Agenda packet — Palm Springs City Council, July 9, 2024 (part 4 of 5)

Item 1S - Page 21
. ,. ,. ... - .. --11_, ___________ .. __ .....__

7. Owners/Investors with a 5% beneficial interest in the Applicant Entity or a related entity EXAMPLE:

Jane Doe 50%, ABC Company, Inc.
[name of owner/investor] [percentage of beneficial interest in entity and name of entity]
A.

Stephen S. Rados 17.91 %, Steve P. Rados, Inc.
[name of owner/investor] [percentage of beneficial interest in entity and name of entity]
B.

Derek W. Rados 17.89%, Steve P. Rados, Inc.
[name of owner/investor] [percentage of beneficial interest in entity and name of entity]
C.
[name of owner/investor] [percentage of beneficial interest in entity and name of entity]
D.
[name of owner/investor] [percentage of beneficial interest in entity and name of entitvl
E.
[name of owner/investor] [percentage of beneficial interest in entity and name of entitvl

I DECLARE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.

Date
March 31, 2022

PENALTIES
Falsification of information or failure to report information required to be reported may subject you to administrative action by the City.

Digester No. 2, Gas Flare, Filtrate PS
CITY PROJECT NO. 20-25
DECEMBER 2021

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS - PUBLIC INTEGRITY DISCLOSURE

APPLICANT DISCLOSURE FORM

Page 2 of 2 ends

Attachment C
Item 1S - Page 22
WWTP Digester No. 2 CM Services
CITY PROJECT NO. 20-25
April 2022

PUBLIC INTEGRITY DISCLOSURE APPLICANT DISCLOSURE FORM

1. Name of Entity

2. Address of Entity (Principle Place of Business)

3. Local or California Address (if different than #2)

4. State where Entity is Registered with Secretary of State If other than California, is the Entity also registered in California? ☐ Yes ☐ No

5. Type of Entity
☐ Corporation ☐ Limited Liability Company ☐ Partnership ☐ Trust ☐ Other (please specify)

6. Officers, Directors, Members, Managers, Trustees, Other Fiduciaries (please specify) Note: If any response is not a natural person, please identify all officers, directors, members, managers and otherfiduciaries forthemember, manager, trust or other entity ☐ Officer ☐ Director ☐ Member ☐ Manager
☐ General Partner ☐ Limited Partner
☐ Other
☐ Officer ☐ Director ☐ Member ☐ Manager
☐ General Partner ☐ Limited Partner
☐ Other
☐ Officer ☐ Director ☐ Member ☐ Manager
☐ General Partner ☐ Limited Partner
☐ Other
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS – PUBLIC INTEGRITY DISCLOSURE

APPLICANT DISCLOSURE FORM

Page 1 of 2 ends

MWH Constructors, Inc.
8001 Arista Place, Suite 500, Broomfield, CO 80021
301 North Lake Avenue, Suite 115, Pasadena, CA 91101
Delaware
X
X
Randy Lovan, Regional Manager
Blair Lavoie, Director
James Lee, Director
Item 1S - Page 23
✓
✓
WWTP Digester No. 2 CM Services
CITY PROJECT NO. 20-25
April 2022

7. Owners/Investors with a 5% beneficial interest in the Applicant Entity or a related entity EXAMPLE:

Jane Doe
[name of owner/investor]
50%, ABC Company, Inc.
[percentage of beneficial interest in entity and
name of entity]
A.
[name of owner/investor] [percentage of beneficial interest in entity and name of entity]
B.
[name of owner/investor] [percentage of beneficial interest in entity and name of entity]
C.
[name of owner/investor] [percentage of beneficial interest in entity and name of entity]
D.
[name of owner/investor] [percentage of beneficial interest in entity and name of entity]
E.
[name of owner/investor] [percentage of beneficial interest in entity and name of entity]

I DECLARE UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THE FOREGOING IS TRUE AND CORRECT.

Signature of Disclosing Party, Printed Name, Title Date

PENALTIES
Falsification of information or failure to report information required to be reported may subject you to administrative action by the City.

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS – PUBLIC INTEGRITY DISCLOSURE

APPLICANT DISCLOSURE FORM

Page 2 of 2 ends

MWH US Acquisitions, Inc. 100%
Randy Lovan
Southern California Regional Manager
April 21, 2022
Item 1S - Page 24
I I
Attachment D
Item 1S - Page 25

Page 1 of 2 ends

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NO. 6
CP 20-25 & 21-07 WWTP Digester No. 2, Waste Gas Flare and Filtrate Pump Station
Contractor: Steve P. Rados, Inc. Date: June 17, 2024

CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY
This lump sum Contract Change Order No. 6 is to address the following:

This change order for the new Ferric Chloride Dosing System to meet AQMD Rule 431.1, Sulfur Content of Gaseous Fuels. AQMD Rule 431.1 limits the amount of sulfur emissions from the City’s Wastewater Treatment Plant. AQMD has set the limit to 5-pounds of sulfur per day. The Ferric Chloride Dosing System will reduce the sulfur emissions to beyond the 5 lbs per day.

CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER COST
ID Description Qty Unit Cost
01 Ferric Chloride Chloride Dosing System. 1 LS $1,071,999.85 Total Lump Sum Change Order Amount: $1,071,999.85

CHANGES TO CONTRACT TIME
The contractor is requesting ninety (90) working days to be added to the contract time.

SOURCE OF FUNDS
Sufficient funds are available in the Wastewater Capital Improvement Projects Fund.

SUMMARY OF COSTS
Original Contract Amount: $15,905,500.00 Construction Start Date: 07/21/2022 Previous Change Orders:

$248,288.76 Previous Agreed Completion Date: 04/25/2024 This Change Order Amount: $1,071,999.85 Calendar Days Added: 90 Revised Contract Amount: $17,356,193.19 Revised Completion: 9/02/2024 Item 1S - Page 26

I I I I I
I I I I l
'

Page 2 of 2 ends

I have received a copy of this Change Order and the above AGREED PRICES are acceptable to the Contractor.

Steve P. Rados, Inc.

Jason Riedel, Project Manager Date
City of Palm Springs
Recommended By:

Joel Montalvo, City Engineer Date
Approved By:

Scott C. Stiles, City Manager Date
Attest By:

Brenda Pree, City Clerk Date
Item 1S - Page 27
Attachment E
Item 1S - Page 28
MWH Constructors, Inc.
391 N. Main St. Suite 110, Corona, CA 92878
www.mwhconstrutors.com
June 11, 2024
City of Palm
Springs Attention:

Andrew Crider, PE
3200 E. Tahquitz
Canyon Way
Palm Springs, California 92262
Subject: Request for Contract Amendment No. 3: WWTP Digester No. 2, Waste Gas Flare and Filtrate Pump Station Improvement Project City Project No. 20-25 and No. 21-07
Dear Mr. Crider,
MWH is requesting an amendment of the existing contract No.20-25 and No.21- 07 for the WWTP Digester No. 2, Waste Gas Flare and Filtrate Pump Station Improvement Project. Our purpose is to address a necessary budget increase to ensure the successful completion of the project in accordance with our initial agreement.

Since the commencement of the project, unforeseen challenges and changes in scope have arisen, impacting the original budget. As part of our ongoing project, the permitting process with the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) for the Gas Flare, Gas Holder, and Digester Tank #2 has introduced several challenges and complexities. In particular, the conditions outlined in the SCAQMD permit require significant modifications to the Ferrous Chloride Dosing Design and construction. These modifications are essential to comply with regulatory standards and ensure the project's successful completion.

In addition to the budget increase, these design changes will extend the project completion timeline. The original completion date was April 25, 2024. With the necessary modifications, the revised completion date is now anticipated to be March 31, 2025, reflecting an extension of Eight months to accommodate the additional work.

We are committed to ensuring the highest quality and compliance with all regulatory requirements for this project. Our team will continue to work diligently to manage these changes efficiently. We seek your understanding and approval of this budget amendment and revised timeline to proceed accordingly.

Considering these challenges, we propose an amendment to the contract to reflect an additional cost to the budget of $323,100.
.

Item 1S - Page 29
(tl}) MWH
Building a Better World
Mission Springs Water District Water and Sewer Construction Inspection for Skyborne Village III – Lennar Tract 32030-3 2 Fee Schedule Overview
Original Contract: $1,246,123
Amendment No. 1: $17,237
Amendment No. 2: $274,567
Amendment No. 3: $323,100
Revised Contract Total: $1,861,027
Attached for your reference is the fee schedule breakdown of additional costs to the budget
I believe that this adjustment is necessary to ensure the successful and timely completion of the project while maintaining the high standards we have set for ourselves.

I am committed to working closely with you to provide any additional documentation or clarification required to support this request.

I appreciate your understanding and cooperation in this matter.

Sincerely
Michael Dietrick CCM
Construction Manager
CC: RL
Attachment(s)
Fee schedule breakdown of additional costs
Item 1S - Page 30
I I
I
I
_ ., · --· - · J
Michael Dietrick CCM

TASK A - REQUIRED WORK
Labor Hours 498 990 1,488
Labor Cost $ 94,350 181,940 $ $ 276,290
Subtotal Cost $ 276,290
SUBCONSULTANTS:

Converse Conslutants $ 1,875 3,125 $ $ 5,000
Procore Web-Based Document Control System $ 4,882 8,136 $ $ 13,018 Capo Projects Group $ 4,272 7,120 $ $ 11,392
$ -
$ -
$ -
15% Administrative Fee $ 4,412
Subconsultant Subtotal Cost $ 33,822
ODC's
Billable ODCs per Basis of Other Direct Costs $ 4,235 7,059 $ $ 11,294 15% Administrative Fee 1,694
ODC Subtotal Cost 12,988
Total Cost Proposal $ 323,100
City of Palm Springs
WWTP Digester No.2, Waste Gas Flare & Filtrate Pump Station Cost Proposal Summary - Amendment 3
June 11, 2024
Description Project 2024 2025
Item 1S - Page 31
<8MWH
Building o Beiter Wor Id
Name Description
Randy Lovan, Certified CM Principle in Charge $260 $268 Michael Dietrick CCM Construction Manager $191 $197
Jrry Rodriguez Construction Inspector, C/M/S $175 $180
Carmen Laabs Administrative Assistant $106 $109
WWTP Digester No.2, Waste Gas Flare & Filtrate Pump Station City of Palm Springs
Hourly Rate Schedule - Amendment 3
June 11, 2024
Staff Name MWHC Position Descriptions 2025 Hourly Rate
Legal:

All subconsultants will be bound to the final terms and conditions of the prime agreement.

Our solid financial position ensures MWH will endure to see every project through successful completion and is capable of providing the services required for the duration of the contract. 2024 Hourly Rate
Field Office:

We have assumed a “Green book Class A” Field office in a field trailer complex shall be provided for each CM Team member by Others, the Client or the construction contractor. We will utilize the “Green book” standards in determining need of office size, furniture, fixtures and equipment. Also, refer to the “Rates - Standard Exclusions” section above which further defines field office requirements.

Geotechnical Support & Inspection Material Testing:

Geotechnical inspection, materials sampling and testing services of the subgrade & base layers are NOT INCLUDED in the scope of services.

MWH will assist the Client in coordinating services of other consultants (geotechnical, NPDES, materials testing, deputy inspection, special laboratory testing, etc.) that may be hired or selected for the project.

Survey Baseline Control:

Survey services and fees are NOT INCLUDED in the scope of services. However, the coordination of these services is included.

Construction Management Services - Standard Clarification for Fee Proposal General:

Our hourly rate schedule is based on Construction Management and Inspection Service referenced in the City of Palm Springs RFP E20-25CM Construction Management and Inspection Services for the WWTP Digester No.2, Waste Gas Flare, and Filtrate Pump Station Improvement Project City Project No. 20-25 and No. 21-07 dated February 1, 2022. Our final contract budget will be based on the project assignments and the attached hourly rate schedule. Field staffing will be driven by project demands, confirmed by a baseline schedule and approved by The Prevailing Wage:

All Prevailing Wage requirements will be followed by the team and its subconsultants. All team members are in conformance with the State of California Labor compliance requirements. All Inspectors shall be paid the latest conforming wage with rate increase upon notice by the State of California. Overtime hourly rates for Field Inspection personnel shall be subject to 1.5 times the listed rate for standard overtime hours and 2 time the listed rate for standard double hours.

Rates for the Construction Management Team:

Rates for the CM team include salary, overhead, and profit, computers, computer software, digital cameras, digital video cameras, cell phones and cell phone service, mail, telephone charges, technical reference materials, training and personal protective equipment (PPE) including hard hats, safety boots, work gloves, safety glasses and other PPE as required.

The Hourly Rate Schedule:

As included in MWH’s Cost Proposal listed are the Hourly rates for each position for the duration of the project. Overtime rate shall be billed at 1 ½ the posted rate. An annual escalation of 3% per year shall apply for management personnel, and/or escalations per the Federal and State Prevailing Wage Laws for Inspectors, whichever is greater. The Annual rate increases will be reviewed and negotiated in January of each calendar year with implementation beginning on March 1st of each calendar year.

Other Direct Costs:

Other Direct Costs including subconsultants will be billed directly at cost plus fifteen percent. Vehicle and mileage expenses are billed at a flat rate of $1,200 per month for each assigned personnel.

Invoicing and Payment:

All project related costs shall be compiled and submitted on a monthly basis, payable within net 45 days or as stated in the contract documents. Any disputed costs may be withheld with the remainder of all acceptable charges to be paid within the terms.

Excluded from Rates:

Items excluded from the rates are vehicle mileage, printers/copiers/scanners, paper for any and all reproduction, prints, plotting, including plan sets & specifications, and record mapping copies, broadband service, broadband/high speed connections, delivery service, facsimile transmission, trailer rental costs, installation of utilities, cost of utilities, cost of sanitary services, janitorial, furniture, travel and per diem outside the service area for in-plant fabrication inspection. Travel costs outside the service area will be determined after receiving prior approval from the Client.

Item 1S - Page 32
MW
lulldlng Cl --Y411111d
Client: City of Palm Springs
Project: WWTP Digester No.2, Waste Gas Flare & Filtrate Pump Station Estimate: Level of Effort Estimate by Position
June 11, 2024 Amendment 3
Person Position Description 2024 2025 Year
Hourly Rate Hourly Rate Quarter 2023 2024 2025 Project
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
31 28 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 31 31 29 31 30 31 30 31 31 30 31 30 3120 19 23 20 22 21 20 23 20 21 20 20 21 20 21 22 22 19 22 22 20 22 19 21 160 152 184 168 176 160 176 176 160 184 152 160 160 160 168 168 176 160 176 176 160 184 152 168 Construction Phase 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 326 166 166 166 166 166 166 166 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 990 498 - 1,488 Name DescriptionRandy Lovan, Certified CM Principle in Charge $260 $268 MWH 44444444 20 - 12 32 Michael Dietrick CCM Construction Manager $191 $197 MWH 160 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 480 240 - 720 Jrry Rodriguez Construction Inspector, C/M/S $175 $180 MWH 160 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 480 240 - 720Carmen Laabs Administrative Assistant $106 $109 MWH 22222222 10 - 6 16 Total Hrs. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 326 166 166 166 166 166 166 166 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 990 498 - 1,488 2024
Qtr. 1 Qtr. 2 Qtr. 3 Qtr. 4
Work Hrs./Mo
Month
Cal Days
Work Days
2025
Qtr. 1 Qtr. 2 Qtr. 3 Qtr. 4
Item 1S - Page 33
8 MW
Building ,a Bener World
Client: City of Palm Springs
Project: WWTP Digester No.2, Waste Gas Flare & Filtrate Pump Station Estimate: Cost Estimate by Position June 11, 2024 Amendment 3
Person Position Description 2024 2025 Year
Quarter 2023 2024 2025 Project
7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6
31 31 30 31 30 31 31 28 31 30 31 3021 23 19 23 21 20 21 20 21 21 22 2122 22 20 23 19 20 20 20 21 21 22 20 PhaseConstruction Phase 59,812 - 30,532 30,532 30,532 30,532 31,450 31,450 31,450 - - - 181,940 - 94,350 276,290 Name DescriptionRandy Lovan, Certified CM Principle in Charge $260 $268 MWH 1,040 - 1,040 1,040 1,040 1,040 1,072 1,072 1,072 - - - 5,200 - 3,216 8,416Michael Dietrick CCM Construction Manager $191 $197 MWH 30,560 - 15,280 15,280 15,280 15,280 15,760 15,760 15,760 - - - 91,680 - 47,280 138,960 Jrry Rodriguez Construction Inspector, C/M/S $175 $180 MWH 28,000 - 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 14,400 14,400 14,400 - - - 84,000 - 43,200 127,200 Carmen Laabs Administrative Assistant $106 $109 MWH 212 - 212 212 212 212 218 218 218 - - - 1,060 - 654 1,714 Total Hrs. 0 59,812 30,532 30,532 30,532 30,532 31,450 31,450 31,450 0 0 0 181,940 - 94,350 276,290 Qtr. 2
Month
Cal Days
Work Days
Work Hrs./Mo
Qtr. 3 Qtr. 4
2025
Qtr. 1
2024
Item 1S - Page 34
<ll> MW
Building c BeUer World
Client: City of Palm Springs
Project: WWTP Digester No.2, Waste Gas Flare & Filtrate Pump Station Estimate: Basis of Other Direct Costs June 11, 2024 Amendment 3
Administrative
Cost Extension
Description Unit Qty /
Duration
Cost Per
Unit
Units Subtotal
Cost / Ea.

