of stewards of the taxpayer and their money to put them at risk by removing that requirement.
[01:44:30] Speaker: Agreed. I don't have the appetite for that either. Council member Moreno.
[01:44:34] Council member Moreno: We did get a lot of emails, and I read through them. I counted 49: 45 yes and four no. Two mentions of El Paseo. One referenced El Paseo without having an opinion, and the majority of the letters, or actually the rest of the 45, were regarding Little Bar. We're not trying to be a fun killer, as the email said.
[01:45:03] Speaker: Um, I loved hearing how many people said it's their neighborhood place, and that's what we do want to foster in the city.
[01:45:12] Speaker: But I think that the need to preserve our own residents, to protect them from lawsuits as mentioned, we need to keep the same requirements that we would with other contracts.
[01:45:28] Speaker: Personally, I think that we're leading people on with new extensions, and this year we're going to do this, and next year, you know, we present something else, and I think that's not fair.
[01:45:41] Speaker: That's not fair. Yes, we were bound by trying to see what the state was going to do. Our crystal ball doesn't tell us what can happen.
[01:45:50] Speaker: So, that's one of the reasons I've for a while just thinking we just need to end this because it's not fair to have our owners continue to put money and time and investment if they're not knowing for certain.
[01:46:05] Speaker: So if we look back again to Kitchen 86, we don't know what it would look like.
[01:46:11] Speaker: So if we say, 'Yes, you're going to have to put in the papers,' but now it's going to cost you this much, and you have to agree that you're going to then be responsible for the road.
[01:46:20] Speaker: Right now, as it stands, it's only one person that would have those papers on El Paseo, and I think what we keep saying is we want everything to look consistent. So from that aesthetic component, I think that we would be creating something that really would stick out as odd.
[01:46:39] Speaker: Um, the emails in support said that it's iconic. Little Bar, it has gained its popularity, but you know, to me, iconic is something that's indicative of a landmark in the city or that defines a style.
[01:46:53] Speaker: Um, so I don't think that the merits of people's love for it trumps the need to maintain the legal responsibilities and requirements that we have in place for a reason. We have determined that this is what we wanted to do.
[01:47:10] Speaker: Um, I'm concerned that the 'yes, I do have a letter here' ends up being the same letter that was received in the past that was not compliant. And that's frustrating to me.
[01:47:23] Speaker: Um, seeing how much people love going there, I think that maybe Little Bar has outgrown where they are, and they need to be, maybe now they're a medium bar, and maybe we could help you find a different location that would work to support the customers that are there.
[01:47:44] Speaker: Um, there's never anything that everyone's going to be 100% happy with, and I'm sorry that you're walking away while we're still trying to figure out the best solutions across the way.
[01:47:57] Speaker: So.
[01:47:58] Speaker: So, you have had your time for public comment, as I imagine the Mayor had said earlier. Um, I think that the constant evolution of this does make it problematic. Um, but I am not in support of having staff spend any more time of what we don't know is in the future. I think our staff has lots of other wonderful things to do. Right now, we're looking at two operators, one that's not compliant, and I think it's just time to end it.
[01:48:29] Speaker: Okay. Well, I'm going to make a motion to approve staff's recommendation.
[01:48:34] Speaker: I just, I just want to add one more thing to Councilwoman Moreno's comments. The fortunate thing is the ABC regulation that allows permanence is fairly new, like within the last year or so. So we can finally end it, and that's what we're hoping to do here. So I agree, and we don't want to, part of the discussion on the subcommittee is, we don't want to keep putting our operators through this cycle of uncertainty.
[01:49:01] Speaker: I'll second the motion.
[01:49:03] Speaker: And Councilwoman Harnik, do you have any other comments?
[01:49:07] Speaker: She does.
[01:49:07] Speaker: Okay. I just... There we go.
[01:49:09] Councilwoman Harnik: I do.
[01:49:09] Speaker: I could just, I could read the body language. All right, here we go.
[01:49:12] Councilwoman Harnik: Thank you. Thank you. I am so unclear on, there's been a lot of words.
[01:49:18] Councilwoman Harnik: Um.
[01:49:19] Councilwoman Harnik: So, we're saying we want them, the staff, to... Is it, are you supporting exactly what is being said in the staff's recommendation?
[01:49:30] Councilwoman Harnik: Is that what the motion is?
[01:49:31] Speaker: Yes.
[01:49:33] Councilwoman Harnik: Okay.
[01:49:34] Councilwoman Harnik: So, we are saying explore the feasibility, look at structure, sideways structure options. Uh, we're not telling business owners how to do their business, to move to different places or anything like that.
[01:49:50] Councilwoman Harnik: All we're doing is saying we support recommendation number one and two. Is that accurate?
[01:49:59] Speaker: Yes.
[01:50:01] Speaker: Okay. I would like to make some comments. I really have made questions. If I may do that now that there is a motion and a second, may I just have a couple comments?
[01:50:12] Speaker: There's a motion and a second, yes.
[01:50:14] Speaker: Okay, so then may I please make a couple comments? I support outdoor dining. I think it is a great asset. There are many people who like that. As long as we have safe dining decks, as long as they are compliant with what our legal team and our planning and permitting set forth. And as long as they are genuinely aesthetically pleasing both during the daytime and the nighttime, I absolutely support this. So I just wanted to get those comments in. And thank you for the motion and the second.
[01:51:00] Speaker: Okay, any further comments? Council member Harnik.
[01:51:09] Speaker: I'm sorry, we didn't hear that on audio.
[01:51:12] Speaker: Oops, sorry. Yes.
[01:51:14] Speaker: Councilmember Moreno?
[01:51:16] Speaker: Yes.
[01:51:17] Speaker: Councilmember Moreno?
[01:51:18] Councilmember Moreno: No.
[01:51:20] Speaker: Councilmember Nestande?
[01:51:21] Councilmember Nestande: Yes.
[01:51:22] Speaker: Mayor Pro Tem Perdeto?
[01:51:23] Mayor Pro Tem Perdeto: Yes.
[01:51:24] Speaker: Mayor Truby?
[01:51:25] Mayor Truby: Yes.
[01:51:25] Speaker: Motion passes 4 to 1.
[01:51:28] Speaker: Okay, on to item 11, public hearings. There are none. Brings us item 12, which is adjournment at 5:48 p.m. Thank you very much.
[01:51:36] Speaker: Mayor, I think there is a section for information items and I just wanted to continue to commend staff and our HR director and everybody involved in having the opportunity to view the World Cup kickoff during lunch time and have that available. That made it a lot of fun. Just shows the continued creativity for team building and everybody was there with work. I can see everybody was being very productive. So, thanks for making that happen and congratulations, Mexico. Your two and 0 victory over South Africa. Thank you.
[01:52:17] Speaker: Adjourned.