Cost Per Unit Units Subtotal
Cost / Ea.

Cost Per
Unit
Units Subtotal
Cost / Ea.

Project Vehicles & Mileage $ 11,294
Project Vehicles - Const. Manager mo. 8 ‐ 1,200.00 1 ‐ 1,200 $ 1,694 $ 11,294Project Vehicles - Construction Inspector, C/M/S mo. ‐ ‐ ‐ $ ‐ $ ‐Project Vehicles - Deputy Electrical Inspector mo. ‐ ‐ ‐ $ ‐ $ ‐Total Raw ODC Cost $ 11,294 Labor Equipment Software/Permits
Item 1S - Page 35 <lll> MW Building a Better World

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: JULY 9, 2024 CONSENT CALENDAR
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF INTENTION FOR VACATION OF PUBLIC VEHICULAR

ACCESS OVER A PORTION OF MUSEUM WAY BETWEEN BELARDO

ROAD AND MUSEUM DRIVE IN ORDER TO FACILITATE THE
PERMANENT INSTALLATION OF THE “FOREVER MARILYN” STATUE
AT THAT LOCATION, SHOWN AS LOT ‘A’ OF PARCEL MAP NO. 36446, SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 4 SOUTH, RANGE 4 EAST (ENG. FILE R 23- 15-0250)
FROM: Scott C. Stiles, City Manager
BY: Engineering Services Department
SUMMARY:

This item will initiate proceedings and set a public hearing for the proposed vacation of a portion of Museum Way west of Belardo Road to Museum Drive. The applicant, PS Resorts, owner of the “Forever Marilyn” statue, is requesting vacation of public vehicular access over a portion of Museum Way between Belardo Rd. and Museum Dr. to facilitate permanent installation of the statue. The public hearing date is proposed for July 25, 2024.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Adopt Resolution No. _____, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO

VACATE A PORTION OF MUSEUM WAY WEST OF BELARDO ROAD TO

MUSEUM DRIVE, SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING, AND DIRECTING NOTICE TO BE POSTED AND PUBLISHED.”
BACKGROUND:

Museum Way was opened as a public road between North Palm Canyon Drive and Museum Drive in 2018 and remained open until April 2021, when the City authorized the closure of a portion of Museum Way between Belardo Road and Museum Drive.

Thereafter, bollards were raised at the east and west end of the closure, and in June 2021, a statue named “Forever Marilyn” was installed within the roadway, approximately 100 feet west of Belardo Road. Museum Way has remained closed to vehicular traffic since that time but remains a public roadway.

Item 1T - Page 1
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024-- Page 2
Resolution of Intention for Vacation of a portion of Museum Way between Belardo Road and Museum Drive In 2023, a group of Palm Springs registered voters circulated a petition to place an Initiative on the ballot which would amend the Specific Plan to remove Museum Way between Belardo Road and Museum Drive from the circulation plan, and officially change the name of the street from Main Street to Museum Way along its entirety. The Initiative petition was circulated for signature in conformance with California Election Code. In November of 2023, the Riverside County Registrar of Voters completed the verification process and certified that the petition contained a sufficient number of qualified signatures, and the matter was scheduled for hearing by the City Council on December 4, 2023. The City Council, consistent with Elections Code sections 1405 and 9215, had the option to adopt the petition without election (thereby adopting the amendments to the Specific Plan); or put the petition on the ballot of either a regular or a special municipal election. At its December 4, 2023, meeting, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2092, adopting the amendments to the Specific Plan, removing Museum Way between Belardo Road and Museum Drive from the Specific Plan’s street grid.

In October 2023, the City received an application to vacate Museum Way between Belardo Road and Museum Drive from PS Resorts, owner of the “Forever Marilyn” statue.

STAFF ANALYSIS:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 24-_______ (Attachment A), which will declare its intention to vacate a portion of Museum Way between Belardo Road and Museum Drive to facilitate the permanent installation of the “Forever Marilyn” statue at that location, setting the public hearing date for July 25, 2024 and directing notice to be posted and published accordingly.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There will be no fiscal impact from this City Council action.

REVIEWED BY:

City Engineer Joel Montalvo
Deputy City Manager: Flinn Fagg
City Manager: Scott Stiles
ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution of Intention – Resolution No. 2024-_________ B. Vicinity Map
C. Legal Description and Map
Item 1T - Page 2

ATTACHMENT A
Item 1T - Page 3
RESOLUTION NO. ____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS

INTENTION TO VACATE A PORTION OF THE MUSEUM

WAY RIGHT-OF WAY BETWEEN BELARDO ROAD AND

MUSEUM DRIVE, SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING, AND

DIRECTING NOTICE TO BE POSTED AND PUBLISHED
The City Council of the City of Palm Springs does hereby find, order, and resolve as follows:

SECTION 1. Recitals.

A. The City of Palm Springs has the authority to initiate vacation proceedings pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code section 8300 et seq.

B. The City Council hereby desires to declare its intention to vacate a portion of the Museum Way right-of-way located west of Belardo Road to Museum Drive, shown as Lot ‘A’ of Parcel Map 36466, Section 15, Township 4 South, Range 4 East.

C. The vacation proceeding shall be conducted in accordance with the procedures contained in Division 9, Part 3, Chapter 3 of the Streets and Highway Code (Sections 8300 et seq.)
SECTION 2. Background.

Museum Way was identified as a public roadway called Main Street in the 2016 Specific Plan and was shown to extend from North Palm Canyon Drive to Museum Drive. It was opened as a public road between North Palm Canyon Drive and Museum Drive in 2018 and remained open until April 2021, when the City authorized the closure of a portion of Museum Way between Belardo Road and Museum Drive to accommodate installation of a statue named “Forever Marilyn” within the roadway approximately 100 feet west of Belardo Road. On October 24, 2023, PS Resorts, owner of the “Forever Marilyn” statue submitted an application for vacation of public vehicular access over a portion of Museum Way between Belardo Rd. and Museum Dr. to facilitate permanent installation of the statue, attached as Exhibit “A” to the Staff Report dated July 9, 2024. On June 26, 2024, the Planning Commission for the City of Palm Springs considered the proposed vacation pursuant to Government Code section 65402 and found that the vacation conforms with the City’s General Plan.

SECTION 3. Area To Be Vacated.

The vicinity map of the area to be vacated is attached as “Exhibit B” to the City’s Staff Item 1T - Page 4
Report dated July 9, 2024. A full legal description and plat map that shows the area to be vacated is attached as Exhibit “C”. Both the legal description and plat map documents shall be on file in the office of the City Clerk located at 3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, CA 92262.

SECTION 4. Scheduling of Public Hearing.

The City Council hereby declares its intention to vacate a portion of Museum Way between Belardo Road and Museum Drive and directs that the required public hearing for these vacation proceedings be scheduled for the Council’s regularly scheduled meeting on July 25, 2024, at 5:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter can be heard in the Council Chamber of the City of Palm Springs located at 3200 E Tahquitz Canyon Way, Palm Springs, CA 92262.

At this hearing, all interested persons may introduce testimony and evidence pertaining to the proposed vacation. At the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council shall determine, from all evidence submitted, whether the public easement is unnecessary for present or prospective public use, and that the abandonment is in the public interest.

SECTION 5. Environmental Impact.

In accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21166 and Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City has prepared a proposed Addendum (Addendum #3) to the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) adopted for the Specific Plan that evaluates the potential environmental impacts of the vacation of Museum Way between Belardo Road and Museum Drive, as well as the potential permanent placement of the Forever Marilyn statue at a location within the project area. The Addendum has determined that that the proposed vacation and statue placement would not result in any new or more significant impacts than those identified in the previously certified FEIR, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

SECTION 6. Certification.

The City Clerk shall certify the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.

SECTION 7. Notice and Publication.

The City Clerk shall publish and post notice of the above hearing in accordance with the provisions of Streets and Highways Code sections 8320 et seq.

Item 1T - Page 5
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED THIS 9TH DAY OF JULY 2024.

SCOTT C. STILES

CITY MANAGER
ATTEST:

BRENDA PREE

CITY CLERK
Item 1T - Page 6

CERTIFICATION

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, BRENDA PREE, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that Resolution No. _________ is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on July 9, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Palm Springs, California, this 9th day of July 2024.

BRENDA PREE

CITY CLERK
Item 1T - Page 7

ATTACHMENT B

Item 1T - Page 8
Department of Planning Services
Vicinity Map

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
Item 1T - Page 9
--- Centerline
D 500 Ft. Buffer
~ Parcel s
"' 0
"' 0 [I] i;
::,
w
"' ::,
:;

W TAHQUITZ CA NYON WAY
0 0
"' "' S 8 ..J t--------< <>= 5 < ',-----I :r u:I 5 OJ
15 z
~ z
;j
:ii
_,
f >--~>--~ "'
AMA c0 FHl
"' 0
z
~ z
5 z
<
0 :;:;
z
•
.
. ~ E .
.
.
s

ETA HQ UITZ CA NYON WAY

A RENAS RD

ATTACHMENT C
Item 1T - Page 10
Item 1T - Page 11
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:

EXHIBIT "A"
R 23-15-0250

VACATION EASEMENT
ALL THAT PORTION OF LOT 'A' OF PARCEL MAP NO. 36446, IN THE CITY OF PALM

SPRINGS, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 238, PAGES 31 THROUGH 34, INCLUSIVE OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 'A', THENCE NORTH 00°08'00"

WEST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT 'A', ALSO BEING THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY OF MUSEUM DRIVE, A DISTANCE OF 41.00 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID

LOT'A',
THENCE NORTH 89°52'00" EAST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 'A', A DISTANCE OF 393.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 00°08'00" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 41.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 'A';
THENCE SOUTH 89°52'00" WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 'A', A DISTANCE OF 393.00 FEET TO THE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.

SUBJECT TO ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS, RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS, EASEMENTS, OFFERS OF DEDICATION, RIGHTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY OF RECORD.

CONTAINING 16,113 SQ.FT/0.37 AC. MORE OR LESS
ROW WO 23-11-4
Item 1T - Page 12 CITY OF PALM SPRINGS ENGINEERING SERVICES L£GAL 0£SCRIPTION: SEE EXHIBIT ,. A" Item 1T - Page 13
EXHIBIT "B"

VACATION EASEMENT

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS ENGINEERING SERVICES
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:

SEE EXHIBIT "A•
APPRO'ttD:
7648
"l'I:r

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: JULY 9, 2024 BUSINESS & LEGISLATIVE
SUBJECT: RESOLUTIONS TO PLACE A MEASURE ON THE NOVEMBER 5, 2024,

GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION BALLOT TO EXTEND THE TERM OF MEASURE “J”, ADOPTING RESOLUTIONS REGARDING UPDATES TO
THE SALES TAX ORDINANCE; TO CONSOLIDATE THE GENERAL

MUNICIPAL ELECTION WITH THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION,

AND TO SET THE DEADLINE AND RULES FOR PRIMARY ARGUMENTS

AND REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS REGARDING THE MEASURE
FROM: Scott C. Stiles, City Manager
BY: Department of Finance and Treasury
SUMMARY:

The City Council is being requested to place a Measure on the November 5, 2024, General Municipal Election ballot to extend the term of Measure “J”, a one percent (1%) General Transactions and Use Tax (Sales Tax), by removing its sunset; and making various technical updates to the Sales Tax Ordinance; to consolidate the General Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election and to set the deadline and rules for primary arguments and rebuttal arguments regarding the measure recommendation.

RECOMMENDATION:
1) Adopt a Resolution entitled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, CALLING FOR THE PLACEMENT OF A GENERAL TAX MEASURE ON THE BALLOT FOR THE NOVEMBER 5, 2024

GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION FOR THE SUBMISSION TO THE QUALIFIED VOTERS OF AN ORDINANCE TO EXTEND THE TERM OF MEASURE “J”, A ONE PERCENT (1%) GENERAL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX (SALES TAX), BY REMOVING ITS SUNSET; AND MAKING VARIOUS TECHNICAL UPDATES TO THE TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX ORDINANCE; AND
2) Adopt a Resolution entitled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD OF

SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TO CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 5, 2024 WITH Item 3A - Page 1
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 2
Measure J Ballot to Extend Term

THE STATEWIDE GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THAT DATE
PURSUANT TO §10403 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE; AND
3) Adopt a Resolution entitled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING FOR THE FILING OF

PRIMARY AND REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS AND SETTING RULES FOR THE

FILING OF WRITTEN ARGUMENTS REGARDING A CITY MEASURE TO BE SUBMITTED AT THE NOVEMBER 5, 2024 GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION.” BACKGROUND:

Measure “J” was passed by the residents of Palm Springs on November 8, 2011, with an effective date of April 1, 2012. Measure “J” is a tax that can be used for any general purpose; however, the City has a history of using these funds to help with infrastructure improvements within the City.

STAFF ANALYSIS:

Transactions and Use (Sales Tax)
Revenues from Measure J are used to fund, or help fund, many general City services including significant improvements to downtown such as the downtown park and the Plaza Theatre renovation, street repair, many parks’ improvements including playground equipment and shade structures, and many projects initiated by residents of Palm Springs through the Community Initiated Project’s program.

Upcoming projects could include a remodel of the City’s Main Library and the construction of a new Fire Station #1. Measure “J” currently has a 25-year term and is scheduled to sunset on March 31, 2037, unless extended by Palm Springs voters. If approved by a majority of Palm Springs voters, this measure would extend the term of Measure “J” by removing the sunset. The measure would also make various technical updates to the sales tax ordinance required by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA), the former Board of Equalization, that State agency that collects, processes and remits sales taxes to counties, cities and other local agencies. The technical changes are outlined in the attached ordinance.

It is staff’s recommendation that the City Council take action to adopt the resolutions to place the Measure “J” extension measure on the ballot for the November 5, 2024 General Election. Placing the measure on the ballot will give the City’s voters the opportunity to decide the level of service the City provides going forward.

Tax Measure Process
Under State law, extending the term of an existing tax is deemed a tax “increase”. The City Council does not have the authority to establish or increase local taxes, only to put a Item 3A - Page 2
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 3
Measure J Ballot to Extend Term
measure on the ballot for voter consideration. In order to place a tax measure on the November 5, 2024 ballot, the City Council must approve the submission of the measure to the voters by a 2/3 vote of the City Council (at least four affirmative votes). The resolutions also include the specific language for the ballot un question that will be presented to voters as required by Elections Code.

ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLANNING:

This item aligns with City Council Strategic Priority 2, Community Infrastructure.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Measure “J” currently generates approximately $22 million in annual revenue that pays for City infrastructure improvements and other general services.

If approved by the City Council and adopted by a majority of the electorate, the tax would continue at its current 1% rate and would not sunset on March 31, 2037. Rather, the tax would continue beyond that date until repealed by Palm Springs voters at a subsequent election. There would be no immediate financial impacts from passage of the measure, as the existing tax will continue for several more years. However, after March 31, 2037, there would be a significant impact as Measure “J” revenues would remain in effect and not sunset.

The California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) will assess the City for preparatory charges to administer the new local sales tax based on actual costs. The statutory maximum amount of these costs shall not exceed $175,000; however, the “startup” cost is usually much less, particularly given that CDTFA is simply being asked to continue collecting a tax currently in effect. CDTFA will also assess an annual administration fee that is typically a fraction of one percent of revenue collected. All other funding from the tax will be remitted to the City and remain under local control to fund City services and programs.

REVIEWED BY:

Director of Finance: Kristopher J. Mooney
City Manager: Scott Stiles
ATTACHMENTS:

A. Resolution Calling for Sales Tax Extension Measure to be Placed on Ballot B. Resolution Requesting Election be Consolidated with Statewide Election C. Resolution Providing Primary and Rebuttal Arguments
D. Ordinance to extend the term of Measure “J”
Item 3A - Page 3
Attachment A
Item 3A - Page 4
RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM

SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA CALLING FOR THE PLACEMENT OF A
GENERAL TAX MEASURE ON THE BALLOT FOR THE NOVEMBER 5,
2024 GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION FOR THE SUBMISSION TO THE

QUALIFIED VOTERS OF AN ORDINANCE TO EXTEND THE TERM OF
MEASURE “J”, A ONE PERCENT (1%) GENERAL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX (SALES TAX), BY REMOVING ITS SUNSET; AND MAKING

VARIOUS TECHNICAL UPDATES TO THE TRANSACTIONS AND USE

TAX ORDINANCE
WHEREAS, the City of Palm Springs (“City”) is authorized to levy a Transactions and Use Tax (“sales tax”) for general purposes pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code section 7285.9, subject to approval by a majority vote of the electorate pursuant to Article XIIIC, section 2 of the California Constitution (“Proposition 218”); and:

WHEREAS, also known as Measure “J”, and approved by Palm Springs voters in 2011, the City currently levies for general purposes a sales tax of 1 percent (1%) on the sale and/or use of all tangible personal property sold at retail in the City, as more specifically set forth in current Article I (Sections 3.22.010 through 3.22.140) of Chapter

3.22 of Title 3 of the City’s Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, by its terms, the Measure “J” sales tax has a sunset of 25 years from the operative date of the tax, which is March 31, 2037; and WHEREAS, pursuant to City Charter §802 and California Elections Code §9222, the City Council has authority to place local measures on the ballot to be considered at a Municipal Election; and
WHEREAS, the City Council would like to submit to the voters at the November 5, 2024 General Municipal Election a measure extending the term of the current one percent (1%) Measure “J” sales tax to remove the 25-year sunset, with the tax remaining operative until it is repealed by voters, as more specifically set forth in the attached proposed ordinance amending Sections 3.22.010 through 3.22.140 of the City’s Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, by placing this measure on the ballot, the City Council would also like to submit to the voters various technical updates to the Measure “J” sales tax ordinance to conform its terms to the most modern terminology used by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA), the State agency charged with collecting, processing and remitting sale tax revenues to cities, counties and other local agencies within the State of California; and
WHEREAS, this proposed sales tax measure will remain a general tax, the revenue of which will be placed in the City’s general fund and will be used to pay for general City services; and
WHEREAS, on November 6, 1996, the voters of the State of California approved Item 3A - Page 5
Resolution No. _____

Page 2 ends

Proposition 218, an amendment to the State Constitution which requires that all general taxes which are imposed, extended or increased must be submitted to the electorate and approved by a majority vote of the qualified electors voting in the election; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Proposition 218 (California Constitution, Article XIIIC, section 2(b)), the general rule is that any local election for the approval of a new, extended or increased general tax must be consolidated with a regularly scheduled general election for members of the governing body of the local government; and WHEREAS, the next regularly scheduled general election at which City Council members will be elected is November 5, 2024; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code section 7285.9, a two-thirds (2/3) vote of all members of the City Council is required to place the Measure on the November 5, 2024 ballot; and
WHEREAS, the ordinance to be considered by the qualified voters and the terms of approval, collection and use of the general sales tax are described and provided for in the ordinance/measure attached hereto as Exhibit “A” (the “Measure”) and by this reference made an operative part hereof, in accordance with all applicable laws.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated and made an operative part of this Resolution.

SECTION 2. Submission of Ballot Measure. Pursuant to California Elections Code §9222, Government Code §53724, Revenue and Taxation Code §7285.9 and any other applicable requirements of the laws of the State of California relating to the City, the City Council, by a two-thirds (2/3) vote of all members, hereby orders the Measure to be submitted to the voters of the City at the General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 5, 2024.

SECTION 3. The City Council, pursuant to California Elections Code section 9222, hereby orders that the ballot question for the Measure shall be presented and printed upon the ballot submitted to the qualified voters in the manner and form set forth in this Section 3. On the ballot to be submitted to the qualified voters at the General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 5, 2024, in addition to any other matters required by law, there shall be printed substantially the following ballot question:

Item 3A - Page 6
Resolution No. _____

Page 3 ends

“CITY OF PALM SPRINGS SALES TAX EXTENSION
MEASURE.

To continue funding for general City services such as expanding police and fire services, maintaining and improving streets, parks and infrastructure, supporting community non-profit organizations and improving the City library; shall the measure maintaining the Measure J City sales tax at a 1% rate and extending its term by repealing its March 31, 2037 expiration date/sunset, generating approximately $22,000,000 annually until ended by voters, be adopted?”
YES
NO
SECTION 4. Conduct of Election. The City Clerk is authorized, instructed, and directed to procure and furnish any and all official ballots, printed matter and all supplies, equipment and paraphernalia that may be necessary in order to properly and lawfully conduct the election. In all particulars not recited in this Resolution, the election shall be held and conducted as provided by law for holding municipal elections.

SECTION 5. Pursuant to Elections Code §9280, the City Council hereby directs the City Clerk to transmit a copy of the Measure to the City Attorney. The City Attorney shall prepare an impartial analysis of the Measure, not to exceed 500 words in length, showing the effect of the Measure on the existing law and the operation of the Measure, and transmit such impartial analysis to the City Clerk not later than the deadline for submittal of primary arguments for or against the Measure.

The impartial analysis shall include a statement indicating whether the Measure was placed on the ballot by a petition signed by the requisite number of voters or by the City Council. In the event the entire text of the Measure is not printed on the ballot, nor in the voter information guide, there shall be printed immediately below the impartial analysis, in no less than 10-font bold type, the following: “The above statement is an impartial analysis of Ordinance or Measure _____. If you desire a copy of the ordinance or measure, please call the Office of the City Clerk at (760) 323-8206 and a copy will be mailed at no cost to you.”
SECTION 6. Notice of the election is hereby given and the City Clerk is authorized, instructed and directed to give further or additional notice of the election, in time, form and manner as required by law.

SECTION 7. Placement on the Ballot. The full text of the Measure shall not be printed in the voter information guide, and, if not printed, a statement shall be printed on the ballot pursuant to Elections Code §9223 advising voters that they may obtain a copy of this Resolution and the Measure, at no cost, upon request made to the City Clerk.

SECTION 8. Filing with County. The City Clerk shall, not later than the 88th day prior to the General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 5, 2024, file with the Board of Supervisors and the Registrar of Voters of the County of Riverside, State of California, a certified copy of this Resolution.

Item 3A - Page 7
Resolution No. _____

Page 4 ends

SECTION 9. Public Examination. Pursuant to Elections Code §9295, this Measure will be available for public examination for no fewer than ten (10) calendar days prior to being submitted for printing in the voter information guide. The City Clerk shall post notice in the Clerk’s office of the specific dates that the examination period will run.

SECTION 10. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the Measure relates to organizational or administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment, and therefore is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the State CEQA Guidelines, section 15378(b)(5).

SECTION 11. Severability. The provisions of this Resolution are severable and if any provision of this Resolution is held invalid, that provision shall be severed from the Resolution and the remainder of this Resolution shall continue in full force and effect, and not be affected by such invalidity.

SECTION 12. This Resolution shall become effective upon its adoption.

SECTION 13. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS THIS ____ DAY OF ____, 2024.

Jeffrey Bernstein
Mayor
ATTEST:

Brenda Pree, MMC, CERA
City Clerk
Item 3A - Page 8
Resolution No. _____

Page 5 ends

CERTIFICATION

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, BRENDA PREE, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, hereby certify that Resolution No. ____ is a full, true and correct copy, and was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Palm Springs on the ____ day of ____, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Palm Springs, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.

Brenda Pree, MMC, CERA
City Clerk
Item 3A - Page 9
Attachment B
Item 3A - Page 10
RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, REQUESTING THE BOARD

OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE TO

CONSOLIDATE A GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION TO
BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 5, 2024 WITH THE STATEWIDE

GENERAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON THAT DATE
PURSUANT TO §10403 OF THE ELECTIONS CODE
WHEREAS, on ____ ____, 2024, the City Council of the City of Palm Springs adopted Resolution No. 2024-____, calling a General Municipal Election to be held on November 5, 2024; for the purpose of submitting to the voters the question relating to the General Transactions and Use Tax; and
WHEREAS, it is therefore desirable that the General Municipal Election be consolidated with the Statewide General Election to be held on the same date and that within the City the precincts, polling places and election officers of the two elections be the same, and that the election department of the County of Riverside canvass the returns of the General Municipal Election and that the election be held in all respects as if there were only one election.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,

CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS SECTION 1. Request for Consolidation. Pursuant to the requirements of §10403 of the Elections Code, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Riverside is hereby requested to consent and agree to the consolidation of a General Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election on Tuesday, November 5, 2024, for the purpose of submitting to the voters the following question relating to the Transactions and Use Tax.

SECTION 2. Measure Language. A measure is to appear on the ballot as follows:
“CITY OF PALM SPRINGS SALES TAX EXTENSION
MEASURE.

SECTION 3. Canvass of Returns. The County election department is authorized to canvass the returns and perform all other proceedings incidental to and connected with Item 3A - Page 11
Resolution No. _____

Page 2 ends

the General Municipal Election. The Election shall be held in all respects as if there were only one election, and only one form of ballot shall be used. Pursuant to California Elections Code §10403 and §10418, the election will be held and conducted in accordance with the provisions of law regulating the Statewide General Election.

SECTION 4. Necessary Steps. The Board of Supervisors is requested to issue instructions to the County election department to take any and all steps necessary for the holding of the consolidated election.

SECTION 5. Costs. The City Council determines and declares that the City will pay to the County the reasonable and actual expenses incurred by the County by the consolidation of the General Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election. The City shall reimburse the County for services performed when the work is completed and upon presentation to the City of a properly approved bill. The City Manager of the City of Palm Springs is authorized and directed to pay for the expenses incurred after receiving a statement from the County of Riverside.

SECTION 6. Filing of Resolution. The City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Board of Supervisors and the election department of the County of Riverside.

SECTION 7. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS THIS ____ DAY OF ____, 2024.

Jeffrey Bernstein
Mayor
ATTEST:

Brenda Pree, MMC, CERA
City Clerk
Item 3A - Page 12
Resolution No. _____

Page 3 ends

CERTIFICATION

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Palm Springs, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.

Brenda Pree, MMC, CERA
City Clerk
Item 3A - Page 13
Attachment C
Item 3A - Page 14
RESOLUTION NO. _____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING FOR THE

FILING OF PRIMARY AND REBUTTAL ARGUMENTS AND

SETTING RULES FOR THE FILING OF WRITTEN

ARGUMENTS REGARDING A CITY MEASURE TO BE
SUBMITTED AT THE NOVEMBER 5, 2024 GENERAL

MUNICIPAL ELECTION
WHEREAS, a General Municipal Election is to be held in the City of Palm Springs, California on November 5, 2024, at which there will be submitted to the voters the following measure:
“CITY OF PALM SPRINGS SALES TAX EXTENSION
MEASURE.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Primary Arguments. That the City Council authorizes (i) the City Council or any member(s) of the City Council, (ii) any individual voter eligible to vote on the above measure, (iii) a bona fide association of such citizens or (iv) any combination of voters and associations, to file a written argument in favor of or against the City measure, accompanied by the printed name(s) and signature(s) of the author(s) submitting it, in accordance with Article 4, Chapter 3, Division 9 of the Elections Code of the State of California, and to change the argument until and including the date fixed below by the City Clerk, after which no arguments for or against the City measure may be submitted to the City Clerk.

The deadline to submit arguments for or against the City Measure pursuant to this Resolution is declared by the City Clerk to be August 19, 2024, at 5:00 p.m. Each argument shall not exceed 300 words and shall be filed with the City Clerk, signed, and include the printed name(s) and signature(s) of the author(s) submitting it, or if submitted on behalf of an organization, the name of the organization, and the printed name and signature of at least one of its principal officers who is the author of the argument.

SECTION 2. Rebuttal Arguments. Pursuant to §9285 of the Elections Code of the State of California, when the City Clerk has selected the primary arguments for and Item 3A - Page 15
Resolution No. _____

Page 2 ends

against the City Measure which will be printed and distributed to the voters, the Clerk shall send copies of the primary argument in favor of the Measure to the authors of the primary argument against, and copies of the primary argument against to the authors of the primary argument in favor. The authors or persons designated by them may prepare and submit rebuttal arguments not exceeding 250 words. The rebuttal arguments shall be filed with the City Clerk not later than August 29, 2024, at 5:00 p.m. Rebuttal arguments shall be printed in the same manner as the primary arguments. Each rebuttal argument shall immediately follow the primary argument which it seeks to rebut.

SECTION 3. Prior Resolutions. That all previous resolutions providing for the filing or primary and rebuttal arguments related to City measures are repealed.

SECTION 4. November 5, 2024 Election. That the provisions of Section 1 and Section 2 shall apply only to the Election to be held on November 5, 2024, and shall then be repealed.

SECTION 5. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution and enter it into the book of original Resolutions.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS THIS ____ DAY OF ____, 2024.

Jeffrey Bernstein
Mayor
ATTEST:

Brenda Pree, MMC, CERA
City Clerk
Item 3A - Page 16
Resolution No. _____

Page 3 ends

CERTIFICATION

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Palm Springs, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.

Brenda Pree, MMC, CERA
City Clerk
Item 3A - Page 17
Attachment D
Item 3A - Page 18
ORDINANCE NO. _____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,
AMENDING ARTICLE I (SECTIONS 3.22.010 THROUGH 3.22.140) OF CHAPTER 3.22 OF TITLE 3 OF THE PALM SPRINGS
MUNICIPAL CODE TO EXTEND THE TERM OF MEASURE “J”, A
ONE PERCENT (1%) GENERAL TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX
(SALES TAX), BY REMOVING ITS SUNSET; AND MAKING

VARIOUS TECHNICAL UPDATES TO THE SALES TAX
ORDINANCE; TO BE ADMINISTERED BY THE CALIFORNIA

DEPARTMENT OF TAX AND FEE ADMINISTRATION
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Revenue and Taxation Code §7285.9 the City of Palm Springs (“City”) is authorized to levy a Transactions and Use Tax for general purposes, subject to majority voter approval; and
WHEREAS, the People of the City desire to amend Article I (sections 3.22.010 through 3.22.140) of Chapter 3.22 of Title 3 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code to extend the term of Measure “J”, a one percent (1%) general transactions and use tax (sales tax) on the sale and/or use of all tangible personal property sold at retail in the City, by removing its March 31, 2037 sunset and making it effective until ended by voters; and making various technical updates to the sales tax ordinance.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Title and Text. This Ordinance shall be known as the Sales and Use Tax (Measure J Extension)”, the full text of which is set forth in Attachment “1”, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

SECTION 2. Approval by the City Council. Pursuant to California Government Code §53724 and Revenue and Taxation Code §7285.9, this Ordinance was duly approved for placement on the ballot by a minimum two-thirds (2/3) supermajority of all members of the City Council on ____ ____, 2024.

SECTION 3. Approval by the Voters. Pursuant to California Elections Code §9217, this Ordinance shall be deemed adopted and take effect only if approved by a majority of the eligible voters of the City of Palm Springs voting at the General Municipal Election of November 5, 2024. It shall be deemed adopted when the City Council has certified the results of that election by resolution and shall take effect ten (10) days thereafter.

SECTION 4. Operative Date. “Operative Date” for the Transactions and Use Tax means the first day of the first calendar quarter commencing more than 110 days after the date this Ordinance is adopted, as set forth in Section 3 above.

Item 3A - Page 19
SECTION 5. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the Ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

I hereby certify that the Palm Springs Measure J Extension of the General Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance was PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the People of the City of Palm Springs on the ____ day of ____, 2024.

Jeffrey Bernstein
Mayor
ATTEST:

Brenda Pree, MMC, CERA
City Clerk
Item 3A - Page 20
ATTACHMENT 1
“Chapter 3.22 – SALES AND USE TAX”
Article I Sales and Use Tax (Measure J)
Sections:

3.22.010 - Title.

3.22.020 - Purpose.

3.22.030 - Operative Date and Termination of Tax.

3.22.040 - Contract With State.

3.22.050 - Transactions Tax Rate.

3.22.060 - Place of Sale.

3.22.070 - Use Tax Rate.

3.22.080 - Adoption of Provisions of State Law.

3.22.090 - Limitations on Adoption of State Law and Collection of Use Taxes.

3.22.100 - Permit Not Required.

3.22.110 - Exemptions and Exclusions.

3.22.120 - Amendments.

3.22.130 - Enjoining Collection Forbidden.

3.22.140 – Independent Annual Audit
Sections:

3.22.010 – Title.

This article shall be known as the “Extended Measure J City of Palm Springs Local Transactions and Use Tax”. This article shall be applicable in the incorporated territory of the City of Palm Springs hereinafter referred to as the "City." This article shall complement, and not replace or supersede, the city's existing Measure D transactions and use tax, as such tax is described in Article II of Chapter 3.22 of Title 3 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code.

3.22.020 – Purpose.

This article is adopted to achieve the following, among other purposes, and directs that the provisions hereof be interpreted in order to accomplish those purposes:

A. To impose a retail transactions and use tax to be applied throughout the entire territory of the City to the fullest extent permitted by law in accordance with the provisions of Part 1.6 (commencing with Section 7251) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code and Section 7285.9 of Part 1.7 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, which authorizes the City to adopt this article which shall be operative if a majority of the electors voting on the measure vote to approve the imposition of the tax at an election called for that purpose.

B. To adopt a retail transactions, sales and use tax ordinance that incorporates provisions identical to those of the Sales and Use Tax Law of the State of California Item 3A - Page 21
insofar as those provisions are not inconsistent with the requirements and limitations contained in Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.

C. To adopt a retail transactions, sales, and use tax ordinance that imposes a tax and provides a measure therefore that can be administered and collected by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration in a manner that adapts itself as fully as practicable to, and requires the least possible deviation from, the existing statutory and administrative procedures followed by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration in administering and collecting the California State sales and use taxes.

D. To adopt a retail transactions, sales, and use tax ordinance that can be administered in a manner that will be, to the greatest degree possible, consistent with the provisions of Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, minimize the cost of collecting the transactions and use taxes, and at the same time, minimize the burden of record keeping upon persons subject to taxation under the provisions of this article.

E. To provide transactions, sales, and use tax revenue to the City to be used for the general governmental purposes of the City and with any transactions, sales, and use tax revenue received being placed into the City's general fund.

3.22.030 – Operative Date and Termination Date.
“Operative Date” means the first day of the first calendar quarter commencing more than 110 days after the adoption of this ordinance. The authority to levy the tax imposed by this article shall continue until this article is repealed by Palm Springs voters.

3.22.040 - Contract With State.

Prior to the operative date, the City shall contract with the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration to perform all functions incident to the administration and operation of this transactions, sales and use tax ordinance; provided, that if the City shall not have contracted with the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration prior to the operative date, it shall nevertheless so contract and in such a case the operative date shall be the first day of the first calendar quarter following the execution of such a contract.

3.22.050 - Transactions and Sales Tax Rate.

For the privilege of selling tangible personal property at retail, a tax is hereby imposed upon all retailers in the incorporated territory of the City at the rate of 1% of the gross receipts of any retailers from the sale of all tangible personal property sold at retail in said territory on and after the operative date of this article.

3.22.060 - Place of Sale.

For the purposes of this article, all retail sales are consummated at the place of business of the retailer unless the tangible personal property sold is delivered by the retailer or his or her agent to an out-of-state destination or to a common carrier for delivery to an outItem 3A - Page 22 of-state destination. The gross receipts from such sales shall include delivery charges, when such charges are subject to the state sales and use tax, regardless of the place to which delivery is made. In the event a retailer has no permanent place of business in the State or has more than one place of business, the place or places at which the retail sales are consummated shall be determined under rules and regulations to be prescribed and adopted by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration.

3.22.070 - Use Tax Rate.

An excise tax is hereby imposed on the storage, use or other consumption in the City of tangible personal property purchased from any retailer on and after the operative date of this article for storage, use or other consumption in said territory at the rate of 1% of the sales price of the property. The sales price shall include delivery charges when such charges are subject to state sales or use tax regardless of the place to which delivery is made.

3.22.080 - Adoption of Provisions of State Law.

Except as otherwise provided in this article and except insofar as they are inconsistent with the provisions of Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, all of the provisions of Part 1 (commencing with Section 6001) of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code are hereby adopted and made a part of this article as though fully set forth herein.

3.22.090 - Limitations on Adoption of State Law and Collection of Use Taxes.

In adopting the provisions of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code:

A. Wherever the State of California is named or referred to as the taxing agency, the name of this City shall be substituted therefore. However, the substitution shall not be made when:

1. The word “State” is used as a part of the title of the State Controller, State Treasurer, California Victim Compensation Board, California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, State Treasury, or the Constitution of the State of California;

2. The result of that substitution would require action to be taken by or against this City or any agency, officer, or employee thereof rather than by or against the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, in performing the functions incident to the administration or operation of this article.

3. In those sections, including, but not necessarily limited to sections referring to the exterior boundaries of the State of California, where the result of the substitution would be to:
a. Provide an exemption from this tax with respect to certain sales, storage, use or other consumption of tangible personal property which would not Item 3A - Page 23
otherwise be exempt from this tax while such sales, storage, use or other consumption remain subject to tax by the State under the provisions of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, or;
b. Impose this tax with respect to certain sales, storage, use or other consumption of tangible personal property which would not be subject to tax by the state under the said provision of that code.

4. In reference to Sections 6701, 6702 (except in the last sentence thereof), 6711, 6715, 6737, 6797 or 6828 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.

B. The word “city” shall be substituted for the word “state” in the phrase “retailer engaged in business in this state” in Section 6203 of the Revenue and Taxation Code and in the definition of that phrase in Section 6203.

1. “A retailer engaged in business in the District” shall also include any retailer that, in the preceding calendar year or the current calendar year, has total combined sales of tangible personal property in this state or for delivery in the State by the retailer and all persons related to the retailer that exceeds five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000). For purposes of this section, a person is related to another person if both persons are related to each other pursuant to Section 267(b) of Title 26 of the United States Code and the regulations thereunder.

3.22.100 - Permit not Required.

If a seller’s permit has been issued to a retailer under Section 6067 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, an additional transactor’s permit shall not be required by this article.

3.22.110 - Exemptions and Exclusions.

A. There shall be excluded from the measure of the transactions tax and the use tax the amount of any sales tax or use tax imposed by the State of California or by any city, city and county, or county pursuant to the Bradley-Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law or the amount of any state-administered transactions or use tax.

B. There are exempted from the computation of the amount of transactions tax the gross receipts from:

1. Sales of tangible personal property, other than fuel or petroleum products, to operators of aircraft to be used or consumed principally outside the county in which the sale is made and directly and exclusively in the use of such aircraft as common carriers of persons or property under the authority of the laws of this State, the United States, or any foreign government.

2. Sales of property to be used outside the City which is shipped to a point outside the City, pursuant to the contract of sale, by delivery to such point by the retailer or his agent, or by delivery by the retailer to a carrier for shipment to a consignee Item 3A - Page 24
at such point. For the purposes of this paragraph, delivery to a point outside the City shall be satisfied:
a. With respect to vehicles (other than commercial vehicles) subject to registration pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 4000) of Division 3 of the Vehicle Code, aircraft licensed in compliance with Section 21411 of the Public Utilities Code, and undocumented vessels registered under Division 3.5 (commencing with Section 9840) of the Vehicle Code by registration to an out-of-City address and by a declaration under penalty of perjury, signed by the buyer, stating that such address is, in fact, his or her principal place of residence; and
b. With respect to commercial vehicles, by registration to a place of business out-of-City and declaration under penalty of perjury, signed by the buyer, that the vehicle will be operated from that address.

3. The sale of tangible personal property if the seller is obligated to furnish the property for a fixed price pursuant to a contract entered into prior to the operative date of this ordinance.

4. A lease of tangible personal property which is a continuing sale of such property, for any period of time for which the lessor is obligated to lease the property for an amount fixed by the lease prior to the operative date of this article.

5. For the purposes of subparagraphs (3) and (4) of this subsection, the sale or lease of tangible personal property shall be deemed not to be obligated pursuant to a contract or lease for any period of time for which any party to the contract or lease has the unconditional right to terminate the contract or lease upon notice, whether or not such right is exercised.

C. There are exempted from the use tax imposed by this article, the storage, use or other consumption in this City of tangible personal property:

1. The gross receipts from the sale of which have been subject to a transactions tax under any state-administered transactions and use tax ordinance.

2. Other than fuel or petroleum products purchased by operators of aircraft and used or consumed by such operators directly and exclusively in the use of such aircraft as common carriers of persons or property for hire or compensation under a certificate of public convenience and necessity issued pursuant to the laws of this State, the United States, or any foreign government. This exemption is in addition to the exemptions provided in Sections 6366 and 6366.1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code of the State of California.

3. If the purchaser is obligated to purchase the property for a fixed price pursuant to a contract entered into prior to the operative date of this article.

Item 3A - Page 25

4. If the possession of, or the exercise of any right or power over, the tangible personal property arises under a lease which is a continuing purchase of such property for any period of time for which the lessee is obligated to lease the property for an amount fixed by a lease prior to the operative date of this article.

5. For the purposes of subparagraphs (3) and (4) of this subsection, storage, use, or other consumption, or possession of, or exercise of any right or power over, tangible personal property shall be deemed not to be obligated pursuant to a contract or lease for any period of time for which any party to the contract or lease has the unconditional right to terminate the contract or lease upon notice, whether or not such right is exercised.

6. Except as provided in subparagraph (7), a retailer engaged in business in the City shall not be required to collect use tax from the purchaser of tangible personal property, unless the retailer ships or delivers the property into the City or participates within the City in making the sale of the property, including, but not limited to, soliciting or receiving the order, either directly or indirectly, at a place of business of the retailer in the City or through any representative, agent, canvasser, solicitor, subsidiary, or person in the City under the authority of the retailer.

7. “A retailer engaged in business in the City” shall also include any retailer of any of the following: vehicles subject to registration pursuant to Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 4000) of Division 3 of the Vehicle Code, aircraft licensed in compliance with Section 21411 of the Public Utilities Code, or undocumented vessels registered under Division 3.5 (commencing with Section 9840) of the Vehicle Code. That retailer shall be required to collect use tax from any purchaser who registers or licenses the vehicle, vessel, or aircraft at an address in the City.

D. Any person subject to use tax under this article may credit against that tax any transactions tax or reimbursement for transactions tax paid to a district imposing, or retailer liable for, a transactions tax pursuant to Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code with respect to the sale to the person of the property the storage, use or other consumption of which is subject to the use tax.

E. Nothing in this article shall be construed as imposing a tax upon any person or service when the imposition of such tax upon such person or service would be in violation of a federal or state statute, the Constitution of the United States or the Constitution of the State of California.

3.22.120 - Amendments.

All amendments subsequent to the effective date of this article to Part 1 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code relating to sales and use taxes and which are not inconsistent with Part 1.6 and Part 1.7 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, and all amendments to Part 1.6 and Part 1.7 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, shall automatically become a part of this article, provided however, that no such amendment shall operate so as to affect the rate of tax imposed by this article.

Item 3A - Page 26

3.22.130 - Enjoining Collection Forbidden.

No injunction or writ of mandate or other legal or equitable process shall issue in any suit, action or proceeding in any court against the State or the city, or against any officer of the State or the City, to prevent or enjoin the collection under this article, or Part 1.6 of Division 2 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, of any tax or any amount of tax required to be collected.

3.22.140 – Independent Annual Audit.

The proceeds resulting from this transactions, sales, and use tax shall be deposited into the City's general fund and become subject to the same independent annual audit requirements as other general fund revenue. The independent auditor's report, which shall include an accounting of the revenues received and expenditures made from the transactions and use tax, will be presented annually to the City Council and made available for public review.

Item 3A - Page 27

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: JULY 9, 2024 BUSINESS & LEGISLATIVE
SUBJECT: NEW PALM SPRINGS SHOP LOCAL PROGRAM – BOGO GIFT CARDS FROM: Scott C. Stiles, City Manager
BY: Office of Economic Development
SUMMARY:

The Office of Economic Development is proposing to provide a total of $75,000 in support of a direct to consumer “buy two get one” (BTGO) gift card program for use in sales-taxgenerating, local merchant locations. Staff reviewed several online shop local gift card management systems that would offer the City the greatest efficiency and flexibility in quickly delivering the support to the local business community. Budget is allocated in FY25 for the program, so no budget adjustment is necessary. The use of funds can be spread across multiple shopping seasons (i.e., summer, holiday, festival season, etc.). Staff is proposing starting with $25,000 in local incentive for a summer pilot program ($50,000 worth of local consumer spend). The total contract amount is within the City Manager’s approval authority so no Council action is required.

RECOMMENDATION:

Receive and file.

BACKGROUND:

On June 12, 2024, the Business Retention Subcommittee discussed shop local programs that would enhance off-season sales, particularly in the Summer of 2024, where sales tend to slow the most. A number of ideas were reviewed, and support was voiced for an online shop local gift card. No official vote was taken at the subcommittee meeting. Additional shop local programs will be developed over time in concert with local businesses.

Staff researched shop local gift card management systems that could accomplish the following goals:
• Provide an easy-to-use, free platform for local businesses to participate in and for consumers to spend dollars at local Palm Springs (only) merchants; • Activate City brick and mortar businesses to diminish the effects of economic leakage into other cities and off-season drop in spending; Item 3B - Page 1
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 2
Shop Local Gift Cards
• Ensure City investments have a direct and equitable impact on all local Palm Springs businesses;
• Produce a multiplier effect in the program that leverages consumer spending;
• Infuse fiscal stimulus into Palm Springs local economy during off-season and summer months.

STAFF ANALYSIS:

The City reviewed four proposals from prospective vendors to provide an application-based gift card management platform that can be easily used by businesses and customers and provide the necessary administrative services to fully launch and maintain the program.

The City reviewed prospective system providers within the following parameters:
• The system provider must be able to deliver a pilot program for Summer of 2024;
• The system provider must handle the distribution, auditing and marketing of a BTGO gift card program and minimize staff time (e.g., must not require that City staff manage the point of sale of physical gift cards at City Hall); • The system provider would complete the establishment and administration of the program with no impact on participating businesses. This includes developing the business onboarding process/forms, branding and outreach materials for the program, overseeing the system's maintenance, and ensuring the funds’ distribution is secure and proper;
• The system provider would coordinate with the City to ensure that the program focuses on assisting small/local businesses and promoting the shop local campaign at no added cost to the local businesses; • The system should not require that local businesses purchase additional Point-of-Sale (POS) hardware/software to implement the program; • Customers and businesses must be able to use the system easily, safely and securely through different electronic devices (i.e., no separate app to download) as well as print hard copy versions, if desired; • The system provider must have the ability to produce monthly reporting that tracks program progress, status of funds, and the types of businesses benefiting from the program; and,
• The system must provide flexibility over time to allow the City to adjust the rewards by type of business, geographical locations, limited time offers of premiums and seasonal adjustments.

Summary of Bids Reviewed:

Staff reviewed bids from the following (in alphabetical order):

Item 3B - Page 2
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 3
Shop Local Gift Cards

1. Blackhawk Systems

2. ColuTechnologies

3. Factor4

4. Yiftee.

Of the bids compared, Yiftee presented the best option for the following reasons:
• They can deliver a pilot program for Summer of 2024;
• They have over a decade of experience implementing hundreds of gift card bonus programs, including 90+ cities in California;
• They offer an easy-to-use program for staff, businesses and customers to use at no cost to the businesses, and no additional hardware requirements; • They offer a Palm Springs branded e-gift card, online portal for purchasing, and ease of use at most POS systems that accept Mastercard gift cards; • They offer an easy-to-navigate backend reporting platform showing cards purchased (in $ value), premiums redeemed, data of benefiting businesses and overall funds invested;
• There is nominal set-up or ongoing maintenance fees and no minimum purchase volume.

Yiftee, Inc. has successfully launched the same platform in multiple cities including, Sacramento, Murrieta, Berkeley and Palm Desert (complete list attached). City staff confirmed with staff from Sacramento and Murrieta that Yiftee platform consistently delivered customer service to both City staff and enrolled businesses, and that the program generated an economic multiplier of the funds allocated to their projects.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:

The extension of the Program considered at this time is not a “project” for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as that term is defined by CEQA guidelines (Guidelines) section 15378. This action is organizational or administrative activity by the City of Palm Springs in furtherance of its regulatory power and will not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment, per section 15378(b)(5) of the Guidelines.

ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLANNING:

Quality of Life (1D), Advance Economic Development – Stimulate investment in activities that create living wage employment opportunities and increase livability of the community.

FISCAL IMPACT:

City Impact:

Staff proposes using $25,000 from the FY25 Economic Development funds for a BTGO local gift card incentive program (total consumer purchase of $50,000). The remaining Item 3B - Page 3
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 4
Shop Local Gift Cards
funds will be used toward holiday or festival season initiatives. Gift Cards would be restricted for spending exclusively in Palms Springs' merchants that generate sales tax and who sign up as a redeemer of the gift cards. The premium applied by the City on gift card purchases will total 50% of the original purchase (e.g. Buy a $100 Palm Springs Card, Get a $50 Card FREE). Consumers can purchase up to $200 in gift cards per person, with the City contributing an additional maximum contribution of $100 per person, for a total of $300 local consumer spending per person.

If all premium funds over the lifetime of the contract ($75,000) and consumer gift card funds are utilized, this will leverage $217,500 in direct consumer spending at participating Palm Springs merchants. From that, the City will gross $21,923 in local sales tax. On average, consumers of these gift cards overspend on their transaction by $32 per card, generating an expected additional $2.96 per card in sales tax.

Cost of System Fees:
• Yiftee, Inc. Fees: Assuming a $75,000 contribution, there is an eDelivery Fee to Yiftee of $1 per premium gift, totaling $1,450 (based on a $100 consumer purchase with a $50 contribution-funded premium and less marketing fees). • Other Administrative and Marketing Costs: The City can elect to purchase $1,050 worth of additional marketing materials, such as window clings, table tents, business cards, and flyers.
• Summary of Fees: The total fee for a $75,000 premium is $1,450, plus optional marketing materials priced at $1,050. All other money from the fund goes directly into businesses.

Refund Policy:

The City will determine an expiration date for the premium contribution, which can range from one month to one year. Upon expiration, any unspent premium funds will be refunded to the City, minus 10% of the face value of each premium card that still has a balance. For example, if the City pledges $25,000 for a summer BTGO program and only $20,000 of the premium is spent within the allocated time frame, the City will receive the remaining $5,000 back, minus 10% of the face value of any outstanding cards. The amount of this refund can either be applied to the City's account for future promotions or can be refunded to the City entirely via a check. Future shop local programs (i.e., Black Friday; holiday; festival season) can be added to the Yiftee platform as desired. Staff may return for additional budget as required and if the program exceeds capacity.

Return Analysis:

While return as a function of municipal spending goes beyond a direct dollar-to-dollar basis, it may be helpful to review the following table to demonstrate the potential efficacy of the spending in this program. (Figures do not include cost of marketing and fees.) Item 3B - Page 4
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 5
Shop Local Gift Cards
Table 1.1 – Multiple on Initiative Dollars
Consumer
Spend Premium
Overspend
($32/card)*
Gross Local
Spend Sales Tax
Total Direct
Local Spend Multiple
Multiple
(-premium)
$ 150,000 $ 75,000 $ 24,000 $ 249,000 $ 23,033 $ 272,033 3.6 x 2.56x *(estimate at $200/pp = 750 cards @ $32/card overspend) REVIEWED BY:

Department Director: Wayne Olson
City Manager: Scott Stiles
ATTACHMENTS:

None.

Item 3B - Page 5

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: JULY 9, 2024 BUSINESS & LEGISLATIVE
SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA,

AMENDING THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO

REGULATING ENCAMPMENTS AND SLEEPING ON PUBLIC

PROPERTY, AND DETERMINING SUCH ORDINANCE TO BE EXEMPT

FROM FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
FROM: Scott C. Stiles, City Manager
BY: Andrew Mills, Police Department
Jeffrey Ballinger, City Attorney
SUMMARY:

At the City Council meeting of March 14, 2024, Council requested staff bring back an item for discussion regarding a safe camping ordinance. With the imminent opening of the second phase of the City’s Navigation Center, expected over the summer, this agenda item presents the City Council with an opportunity to consider providing the City staff and Police Department with an additional tool for addressing the homelessness situation within the City of Palm Springs. Specifically, the City Council is being presented with an ordinance regulating encampments and sleeping on public property, based largely on the San Diego ordinance, adopted by that City in 2023.

RECOMMENDATION:

Consider and conduct a first reading (introduction) of an ordinance entitled, “AN

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE

PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO REGULATING ENCAMPMENTS

AND SLEEPING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY, AND DETERMINING SUCH ORDINANCE

TO BE EXEMPT FROM FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.

BACKGROUND:

It goes without saying that homelessness has become a crisis within the United States.

And, unfortunately, the City of Palm Springs is not immune to this situation. The City of Palm Springs does not view the criminalization of homelessness as a way to solve the Item 3C - Page 1
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 2
Safe Camping Ordinance
homelessness crisis. Indeed, even before the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Martin v. Boise, discussed below, the City of Palm Springs spent hundreds of thousands of dollars providing for shelter, through a regional approach to shelter before Roy’s Desert Resource Center closed in the summer of 2017. Following the closure of that facility, the City spent hundreds of thousands of dollars funding two homelessness outreach team members to assist homeless individuals.

And, since the Boise decision, the City has sought and received ten million dollars ($10,000,000) from the State of California in order to address homelessness on a local level. Indeed, the City spent some of that grant funding to develop two affordable housing projects, Aloe Palm Canyon and Vista Sunrise II, to provide more than 50 units of permanent supportive housing for individuals experiencing homelessness and leveraging more that $60 million in state and federal funding in the City of Palm Springs.

The City was also awarded more than $19 million ($19,000,000) in HomeKey 2 funds from the State to develop a Navigation Center, at 3589 McCarthy Road. The County of Riverside also provided $15.5 million ($15,500,000) in financing for the Navigation Center and Early Entry Facility (overnight shelter beds). The new Early Entry facility, opened earlier this year, currently houses up to 50 residents waiting to be placed in independent modular units when they become available. The City also began operating cooling centers in the Summer and warming centers during the Winter months, as far back as 2019.

Once the Navigation Center fully opens this summer, it will include a total of eighty (80) prefabricated residential temporary dwelling units and two rehabilitated buildings. The dwelling units will include kitchenettes and bathroom facilities. Sixty-five (65) of the dwelling units are designated for unhoused individuals, and five (5) of the dwelling units are designated for families. An additional ten (10) dwelling units are intended for transitional-aged youth experiencing homelessness. A children’s play area, green space, and dog park are also included. And, as the name suggests, the Navigation Center will not be simply a source of temporary housing. Instead, case managers will connect individuals experiencing homelessness to income, public benefits, health services, shelter, and housing opportunities.

The City has also enhanced its in-house staffing in order to address local homelessness issues, with the recent hiring of a Homeless Outreach Coordinator and a Housing Services Administrator.

Other services, programs, and activities created in the past few years include:

Operation Restore Hope: The Palm Springs Police Department (PSPD) launched Operation Restore Hope, focusing on engaging with the homeless community through trust-building, addressing immediate health and safety needs, and providing long-term solutions by connecting individuals with appropriate resources. The partnership with the Access Center streamlines support by reserving five after-hours beds at the Early Entry Facility for PSPD, allowing post-5:00 p.m. transport to the Early Entry Center with Item 3C - Page 2
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 3
Safe Camping Ordinance
confirmed eligibility. This ensures PSPD accompanies clients for intake and allows for the implementation of a managed intake system for orderly bed assignments. The initiative is committed to inclusivity, equity, and social justice.

R.I.S.E Initiative: The City launched the R.I.S.E (Resilience, Inclusion, and Support for Ending Homelessness) initiative, a weekly collaboration involving City and County departments, local healthcare, and other critical service providers to assist Palm Springs’ unhoused residents with housing, substance abuse, mental healthcare, and medical treatment. Partners include Operation Safe House, Tenet Healthcare, Desert Healthcare District, RUHS-Behavioral Health-HHOPE, DAP Health, Martha’s Village & Kitchen, Jewish Family Services San Diego, Palm Springs Police Department, Find Food Bank, OFRS, Inc., Coachella Valley Rescue Mission, Desert Care Network, DPMG Health, and Cal State San Bernardino Nursing Unit.

Homeless/Mental Health Crisis Teams: In cooperation with the County of Riverside Homeless/Mental Health Crisis teams are on the ground in Palm Springs.

CV Housing First and CV200 Programs: The City partners with CVAG to implement the regional CV Housing First and CV200 programs, which have successfully transitioned homeless individuals to permanent housing over the past several years.

Rental Assistance: The City provides rental assistance to low-income residents unable to pay their rent and at risk of eviction.

Despite these extraordinary efforts, there are still some individuals who are reluctant to accept shelter and other services from the City. These individuals frequently occupy City property – sidewalks, parkways, parks, bus stops – as encampments or sometimes merely as a sleeping location. City streets, sidewalks, and parks are intended for safe and sanitary shared use by a diverse community of users including businesses, government, and the general public for gathering, recreating, movement of people, maintenance, and cleaning, and are frequently used by people relying on a variety of mobility devices, including the handicapped. And, certain public property poses a greater danger to the health and safety of people who may stay in those areas overnight and to the general public if used for sheltering, including near schools, shelters, in open space and City waterways, transit hubs, trolley platforms, and in certain City parks.

It is these limited circumstances that the proposed ordinance would address.

STAFF ANALYSIS:

The proposed ordinance is based largely on an ordinance adopted by the City of San Diego in June of 2023. That ordinance was premised on the holding of a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision from 2019, entitled Martin v. Boise. In Martin v. Boise, 920 F.3d 584 (April 1, 2019), the Ninth Circuit ruled that the criminal enforcement of absolute bans on sleeping and camping on public property violate the U.S. Constitution’s Eighth Item 3C - Page 3
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 4
Safe Camping Ordinance
Amendment1 rights of homeless people, unless sufficient shelter is available.

The Boise Court clarified that its ruling in no way requires that a city must provide sufficient shelters for homeless or allow anyone to sit, lie, or sleep on the streets at any time and at any place. Instead, the Boise Court held that cities cannot criminally prosecute homeless individuals for “involuntarily sitting, lying, and sleeping in public”, so long as there is no option to sleep indoors.

And, in footnote 8, the Boise Court states,
[O]ur holding does not cover individuals who do have access to adequate temporary shelter, whether because they have the means to pay for it or because it is realistically available to them for free, but choose not to use it.

Nor do we suggest that jurisdiction with insufficient shelter can never criminalize the act of sleeping outside. Even where shelter is unavailable, and ordinance prohibiting sitting, lying, or sleeping outside at particular times or in particular locations might well be constitutionally permissible . . . So, too, might an ordinance barring the obstruction of public rights of way or the erection of certain structures. Whether some other ordinance is consistent with the Eighth Amendment will depend, as here, on whether it punishes a person for lacking the means to live out the “universal and unavoidable consequences of being human” in the way the ordinance prescribes. (emphasis added.)

As the Council is aware, on June 28, 2024, the United States Supreme Court overturned the Ninth Circuit’s Boise decision, concluding that the Eight Amendment does not prohibit cities from enforcing bans on sleeping on public property. (Grants Pass v. Johnson, (June 28, 2024).)2
Notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s Grants Pass decision, the proposed ordinance prohibits camping or sleeping citywide on certain public property (sidewalks, streets, alleys, medians, parkways), but when shelter space is available. This is in keeping with the primary rule established by the Boise decision. For purposes of the proposed ordinance, “available” shelter could include space at the Navigation Center, as well as potentially other shelter, such as shelter provided through a hotel voucher program.

In addition, even when shelter space is not available, the proposed ordinance identifies particular locations where camping or sleeping is not permitted on public property. This is consistent with footnote 8 of the Boise decision. Namely, the proposed ordinance prohibits encampments:
1 The Eight Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” 2 Available at: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-175_19m2.pdf Item 3C - Page 4
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 5
Safe Camping Ordinance
• within riverbeds or flood control channels
• within two (2) blocks any school or homeless shelter
• within any transit hub or bus shelter
• within any part where the City Manager has determined that there is a substantial risk to public health and safety, and signs are posted
• when such an encampment would cause an immediate threat or unreasonable risk of harm to any person or the public health/safety, or a disruption to any business, store, religious institution, educational facility or governmental service.

The proposed ordinance also codifies a process for abatement of encampments. The proposed ordinance establishes a protocol for such abatements, including a minimum 24 hour written notice prior to abatement, provision of shelter and service information to any homeless persons present, ninety (90) day storage of any personal property of apparent value, photographing/videoing the abatement process, post-abatement written notice to inform individuals where they can retrieve their items.

Finally, the proposed ordinance would take effect on the thirtieth (30th) day from and after its final passage (second reading) or on the date the second phase of the City’s Navigation Center is open for use, whichever is later.

Therefore, City staff and the City Attorney believe that the proposed ordinance appropriately and lawfully balances the personal interests and rights of persons experiencing homelessness with the interests and rights of other members of the public who rely on public property for its intended purposes. As such, City staff and the City Attorney would recommend that they City Council consider and adopt the proposed ordinance.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:

It can be seen with certainty that the proposed ordinance will not have an impact on the environment. As such, pursuant to the California, Environmental Quality Act, Cal. Pub.

Res. Code 21000 et seq. (“CEQA”), City staff will file a Notice of Exemption within five (5) days following adoption of the proposed ordinance.

ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLANNING:

This ordinance aligns with the City Council’s Strategic Planning Goal 1A – Reducing Homelessness.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The proposed ordinance is not expected to have any significant financial impact to the City.

Item 3C - Page 5
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 6
Safe Camping Ordinance
REVIEWED BY:

Police Chief: Andrew G. Mills
City Attorney: Jeffrey S. Ballinger
City Manager: Scott Stiles
ATTACHMENTS:

A. Draft Ordinance
Item 3C - Page 6

ATTACHMENT A
Item 3C - Page 7
55575.18255\42334819.2
ORDINANCE NO. ______

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,

CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE PALM SPRINGS

MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO REGULATING

ENCAMPMENTS AND SLEEPING ON PUBLIC PROPERTY,

AND DETERMINING SUCH ORDINANCE TO BE EXEMPT

FROM FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.

City Attorney’s Summary
This ordinance updates the City’s existing Municipal Code provisions relating to camping and sleeping on public
property.

WHEREAS, the City of Palm Springs is committed to protecting the life, health, and safety of its residents and all people within the geographical boundaries of the City; and
WHEREAS, the Council finds that certain public lands within the City’s geographical boundaries pose significant health and safety hazards to people who make shelter or stay overnight in these areas; and
WHEREAS, the Council finds that some of these public lands are environmentally sensitive and may be significantly damaged by unregulated human activity; and WHEREAS, the Council is committed to protecting the rights of individuals who cannot obtain shelter and to treating their personal property with respect and consideration and therefore updates the Municipal Code to conform to and address the impacts of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in Martin v. City of Boise; and WHEREAS, the City currently provides 50, and will soon provide 80, shelter beds for people experiencing homelessness, which offer a place to sleep and supportive services including job programs, housing support, treatment for mental health conditions or substance abuse, and security; and
WHEREAS, the City engages in significant outreach work to build relationships with people experiencing homelessness, using a person-centered, compassionate approach to provide services tailored to each person’s specific needs; and WHEREAS, the City provides housing stability support, eviction protection, transitional housing, and supportive and permanent housing solutions to assist people with ending their homelessness; and
Item 3C - Page 8
55575.18255\42334819.2
WHEREAS, the 2023 Point-in-Time Count administered by the County of Riverside Continuum of Care reported 239 people were experiencing unsheltered homelessness within the City, which represents a 7.7 percent increase from the prior year; and WHEREAS, City streets, sidewalks, and parks are intended for safe and sanitary shared use by a diverse community of users including businesses, government, and the general public for gathering, recreating, movement of people, maintenance, and cleaning, and are frequently used by people relying on a variety of mobility devices; and WHEREAS, the Council finds that certain public lands in the City pose a greater danger to the health and safety of people who may stay in those areas overnight and to the general public if used for sheltering, including near schools, shelters, in open space and City waterways, transit hubs, trolley platforms, and in certain City parks; and WHEREAS, this activity has forced students to walk in the street to pass encampments blocking City sidewalks on their way to school and puts students at risk of injury or death from vehicular traffic; and
WHEREAS, there are significant adverse impacts caused by encampment activity concentrated around shelters provided to individuals and families experiencing homelessness, including predatory behavior and drug dealing that undermines the community’s efforts to provide meaningful assistance and long-term solutions for people seeking assistance; and
WHEREAS, people experiencing homelessness on the City’s streets and in transit hubs have been involved in serious and deadly accidents involving cars, buses, or the trolley; and
WHEREAS, people experiencing homelessness on City streets, in City parks, and in transit hubs have been exposed to illicit fentanyl leading to exponential increases in the accidental deaths by overdose among people experiencing homelessness; and WHEREAS, the sustained presence of people in the City’s open space and waterways within the City has created unsafe, unsanitary, unhealthy, and dangerous conditions including water pollution and frequent uncontained fires that threaten people living or using these areas, first responders, and the general public; and WHEREAS, Palm Springs Fire-Rescue indicates that fire crews responded to 54 vegetation fires in the City’s open space areas and 89 rubbish fires last year, which were all suspected to have resulted from human activity in these areas; and WHEREAS, the City annually experiences extended periods of high temperatures with little or no precipitation and strong seasonal dry winds from the east (i.e., Santa Ana winds) that can significantly increase the danger and spread of wildfires, adding to the severity of fires when they start; and
Item 3C - Page 9
55575.18255\42334819.2
WHEREAS, due to the high wildfire risk in Riverside County, Palm Springs FireRescue responds to a vegetation fire with at least two fire engines and eight first responders and these fires are frequently elevated to a First Alarm fire necessitating additional support including brush engines, battalion chiefs and helicopters; and WHEREAS, people sheltering along riverbeds and flood control channels within the City are at risk of experiencing flooding, vector-related disease and other health issues and these areas often contain sensitive environments at risk of significant damage by unregulated human activity; and
WHEREAS, the City counted approximately 200 encampments along the riverbed in 2023 and collected over 150 tons of trash; and
WHEREAS, the City is obligated to protect public health and safety and its natural resources by maintaining clean, safe, and accessible City properties for all residents to enjoy, including parks, open space, and the public right of way; and WHEREAS, to mitigate risks to the health and safety of its citizens and potential damage to environmentally sensitive lands, the Council desires to adopt regulations establishing locations where camping and the maintenance of an encampment is prohibited, regardless of the availability of shelter, due to the significant health and safety risk to those engaged in that activity, the general public, and the environment; and WHEREAS, outside of these specific locations, the prohibition on camping, sleeping, and maintaining an encampment will not be enforced when there are no available shelter beds; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of this Ordinance to prohibit camping, sleeping, and maintenance of encampments within the City while encouraging people experiencing homelessness to use available low barrier shelters and access a variety of services available from the City and its partners; and
WHEREAS, when abating any encampment, the City will provide written notice in advance of the cleared that explains when the encampment will be cleaned up and how an individual can reclaim items stored during the process; and WHEREAS, the City will store any personal property that may belong to a person, has apparently utility in its current condition and can be safely retrieved from the site, but will not store property that is hazardous, practically un-storable, contraband, or listed on the City’s current list of common items regularly abandoned during the abatement process.

Item 3C - Page 10
55575.18255\42334819.2

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Chapter 11.40 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code (Camping on Public or Private Property) is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:
“Chapter 11.40 ENCAMPMENTS ON PUBLIC PROPERTY

§11.40.010 Purpose
§11.40.020 Definitions
§11.40.030 Protection of Waterways
§11.40.040 Unauthorized Encampments or Sleeping on Public Property §11.40.050 Abatement of Encampments
§11.40.060 Abandoned Personal Property
§11.40.070 Enforcement
§11.40.010 Purpose
The Council finds that the City is committed to protecting the life, health, and safety of all people in the City and finds that certain public lands within the geographical boundaries of the City pose significant health and safety hazards to the people who make shelter or stay overnight in these areas.

Additionally, the Council finds that some of these public lands are environmentally sensitive and may be significantly damaged by unregulated human activity. The Council is committed to protecting the rights of individuals related to their personal property and to treating such property with respect and consideration. It is the purpose of this Chapter to set standards for the preservation and protection of human life, health, and safety, to further the preservation and protection of sensitive public lands to prevent destruction of these assets, and to establish a process for the collection, storage, and disposal, recycling, or reuse of personal property found in encampments on public property.
§11.40.020 Definitions
For purposes of this Chapter, the following definitions apply in this Chapter:

Abatement means the process of documenting and collecting eligible items for storage, and removing and disposing of, recycling, or reusing of waste at an encampment according to the process in section 11.40.050 (Abatement of Encampments).

Camp means to pitch, erect, or occupy an encampment, or to use camp paraphernalia or both, for the purpose of, or in a way that facilitates outdoor sheltering for living accommodation purposes or for remaining outdoors overnight.

Camp paraphernalia means personal property used to facilitate occupancy of an area and includes personal property typically associated with camping such as tarps, cots, beds, sleeping bags, hammocks, bedding, camp Item 3C - Page 11
55575.18255\42334819.2
stoves, cooking equipment, buckets, and similar equipment, mattresses, couches, dressers, or other furniture.

City Manager means the City Manager, or the City Manager’s designee.

Encampment means one or more temporary, makeshift, or hand-built structures not intended for long-term continuous occupancy, including tents, that are used to shelter one or more persons or their belongings and that are not authorized by the property owner. Encampment includes any camp paraphernalia and personal property associated with or located in or around the structures or tents.

Open space means any undeveloped public property either primarily in its natural state, including canyons, bluffs, and unimproved waterways, or that is held out by the City or used by the public for passive recreational purposes, conservation, habitat preservation, or that maintains or enhances the conservation of natural or scenic resources.

Park means any public property, whether developed or undeveloped, held out by the City or used by the public for active or passive park and recreation uses, including adjacent buffer lands and natural areas and any adjacent parking lots and perimeter sidewalks.

Shelter means any City-funded shelter or shelter provided by the City for shelter placements where individuals or families experiencing homelessness can access beds and other services or an area designated by the City Manager for use by individuals or families experiencing homelessness.

Waste means any rubbish, solid waste, liquid waste, infectious waste, or medical waste. Waste also includes abandoned or unidentified personal property that is left unattended on public sidewalks and rights-of-way or other Public Property. Waste does not include compost piles, composting or Recyclable Material properly contained and disposed of in a timely fashion.

Waterway means all the portions of the Whitewater River, Tahquitz Creek, Tahquitz Creek Channel, or any flood control channel located within the boundaries of the City of Palm Springs.
§11.40.030 Protection of Waterways
(a) It is unlawful for any person to do any of the following:
(1) build or erect a structure of any type along the banks of any waterway, or drive a nail or other object into any tree or other natural area vegetation for the purpose of building an encampment or any other structure, or to affix an object to any tree or other natural vegetation,
(2) move boulders or large rocks, destroy vegetation, paved roads or paths created by the City, or otherwise reconfigure the natural landscape in the waters of or along the banks of a waterway, (3) drive, park, or bring any vehicle along the banks of a waterway, except in places specifically provided and designated for vehicular use,
Item 3C - Page 12
55575.18255\42334819.2
(4) dig on the banks of a waterway, or
(5) discharge or store waste, including garbage, refuse, or human or animal waste, along the banks or into the waters of a waterway. (b) Nothing in this section 11.40.030 is intended to prohibit the activities of an owner of private property or other lawful user of private property that are normally associated with and incidental to the lawful and authorized use of private property; and nothing is intended to prohibit the activities of a lawful user if such activities are expressly authorized by the City Manager or by any law, regulation, permit, order or other directive from a regulatory authority.
§11.40.040 Unauthorized Encampments or Sleeping on Public Property (a) It is unlawful for any person to camp or to maintain an encampment in or upon any public property, including in any street, sidewalk, park, open space, waterway, and banks of a waterway, unless specifically authorized by the City Manager.
(b) No person may sleep on public sidewalk, street, alleyway, median, parkway or right of way, or in any pedestrian or vehicular entrance to public or private property abutting a public sidewalk, at any time as a matter of individual and public safety.
(c) At all times, regardless of the availability of shelter space or beds, it is unlawful for any person to camp maintain an encampment, or sleep, where such activity poses:
(1) an immediate threat or an unreasonable risk of harm to any natural person,
(2) an immediate threat or an unreasonable risk of harm to public health or safety, or
(3) disruption to any business, store, religious institution, educational facility, or government services.
(d) At all times, regardless of the availability of shelter space or beds, it is unlawful for any person to camp, maintain an encampment, or sleep, in the following locations:
(1) within two blocks of a school that offers instruction on those courses of study required by the California Education Code or that is maintained pursuant to standards set by the State Board of Education provided that signs are posted prohibiting camping that are clearly visible to pedestrians. School for purposes of this section

11.40.040(c) does not include a vocational or professional institution of higher education, including a community or junior college, college, or university;
(2) within two blocks of any shelter provided that signs are posted prohibiting camping that are clearly visible to pedestrians; (3) in any open space, waterway, or banks of a waterway; (4) within any transit hub or bus shelter, or along any rail tracks provided that signs are posted prohibiting camping that are clearly visible to pedestrians; and
Item 3C - Page 13
55575.18255\42334819.2
(5) in any park where the City Manager determines there is a substantial public health and safety risk and provided that signs are posted prohibiting camping that are clearly visible to pedestrians. For purposes of this section 11.40.040(c)(5), the definition of park does not include open space, as defined in section 11.40.020. §11.40.050 Abatement of Encampments
The City Manager may remove personal property, camping paraphernalia, and all other property, contraband, litter, and waste found at an encampment or at a location where a person is engaged in unlawful camping in compliance with the following procedures:
(a) Written Notice Required Prior to Abatement
(1) A written Notice of Clean-Up will be posted on each tent or structure and in any other distinct areas of the encampment providing notice of the date of clean-up and giving a minimum of 24 hours for persons to remove their personal property. The written notice shall also include the following statement, which may be updated by the City Manager to provide accurate and current information:

You must remove your belongings from the site within 24 hours. You should not leave behind any belongings you want to keep. All belongings left behind will be removed by the City.

The City will post an Impound Notice if belongings are stored during the clean-up process.

If you wish to minimize the risk of losing valued belongings, you should try to keep those belongings on your person at all times, in a storage facility, or in visible, sanitary, and safely accessible bags or bins.

If you think your belongings were stored, you can claim them by following the directions on the Impound Notice after the clean-up is complete. Information about how to claim your belongings is also available on the City’s website. You may retrieve any stored belongings without being asked about your criminal background or outstanding warrants.

You may access shelter or services, including access to storage for your personal belongings, through the City of Palm Springs’s website or by calling 2-1-1 Palm Springs.
(2) After 24 hours, the City Manager shall be authorized to conduct abatement of the site on the date posted on the Notice of Clean-Up.

If abatement is delayed or rescheduled, the City Manager may conduct abatement within 72 hours of the posted Notice of Clean-Up without reposting a new Notice of Clean-Up. If abatement is delayed longer, the City Manager shall repost a Notice of Clean-Up with a new date.
(b) The City Manager shall follow these additional procedures when persons are present at an encampment during abatement:

Item 3C - Page 14
55575.18255\42334819.2
(1) When shelter is available, the City Manager shall provide any person at an encampment with shelter and service information and direct them to remove their belongings from the site. The City Manager shall evaluate reasonable requests for additional time or assistance to remove items and may accommodate those requests to the extent practicable.
(2) Any person who returns to an encampment during abatement shall be allowed to remove their personal property from the site. Personal property left behind will be deemed abandoned.
(3) Any person arrested for a criminal offense or an outstanding warrant shall not be required to abandon personal property they identify as their own. Unless the person requests the personal property be discarded or entrusted to another, all personal property of apparent value will be taken to the Palm Springs Police Department for impoundment in accordance with existing policy and procedure.

Where the owner of the items cannot be readily identified or discovered, the City Manager shall follow the abatement process in this Chapter.
(c) The City Manager shall document the abatement process as follows:
(1) photograph or video record the site before any abatement begins, (2) open backpacks, purses, suitcases, and other small storage containers to determine whether they contain items eligible for storage,
(3) set out items contained in bags or suitcases, and photograph the items,
(4) photograph or video record all items to be stored,
(5) photograph or video record the cleanup process, and (6) photograph or video record the site after abatement has concluded. (d) Unclaimed items found in abatement shall be eligible for storage if:
(1) circumstances indicate that the item belongs to a person, (2) the item has apparent utility in its current condition and circumstances, and
(3) the item can be safely retrieved from the site.

Examples of items potentially eligible for storage include identification and associated paperwork, medication stored in medication bottles with identifying information, art, art supplies, musical instruments, and items that reasonably appear to have sentimental value in their current condition. An item need not be in a new or perfect condition to have apparent utility.
(e) An eligible item found during an abatement shall be put into storage, unless it meets one the following disqualifying conditions:
(1) hazardous, including items contaminated with human waste or bodily fluid, soiled items likely to expose others to disease, animal waste, or bugs, explosives, weapons, liquids, drug paraphernalia, or mold; (2) likely to become hazardous in storage, including perishables, wet materials that might become moldy, and items covered in mud; Item 3C - Page 15
55575.18255\42334819.2
(3) practically un-storable, due to large size, weight, or other similar characteristic;
(4) contraband or stolen; or
(5) is on the City Manager’s current list of common types of items that, in the experience of City staff, individuals regularly abandon during abatement, and there is no contrary indication as to the specific item. (f) The City Manager shall record each eligible item to be stored, including the location it was found and the date of storage. Any stored items shall be kept in storage at least 90 calendar days and then may be disposed of, recycled, or reused following the process in Palm Springs Municipal Code section 11.40.060 (Abandoned Personal Property).
(g) After abatement has concluded and when eligible items are collected and will be placed in storage, the City Manager shall post notices at the location of the abatement that includes information how a person can claim stored items. Information about retrieval of stored items shall also be available on the City’s website. A person may retrieve stored items based on a description with sufficient specificity to demonstrate ownership. A person may retrieve stored items without inquiry into the person’s criminal background or outstanding warrants.
(h) Expedited Abatement
(1) In an expedited abatement, the City Manager shall follow the same abatement and storage procedures in section 11.40.050 (Abatement of Encampments), but shall post a Notice of Clean-Up giving a minimum of three (3) hours for all persons to remove their personal property.
(2) The City Manager shall prioritize and expedite the removal of an encampment if:
(A) the City receives direction from County of Riverside or other governmental authority that abatement of the
encampment is necessary to preserve public health or safety, including to address known or suspected outbreaks of
diseases; or
(B) the City Manager observes or reasonably suspects the encampment creates a condition that presents a significant risk of property damage, bodily injury or death.
§11.40.060 Abandoned Personal Property
(a) Any personal property or possessions located on Public Property that are unattended and whose owner cannot be readily identified are presumed to be abandoned and, pursuant to Civil Code section 2080.7, the provisions of Municipal Code section 7.07.020 (Disposition of Surplus Property) do not apply. Enforcement Officials shall make a reasonable effort to ascertain whether the unattended personal property or possessions have been abandoned and, if so, to thereafter cause their removal. Any personal property or possessions found during the abatement process in Municipal Code section 11.40.050 shall first be stored as required by that section.

Item 3C - Page 16
55575.18255\42334819.2
(b) Unattended personal property or possessions that are unsanitary, soiled or verminous may be summarily abated and destroyed. Unattended personal property or possessions that are not summarily abated or destroyed under this section may be disposed of or recycled by the City Manager or donated for reuse.
§11.40.070 Enforcement
(a) Violations of this Chapter may be prosecuted as misdemeanors subject to the fines and custody provisions in Palm Springs Municipal Code section

1.01.160.
(b) Law enforcement officers shall not enforce a violation of subsections

11.40.040(a) or 11.40.040(b), or both, when the person is on public property at a time when there is no available shelter. For purposes of this Section, available shelter means the shelter is reasonably available to that specific person at the time the proposed enforcement is taking place, taking into consideration any disability or other specific circumstances applicable to that person.
(c) Sections 11.40.030 and 11.40.040 (c) and (d) are enforceable at all times regardless of shelter availability.”
Section 6. That this Ordinance shall take effect and be in force on the thirtieth day from and after its final passage or on the date the second phase of the City’s Navigation Center is open for use, whichever is later.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE PALM SPRINGS CITY
COUNCIL THIS _____ DAY OF ______________, 2024.

JEFFREY BERNSTEIN
MAYOR
ATTEST:

BRENDA PREE, MMC

CITY CLERK
Item 3C - Page 17
55575.18255\42334819.2

CERTIFICATION

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS )
I, BRENDA PREE, City Clerk of the City of Palm Springs, California, do hereby certify that Ordinance No. ____ is a full, true, and correct copy, and was introduced at a regular meeting of the Palm Springs City Council on _________ and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council held on __________ by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Palm Springs, California, this ______ day of ______________, 2024.

BRENDA PREE, MMC

CITY CLERK
Item 3C - Page 18

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: JULY 9, 2024 BUSINESS & LEGISLATIVE
SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 5.92 TO THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL

CODE STRICTLY REGULATING CO-OWNED HOUSING UNITS,

DIRECTING THE PLANNING AGENCY TO STUDY PROPOSED
UPDATES TO THE CITY’S TIMESHARE DEFINITIONS, AND

DETERMINING SUCH ACTION TO EXEMPT FROM FURTHER

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
FROM: Scott C. Stiles, City Manager
BY: Jeffrey S. Ballinger, City Attorney
SUMMARY:

This agenda item provides the City Council with the opportunity to discuss a possible regulatory approach to managed co-owned properties. Specifically, City staff and the City Attorney are seeking direction as to whether, and how, the City Council might be interested in allowing and regulating managed co-owned residential properties, such as those marketed, sold and managed by companies such as Pacaso.

RECOMMENDATION:

Discuss and consider a first reading (introduction) of an ordinance entitled, “AN

ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 5.92 TO THE PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE STRICTLY REGULATING

CO-OWNED HOUSING UNITS, DIRECTING THE PLANNING AGENCY TO STUDY PROPOSED UPDATES TO THE CITY’S TIMESHARE DEFINITIONS, AND

DETERMINING SUCH ACTION TO EXEMPT FROM FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.” BACKGROUND:

This agenda item provides the City Council an opportunity to discuss a relatively new business model that began operating within the City of Palm Springs in late 2021.

Specifically, a company named Pacaso purchases residential properties, then sells those properties to a limited liability company (“LLC”), which LLC is owned by up to eight (8) Item 3D - Page 1
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 2
Managed Co-Owned Properties (Pacaso)
owners. The owners of the LLC are thereby entitled to use and occupancy of the residence for short periods of time. Pacaso also provides property management services to the LLC owners, though the owners are not required by Pacaso to use those services.

Although this staff report and discussion references Pacaso, it is entirely conceivable that any number of similar companies might model themselves after Pacaso, just as what happened with other recent emergent technologies, such as Uber (for vehicle transportation) or Limebikes (for electric scooters/bicycles). For instance, in June of 2023, the City became aware of a second company that had begun marketing a similar ownership model, with one residence in the City of Palm Springs.

The City Council considered this matter at the March 10, 2022 and February 21, 2023 City Council meetings. As discussed in the staff report for the March 10, 2022 meeting (Attachments 1 and 2), City staff and the City Attorney have interpreted the City’s existing Zoning ordinance in a way that these operations qualify as a “timeshare” under the City’s Zoning ordinance. Under that interpretation, these operations would be prohibited in residential zones in the City. Pacaso and the second business disagreed with the City’s interpretation.

At the March 10, 2022 City Council meeting, the City Council indicated that it did not wish to allow such operations, unless such operations were strictly regulated, as the City does with vacation rentals.

The City Council is requested to discuss such business models and land uses and provide direction to City staff and the City Attorney as to what, if any, different approach the City Council would like to take with regard to this business model/land use.

It should be noted that this agenda item is not a discussion of vacation rentals. The subject business model involves multiple property owners—not renters. Therefore, the City’s vacation rental ordinance does not apply to the subject business model. This agenda item is solely focused on the business model that Pacaso is currently operating under, i.e., multiple ownership of a residential property managed by a business.

Following the March 2022 and February 21, 2023 Council meeting, City staff and the City Attorney met with representatives of Pacaso. At those meetings, the City identified some of the primary concerns of the City. Namely, the City raised concerns with the potential impacts to neighbors arising from the semi-transient use of the properties by the multiple owners. These secondary impacts include noise, parking, the number of occupants staying at the residences, and quasi-commercial uses of the properties, such as weddings and special events. In addition, the City expressed concern about the impacts to property values that might be caused by this business model, and how that might affect the affordability of housing within the City.

As a result of those discussions, Pacaso presented to City staff and the City Attorney a draft regulatory approach to managed co-owned properties, such as Pacaso’s. City staff Item 3D - Page 2
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 3
Managed Co-Owned Properties (Pacaso)
and the City Attorney worked with Pacaso to refine the ordinance. Accompanying this staff report, as Attachment 3 is a copy of Pacaso’s draft regulatory approach. Below is a summary of the approach.

STAFF ANALYSIS:

Under the regulatory approach, the City would permit, but strictly regulate, operations and uses of property such as Pacaso’s business model. The ordinance would require “coowned property managers” to obtain a permit from the City, similar to what the City requires for vacation rentals.

A “Co-Owned Housing Unit” would be defined as, “a residential dwelling unit, managed by a Co-owned Property Manager, and utilized for occupancy for dwelling, lodging, or sleeping purposes by up to ten owners or ten members of a Limited Liability Company that owns the dwelling unit, along with guests.”
In order to address the City’s stated concerns with regard to impacts on neighbors, the ordinance would go on to heavily regulate the use of these co-owned housing units.

Specifically, the proposed regulatory ordinance would:
• Require a permit in order to occupy a co-owned housing unit. The permit must be renewed annually.
• Prohibit the issuance of a permit for any property that previously had a Vacation Rental permit revoked in the 24-month period prior to the acquisition of that property by the Owner.
• Prohibit a co-owned housing unit to be permitted if it is more than 2.5X the median housing price.
• Prohibit a co-owned housing unit in a neighborhood in which the Vacation Rental percentage cap has been met.
• Cap the number of co-owned housing units to two (2) per Neighborhood. • Establish a City-wide cap of thirty (30) co-owned housing units, for the next three (3) years. This number can be adjusted by resolution of the City Council.
• Require co-owned housing units to comply with City’s noise ordinance. • Require owners and guests to park their vehicles on the property whenever sufficient parking spaces are available.
• Prohibit the storage of trash outside, except in trash containers. • Require “walk-in” trash service.
• Cap occupancy at two per bedroom, plus any minors under 12. • Prohibit home repairs and maintenance before 8am or after 5pm, and only Monday through Friday.
• Prohibit co-owned housing units from being within 500’ of one another. • Require co-owned housing units to be insured.
• Require a local contact person to be located within 25 miles, in order to Item 3D - Page 3
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 4
Managed Co-Owned Properties (Pacaso)
contact and respond to complaints.
• Prohibit Vacation Rental or Homesharing use of the co-owned housing unit.
• Prohibit weddings/events at the co-owned housing unit. • Prohibit amplified sound outside of the house (like with Vacation Rentals)
• Provide for Graduated Penalties.
o Managing without a permit -- $5,000 for the first violation, and $10,000 for each subsequent violation.
o Using as a Vacation Rental/ Homeshare -- $5,000 for first violation, and $10,000 for each subsequent violation.
o Violation related to noise, nuisance, parking, trash, occupancy limits, using for wedding/special events -- $500 for first violation, $1,000 for second violation, and $10,000 for any subsequent violation.

Unlike vacation rentals, which are owned by a limited number of natural persons, and the permit for which can be revoked, the revocation of a managed co-owned housing unit would present a challenge for the property owners with respect to what can thereafter be done with the property. As such, the proposed ordinance provides that, if the property is not managed by a Co-owned Property Manager or is being managed without a Co-owned Housing Unity Permit, and the use of a property otherwise meets the definition of a “timeshare” under the City’s updated definition, the use of that property will be deemed a “timeshare” use, subject to the regulation and prohibition of such by the City.

Pacaso has purchased and sold ownership shares in five (5) residential properties within the City. Under the proposed ordinance, these five (5) properties would be subject to the regulatory provisions of this ordinance but would not count toward the Co-owned Housing Unit Citywide Cap, the Co-owned Housing Unit Neighborhood Cap, or the prohibition on the issuance of a permit in a Neighborhood in which the VR Neighborhood Percentage Cap has been exceeded.

City staff and the City Attorney’s Office believe that the proposed regulatory approach addresses the concerns raised at the March 2022 and February 2023 City Council meetings.

Finally, City staff and the City Attorney believe that it would be appropriate to update the City’s current timeshare definitions. Some of those definitions are contained in the City’s zoning ordinance. Amendments to zoning ordinances require review and consideration by the City’s Planning Commission. As such, the proposed ordinance also directs the City’s Planning Department and Planning Commission to review and consider an update to the City’s timeshare definitions. The update proposed by the City Attorney is modeled after the ordinance adopted by the City of St. Helena, California after Pacaso began operating in that community.

Item 3D - Page 4
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 5
Managed Co-Owned Properties (Pacaso)
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:

This Ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the State Guidelines, because this Ordinance will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and is not a “project” as that term is defined in Section 15378 of the State Guidelines. In addition, this Ordinance consists of regulations intended to ensure that co-managed owned property use of residential property, with the strict regulations implemented by the subject ordinance, remains consistent with other residential uses of property within the City and thereby preserves the residential character of the City’s residential neighborhoods as identified in the City’s adopted General Plan, and its concomitant Environmental Impact Report. Thus, to the extent there is any environmental impact for the adoption of this Ordinance, the Environmental Impact Report for the adopted General Plan is the controlling environmental document.

ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLANNING:

This agenda item aligns with the City Council’s goal of focusing on items that impact quality of life, by ensuring that residential properties that are co-owned by multiple owners do not become a nuisance to neighbors or unduly impact affordability of homes within the City.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Any regulatory approach would be accompanied by a regulatory fee that would be collected by the City in order to appropriately offset the costs of administering the regulatory program.

REVIEWED BY:

City Attorney: Jeffrey S. Ballinger
City Manager: Scott Stiles
ATTACHMENTS:

A. March 10, 2022 Staff Report
B. February 21, 2023 Staff Report
C. Proposed Regulatory Ordinance
Item 3D - Page 5

ATTACHMENT A

Item 3D - Page 6

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 10, 2022 BUSINESS
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING PACASO AND SIMILAR

OPERATIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
FROM: Justin Clifton, City Manager
BY: Jeffrey S. Ballinger, City Attorney

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Discuss and provide direction to City Staff regarding Pacaso, and other similar operations, within the City of Palm Springs.

SUMMARY:

This agenda item provides the City Council an opportunity to discuss a relatively new business model that has begun operating within the City of Palm Springs. Specifically, a company named Pacaso, which purchases residential properties, then sells those properties to a limited liability company (“LLC”), which LLC is owned by up to eight (8) owners. The owners of the LLC are thereby entitled to use and occupancy of the residence for short periods of time. Pacaso also provide property management services to the LLC owners.

The City Council is requested to discuss this operation and provide direction to City Staff and the City Attorney as to what, if any, different approach the City Council would like to take with regard to this business model.

It should be noted that this agenda item is not intended to be a discussion of vacation rentals. The City intends to make vacation rentals the focus of a separate City Council workshop in April. This agenda item is solely focused on the business model that Pacaso1 is currently operating under.
1 Although this staff report and discussion references Pacaso, it is entirely conceivable that any number of similar companies might model themselves after Pacaso, just as what happened with other emergent technologies, such as Uber (for vehicle transportation) or Limebikes (for electric scooters/bicycles).

Item 3D Item 3A - 1 - Page 7
City Council Staff Report
March 10, 2022 -- Page 2
Operations of Pacaso
FACTUAL BACKGROUND:

Pacaso is a relatively new company that holds itself out as a new way to own a second home. According to Pacaso’s website (https://www.pacaso.com/learn), accessed in 2021, Pacaso operates as follows:
“Co-ownership with Pacaso is the best way to buy and own a great second home. From buying to closing here’s how Pacaso works. First, tell us a little about yourself and what you are looking for in a second home. Then, start shopping. If a listing currently on Pacaso is not a fit, find one you love on any real estate site and share it with us. If the home is a match for Pacaso, we will partner with you to purchase up to half of the property in a private and professionally managed LLC uniquely designed for coownership. This LLC is referred to as the Pacaso Home LLC. On behalf of Pacaso, we line up financing for the LLC and close quickly. In parallel Pacaso remarkets remaining ownerships shares in the home to interested buyers. Buyers can purchase their desired amount of ownership from oneeighth to one-half of the whole home. We enable qualified buyers to access funds in the LLC and finance up to half of their purchase. The financing relationship is directly between the LLC and the buyer. Pacaso signs closing paperwork on behalf of the LLC. In parallel buyer signs the LLC owner operating agreement to complete their purchase. Ownership is recorded in the owner’s schedule section of the owner operating agreement.

Following closing the collective owners own 100% ownership interest in the LLC. We transform the home with modern interior design and address any necessary repairs. Owners use the mobile app to book stays 2 days to 24 months in advance. Scheduling is easy and equitable based on the number of shares owned. From there we take care of everything, overseeing local property management, bill pay and platform technology, all from the mobile app. Owners simply show up, relax and enjoy their Pacaso.” The maximum length of a stay is based on shares owned. Owners of one share can enjoy a stay anywhere from 2 to 14 nights. A stay with a duration of 2-7 nights counts as one general stay, while a stay with a duration of 8-14 nights counts as 2 general stays.

Owners of two shares have the option to book stays up to 28 nights.

Pacaso asserts that it is not a timeshare.2 According to Pacaso, a Pacaso home is no different from any other single family residence. Pacaso further asserts that Pacaso coowners agree to several restrictions to help ensure that their use promotes the public interest, safety and comfort. For example, Pacaso states that there is a maximum of eight co-owners for any home, with only one family using the property at a time; co-owners are 2 Attachment 2 to this Staff Report is Pacaso’s January 21, 2022 response to the City Attorney’s December 6, 2021 letter (Attachment 1).

Item 3D Item 3A - 2 - Page 8
City Council Staff Report
March 10, 2022 -- Page 3
Operations of Pacaso
prohibited from having large events or parties that exceed the maximum occupancy of the home; co-owners must adhere to a 9pm to 7am quiet hour policy; co-owners are prohibited from renting the home; and Pacaso encouraged homeowners to avoid parking on the street unless absolutely necessary. Pacaso does not provide any documentation or explanation of how these rules are enforced. Owner compliance with these rules is monitored not only by other co-owners, but also by Pacaso as the property manager.

Also, each owner can book the property to use themselves, or may allow guests to use the residence, whether or not the co-owner is present.

According to Pacaso, as of September of 2021, one residence within Palm Springs has been fully sold, and Pacaso was marketing four others in the City.

Finally, Pacaso has sued the City of St. Helena, California, and has been extremely aggressive in other communities that have asserted a right to regulate Pacaso, including alleging those communities are discriminating against a variety of minority classes.

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK:

The City of Palm Springs regulates where timeshares can be located within the City and taxes occupancy of timeshares. Specifically, under the City’s zoning ordinance, a timeshare project is allowed only in zones where a hotel use would be permitted (i.e., R3, R-4, R-4VP, C-B-D, C-1, C-1AA and C-2 zones, and G-R-5 and R-2 zones when fronting on a major or secondary thoroughfare). So, timeshares are not permitted in single-family zones.

93.23.11(A).)
Section 3.24.020(7), in turn, defines a timeshare, as
“occupancy related to the situation wherein a purchaser receives the right or entitlement in perpetuity, for life, or for a term of years or other extended term, to the recurrent, exclusive use or occupancy of a lot, parcel, unit, room(s), hotel or portion thereof, or segment of real property, annually or on some other seasonable or periodic basis, for a period of time that has been or will be allotted from the use or occupancy periods into which the timeshare project which is involved has been divided. The said right or entitlement to occupancy may attach in advance to a specific lot, parcel, unit, room(s), or portion of a hotel, or segment of real property, or may involve designation or selection of the same at a future time or times.” Item 3D Item 3A - 3 - Page 9
City Council Staff Report
March 10, 2022 -- Page 4
Operations of Pacaso
Despite Pacaso’s assertions to the contrary, the City Attorney believes that Pacaso’s business model meets the City’s definition of a “timeshare”. The City’s definition is broad.

But, broken down, it appears to apply to Pacaso.

Specifically, Pacaso’s business model fits the following, streamlined, definition: “wherein a purchaser receives the right in perpetuity… or other extended term, to the recurrent, exclusive use or occupancy of a lot … annually or on some other … periodic basis, for a period of time that has been or will be allotted from the use or occupancy periods into which the time-share project which is involved has been divided.” Here, purchasers of a Pacaso LLC receive the right, in perpetuity or some other period defined in the LLC agreement, to the recurrent and exclusive use of the lot on which the residence is located. The right to such use is on some periodic basis, for a period of time that is allotted under the LLC agreement.

While a single family residence, owned under an LLC, by up to eight owners may not be the type of time-share development that one often thinks of when they hear the term “timeshare” (i.e., a Hyatt Residence Club or Hilton Grand Vacation Club), by its terms, the City’s ordinance applies to Pacaso’s business model.

Notably, because the properties are occupied by the owners of the LLC that owns the property, the City Attorney believes that the occupants would not qualify as “renters” and therefore the City’s vacation rental ordinance would not apply. This means that the strict regulations adopted by the City for vacation rentals (such as special noise regulations, limits on numbers of stays, significant fines for violations, etc.) do not currently apply to occupants of Pacaso properties.

In addition to regulating where time-shares can be located within the City, the Palm Springs Municipal Code (PSMC) also taxes the use of time-shares, although in a manner slightly differently than hotels and vacation rentals. Specifically, the City has both a Transient Occupancy Tax (“TOT”) (PSMC Chapter 3.24) as well as a Time-Share Occupancy Tax (PSMC Chapter 3.28). The City’s TOT, imposed on short term hotel and vacation rentals, is set at 11½% of the nightly rent. (PSMC 3.24.030(a).) The City’s TimeShare Occupancy Tax is set at Four Dollars ($4.00) per night of occupancy.

OPTIONS:

City Staff is seeking policy direction from the City Council as to how the City Council would like to address business models such as proposed by Pacaso. Some options include:
• Maintain the City’s current prohibition on time-shares in single-family residential zones.
• Maintain the City’s current prohibition on time-shares in single-family residential zones, but update the City’s ordinances.
• Allow operations such as Pacaso’s, but subject them to a strict regulatory regime, similar to the City’s vacation rental ordinance.

Item 3D Item 3A - 4 - Page 10
City Council Staff Report
March 10, 2022 -- Page 5
Operations of Pacaso
Option 1: Maintain the City’s current prohibition on time-shares As discussed in the City’s December 6, 2022 letter to Pacaso, there are several policy reasons why the City Council might want to continue prohibiting business models such as Pacaso’s in single-family residential zones. Namely, Pacaso’s business model of purchasing properties, not as a primary residence, but instead exclusively for secondary, vacation occupancy, limits the number of homes that would be available for use primarily as a residence.

Given the aggressive, litigious approach taken by Pacaso in St. Helena, as between this Option and Option 2, below, the City Attorney and City staff would recommend Option 2.

Option 2: Maintain the City’s current prohibition on time-shares, but update the City’s ordinances
Other cities that have encountered Pacaso have chosen to update their ordinances. For instance, the City of St. Helena’s Planning Commission is scheduled to consider an update to its ordinance, which prohibits time-shares in residential zones, on March 1, 2022. (https://sthelena.civicweb.net/Portal/MeetingInformation.aspx?Org=Cal&Id=905) As part of that proposed ordinance, the City has extensively documented the policy basis for its prohibition, including protecting the residential character of neighborhoods, as well as the legal basis for doing so.

The City of Sonoma has adopted an urgency ordinance to prohibit time-shares in all zones, based on state law definitions (similar to St. Helena’s approach). It also makes advertising time-shares a municipal code violation. The City will also be following up with non-urgency ordinance.

The City of Hermosa Beach’s Planning Commission is scheduled to consider a similar ordinance on March 15.

Option 3: Allow operations such as Pacaso’s, but subject them to a strict regulatory regime, similar to the City’s vacation rental ordinance As discussed above, this agenda item is not intended to address vacation rentals. And, vacation rentals in Palm Springs are allowed only as “ancillary and secondary” uses to the residential use of property, PSMC 5.25.020(a), whereas Pacaso properties are purchased and sold by Pacaso exclusively as temporary, secondary vacation homes.

Therefore, the two could, from a legal perspective, be treated differently. That said, from a neighbor’s perspective, the use and occupancy of a Pacaso home may not be significantly different from the use and occupancy of a vacation rental.

Therefore, should the Council, as a policy matter, wish to allow the use of properties such as Pacaso’s business model, it might be advisable to adopt similarly strict regulations, as has been done with vacation rentals.

Item 3D Item 3A - 5 - Page 11
City Council Staff Report
March 10, 2022 -- Page 6
Operations of Pacaso
CEQA DETERMINATION:

This discussion and possible direction does not constitute a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), as it is merely a discussion and possible research.

If any ordinance is brought forward, the City will analyze such ordinance, in accordance with CEQA.

FISCAL IMPACTS:

Assuming a Pacaso property pays its Time-Share Occupancy Tax for every day of the year, the revenue to the City would be fairly minimal, at $1,460 per year, per property.

Pacaso asserts that its business model positively impacts local businesses and the City.

However, the City has seen no evidence of that, in the form of economic studies or analyses.

CONCLUSION:

Therefore, City staff and the City Attorney request that the City Council provide policy direction with regard to whether and how to address business models such as Pacaso’s.

REVIEWED BY:

City Attorney: Jeffrey S. Ballinger
City Manager: Justin Clifton
ATTACHMENTS:

1. City Attorney Letter to Pacaso, dated December 6, 2021.

2. Pacaso Response Letter dated February 10, 2022.

Item 3D Item 3A - 6 - Page 12
55575.18100\34590098.1

Indian Wells
(760) 568-2611
Irvine
(949) 263-2600
Los Angeles
(213) 617-8100
Manhattan Beach
(310) 643-8448
Ontario
(909) 989-8584
655 West Broadway, 15th Floor, San Diego, CA 92101
Phone: (619) 525-1300 | Fax: (619) 233-6118 | www.bbklaw.com Riverside
(951) 686-1450
Sacramento
(916) 325-4000
San Diego
(619) 525-1300
Walnut Creek
(925) 977-3300
Washington, DC
(202) 785-0600
Jeffrey S. Ballinger
(619) 525-1343
[email protected]
December 6, 2021
VIA E-MAIL [email protected]
Ellen Haberle
Director, Government & Industry Relations
Pacaso.com
2021 Fillmore St. Suite 183
San Francisco, CA 94115
Re: Pacaso’s Operations within the City of Palm Springs, California Dear Ms. Haberle:

As you know, this law firm serves as City Attorney for the City of Palm Springs, California.

In that capacity, we are writing to advise Pacaso.com that Pacaso’s current operations within the City are unlawful and must cease immediately.

While I appreciate your recent efforts to meet with City officials and present Pacaso’s position as to why the City’s timeshare ordinance does not apply to Pacaso, as set forth more fully below, such a position it not legally tenable.

Pacaso is a company that holds itself out as a new way to own a second home. According to Pacaso’s website (https://www.pacaso.com/learn), accessed earlier this year, Pacaso operates as follows:
“Co-ownership with Pacaso is the best way to buy and own a great second home.

From buying to closing here’s how Pacaso works. First, tell us a little about yourself and what you are looking for in a second home. Then, start shopping. If a listing currently on Pacaso is not a fit, find one you love on any real estate site and share it with us. If the home is a match for Pacaso, we will partner with you to purchase up to half of the property in a private and professionally managed LLC uniquely designed for co-ownership. This LLC is referred to as the Pacaso Home LLC. On behalf of Pacaso, we line up financing for the LLC and close quickly. In parallel Pacaso remarkets remaining ownerships shares in the home to interested buyers. Buyers can purchase their desired amount of ownership from one-eighth Item 3D - Page 13 Item 3A - 7
BEST BEST & KRIEGER ~ ATT OR NEYS AT L A W
55575.18100\34590098.1
VIA E-MAIL [email protected]
Ellen Haberle
December 6, 2021

Page 2 ends

to one-half of the whole home. We enable qualified buyers to access funds in the LLC and finance up to half of their purchase. The financing relationship is directly between the LLC and the buyer. Pacaso signs closing paperwork on behalf of the LLC. In parallel buyer signs the LLC owner operating agreement to complete their purchase. Ownership is recorded in the owner’s schedule section of the owner operating agreement. Following closing the collective owners own 100% ownership interest in the LLC. We transform the home with modern interior design and address any necessary repairs. Owners use the mobile app to book stays 2 days to 24 months in advance. Scheduling is easy and equitable based on the number of shares owned. From there we take care of everything, overseeing local property management, bill pay and platform technology, all from the mobile app. Owners simply show up, relax and enjoy their Pacaso.”
The maximum length of a stay is based on shares owned. Owners of one share can enjoy a stay anywhere from 2 to 14 nights. A stay with a duration of 2-7 nights counts as one general stay, while a stay with a duration of 8-14 nights counts as 2 general stays. Owners of two shares have the option to book stays up to 28 nights.

Pacaso asserts that the properties that they sell and manage are not timeshares. According to Pacaso, a Pacaso home is no different from any other single family residence. Pacaso further asserts that Pacaso co-owners agree to several restrictions to help ensure that their use promotes the public interest, safety and comfort. For example, Pacaso states that there is a maximum of eight co-owners for any home, with only one family using the property at a time; co-owners are prohibited from having large events or parties that exceed the maximum occupancy of the home; co-owners must adhere to a 9pm to 7am quiet hour policy; co-owners are prohibited from renting the home; and Pacaso encouraged homeowners to avoid parking on the street unless absolutely necessary. However, Pacaso does not provide any documentation or explanation of how these rules are enforced. The stays are reserved on an app, and while each co-owner is prohibited from renting the home as a short-term rental, they are permitted to allow other guests to stay there during their allotted days.

According to Pacaso, as of September, one single-family residence within Palm Springs has been fully sold, and Pacaso was marketing four others within the City.

City of Palm Springs Timeshare Ordinance
The City of Palm Springs regulates where timeshares can be located within the City and taxes occupancy of timeshares. Specifically, under the City’s zoning ordinance, a timeshare Item 3D - Page 14 Item 3A - 8
BEST BEST & KRIEGER ~ ATT OR NEYS AT LAW
55575.18100\34590098.1
VIA E-MAIL [email protected]
Ellen Haberle
December 6, 2021

Page 3 ends

project is allowed only in those zoning districts where a hotel use would be permitted (i.e., R-3, R-4, R-4VP, C-B-D, C-1, C-1AA and C-2 zones, and G-R-5 and R-2 zones when fronting on a major or secondary thoroughfare). (Palm Springs Zoning Code, § 93.23.11(B).) Indeed, such uses are not allowed by right, but instead require a conditional use permit. Notably, timeshares are not permitted in single-family zones.

The City’s Zoning Ordinance defines a “timeshare” as follows:
“…a “time-share project” is one in which time-share rights or entitlement to use or occupy any real property or portion thereof has been divided as defined in Section 3.24.020(7) of the Palm Springs Municipal Code into twelve (12) or more time periods of such rights or entitlement.” (PSZC, § 93.23.11(A).) Section 3.24.020(7) defines timeshares, for purposes of taxation. It defines a “timeshare” as
“occupancy related to the situation wherein a purchaser receives the right or entitlement in perpetuity, for life, or for a term of years or other extended term, to the recurrent, exclusive use or occupancy of a lot, parcel, unit, room(s), hotel or portion thereof, or segment of real property, annually or on some other seasonable or periodic basis, for a period of time that has been or will be allotted from the use or occupancy periods into which the time-share project which is involved has been divided. The said right or entitlement to occupancy may attach in advance to a specific lot, parcel, unit, room(s), or portion of a hotel, or segment of real property, or may involve designation or selection of the same at a future time or times.” Despite Pacaso’s assertions to the contrary, Pacaso’s business model meets the City’s Ordinance’s definition of a “timeshare”. The City’s definition, broken down into its constituent parts, applies to Pacaso.

Specifically, Pacaso’s business model fits the following definition: “wherein a purchaser receives the right in perpetuity… or other extended term, to the recurrent, exclusive use or occupancy of a lot … annually or on some other … periodic basis, for a period of time that has been or will be allotted from the use or occupancy periods into which the time-share project which is involved has been divided.”
Here, purchasers of a Pacaso LLC receive the right, in perpetuity or some other period defined in the LLC agreement, to the recurrent and exclusive use of the lot on which the residence Item 3D - Page 15 Item 3A - 9
BEST BEST & KRIEGER ~ ATT OR NEYS AT LAW
55575.18100\34590098.1
VIA E-MAIL [email protected]
Ellen Haberle
December 6, 2021

Page 4 ends

is located. The right to such use is on some periodic basis, for a period of time that is allotted under the LLC agreement.

Thus, by its terms, the City’s ordinance applies to a use such as Pacaso’s. As such, Pacaso’s operations are not permitted in single family-zones within the City of Palm Springs, California.

In addition to the City’s Zoning Ordinance, the City’s business license ordinance requires any party that is transacting any business within the City to first procure a business license and pay the applicable business license tax. (Palm Springs Municipal Code, § 3.48.010.) Pacaso does not possess a City business license, nor has it paid any business license tax to the City. As a result, Pacaso’s operations within the City also are in conflict with the City’s business license ordinance.

Finally, several significant policy reasons justify the City’s prohibition against timeshares in single-family zones. As the City’s Housing Element of the General Plan states, “Palm Springs considers housing affordability to be a critical issue. The inability to afford housing leads to a number of undesirable situations, including the doubling up of families in a single home, overextension of a household’s financial resources, premature deterioration of housing due to the high number of occupants, situations where children and seniors cannot afford to live near other family members because of the lack of affordable housing options, and in more extreme cases, homelessness.” (City of Palm Springs General Plan, Housing Element, p. 3-19, (2014-2019).)
For every house that Pacaso sells to one of its limited liability corporations, to be used as a second, vacation home, that house becomes unavailable to a buyer or renter who could live there full time. This necessarily reduces the amount of housing stock that is available for full time residents in the City. The reduction in housing stock, in turn, feeds the affordability crisis, making the remaining houses within the City more costly.

Pacaso may claim that it only purchases and sells “luxury” homes, and therefore does not impact the availability of affordable housing. However, basic laws of supply and demand dictate that every home that is made unavailable to a full time resident, whether “luxury” or not, necessarily reduces the supply of homes, and therefore reduces the affordability of housing in the City.

One of the policies of the City’s Housing Elements is to “protect established single-family residential neighborhoods from the transition, intensification, and encroachment of uses that Item 3D - Page 16 Item 3A - 10
BEST BEST & KRIEGER ~ ATT OR NEYS AT LAW
55575.18100\34590098.1
VIA E-MAIL [email protected]
Ellen Haberle
December 6, 2021

Page 5 ends

detract and/or change the character of the neighborhood.” (Housing Element, HS1.8, p. 3-63.) Pacaso portrays its business model as “the modern way to buy and own a second home”. However, Pacaso’s “modern way” involves up to eight (8) investors and their guests rotating occupancy throughout the year. Although the LLC investors are not technically “renters”, neighbors can expect the property to have many of the secondary impacts of vacation rentals, which are currently prohibited in many Coachella Valley cities and heavily regulated in Palm Springs. For example, house cleaners will have to come to the home in between each stay, and the home can turn over multiple times in a week. To a neighbor, that impact is very much the same as if the occupants were short-term vacation renters. In addition, the “co-owners” of the limited liability company really have no connection with one another, other than their investment in the company. All of this necessarily changes the character of a neighborhood, in contravention of the City’s stated policy of preserving the single-family residential character of its neighborhoods.

Another Housing Element policy is to “preserve the supply of affordable rental housing in the community, including mobile home parks, publicly subsidized rental housing, and special needs housing.” (Housing Element, HS2.9, p. 3-68.) As stated above, Pacaso’s business model removes single-family homes from the housing market for individuals or families who wish to reside in Palm Springs and therefore reduces the supply of affordable rental housing for those individuals or families.

Therefore, Pacaso’s current operations within the City are unlawful and must cease immediately.

Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,
Jeffrey S. Ballinger
of BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP
City Attorney
City of Palm Springs
Item 3D - Page 17 Item 3A - 11
BEST BEST & KRIEGER ~ ATT OR NEYS AT LAW
55575.18100\34590098.1
VIA E-MAIL [email protected]
Ellen Haberle
December 6, 2021

Page 6 ends

cc: Hon. Mayor and Councilmembers
Justin Clifton, City Manager
Teresa Gallavan, Asst. City Manager
Flinn Fagg, Development Services Director
Item 3D - Page 18 Item 3A - 12
BEST BEST & KRIEGER ~ ATT OR NEYS AT LAW

SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY LLP
Palm Springs, CA
T (760) 322-2275
Indian Wells, CA
T (760) 322- 9240
Costa Mesa, CA
T (714) 435-9592
San Diego, CA
T (619) 501-4540
Princeton, NJ
T (609) 955-3393
New York, NY
T (212) 829-4399
www.sbemp.com
BRUCE T. BAUER, ESQ.

Of Counsel

ADMITTED IN CA
REPLY TO:
1800 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
Palm Springs, California 92262
T (760) 322-2275 • F (760) 322-2107
[email protected]
January 21, 2022

VIA EMAIL
Jeff Ballinger, Esq.

City Attorney, City of Palm Springs
[email protected]
Re: City of Palm Springs’ Correspondence of Dec. 6, 2021, and Pacaso’s Operations within the City of Palm Springs, California
Dear Mr. Ballinger:

As you know, our office has been retained to represent Pacaso in connection with the City of Palm Springs’ (the “City”) correspondence of December 6, 2021.

In its December 6th correspondence, the City demanded that Pacaso cease its current operations in the City. In that regard, the City identified three (3) points of concern with Pacaso’s operations within the City: (1) that Pacaso’s operations violate the City’s time share ordinances (Palm Springs Municipal Code § 93.23.11(A)); (2) Pacaso had not obtained a business license to pay the applicable business license tax (Palm Springs Municipal Code, § 3.48.010); and (3) Pacaso’s business model is incongruent with components of the City’s General Plan, i.e., the Housing Element since it negatively impacts the supply of affordable housing in the City and because Pacaso’s model “looks like” short term vacation rentals.

We will address the above three (3) concerns in the order you addressed them. The City provided the lengthiest analysis to the last of the City’s concerns, i.e., alleged violation of the City’s Housing Element policy. In our telephone conversation regarding the City’s letter, you confirmed that issue was indeed the City’s chief concern with Pacaso’s operations in the City. Before we discuss the City’s concerns, we have provided a little more background into Pacaso and its operations.

Background and Pacaso’s Business Model
The COVID-19 pandemic has fundamentally shifted the housing market in the United States and changed demand for second homes. An analysis from Redfin found that as of November 2021, demand for second homes was 83% above pre-pandemic levels. Reflecting low mortgage rates and corporate shifts towards permanent remote work policies, more people are choosing to relocate to second home destinations or buy second homes there.

Item 3D - Page 19 Item 3A - 13
S:E~P

A T T O R N E Y S
Jeff Ballinger, Esq.

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
January 21, 2022

Page 2 ends

Operating in this changed environment, Pacaso seeks to provide second home buyers a better option than a moderately-priced whole second home. By facilitating co-ownership, Pacaso empowers buyers to up level their focus toward luxury properties and away from lower price points, benefitting buyers and reducing competition for homes needed by those who live and work in Palm Springs full-time.

Pacaso’s approach also lowers the barriers to second home ownership by simplifying the process, which opens the door to greater diversity. Second home ownership has traditionally, been accessible only for elite and predominantly white buyers. In contrast, Pacaso’s owner group is organically diverse; as of June 2021, 30% of Pacaso’s clients were non-white or identified as LGBTQ+. Pacaso organizes the ownership group, manages the legal process, and provides a property management service to streamline the home ownership experience for the co-owners. The concept of co-ownership through an LLC is not new; but Pacaso’s simplification of the process in a way that makes the experience accessible to people from traditionally underrepresented communities.

Pacaso and its diverse clientele provide the City with an opportunity to be a partner, to embrace homeowners who are invested in the local community for the long-term, and to enrich and diversify the City’s community. We believe then that rather than be opposed to this model that the City should embrace the opportunity that Pacaso’s business model provides to better utilize the housing stock and support broader homeownership opportunities in the City.

We will now analyze the three (3) points that the City raised in its December 6th letter.

Analysis
(1) Pacaso’s Operations Do Not Violate the City’s Time Share Ordinances.

As set forth herein, the City’s attempt to challenge Pacaso under the City’s time share ordinance is flawed for several reasons. Despite the City’s assertions to the contrary, Pacaso’s business model does not meet the City’s Ordinance’s definition of a “time share”.

The City’s Zoning Ordinance defines a “time share” as follows:
…a “time-share project” is one in which time-share rights or entitlement to use or occupy any real property or portion thereof has been divided as defined in Section

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
January 21, 2022

Page 3 ends

or periodic basis, for a period of time that has been or will be allotted from the use or occupancy periods into which the time-share project which is involved has been divided. The said right or entitlement to occupancy may attach in advance to a specific lot, parcel, unit, room(s), or portion of a hotel, or segment of real property, or may involve designation or selection of the same at a future time or times.

A plain reading of the City’s time share ordinances makes clear that Sections 93.23.11(A) and

3.24.020(7) do not apply to Pacaso.

Pacaso’s small co-ownership model of single-family homes is starkly different from any “time share” project purportedly covered by Section 93.23.11(A). Pacaso creates a property-specific LLC for each home, which owns deeded title to the property. Then Pacaso organizes and vets a maximum of eight co-owners, which have ownership interests in the LLC and co-own the home in increments, typically ranging from 12.5% to 50%. The co-owners can purchase their desired ownership interest based on their expected occupancy needs, financial means, and even in certain circumstances their desire to participate in the LLC with co-owners of their choosing. At closing, the co-owners enjoy 100% ownership in the property, and Pacaso’s only role remains as property manager.

On its face, the City’s ordinance does not apply to Pacaso. The ordinance only applies to entitlement to use or occupy any real property or portion thereof has been divided into twelve (12) or more time periods of such rights or entitlement. As pointed out above, Pacaso’s model does not divide the real property into time periods and title to the home is vested in the LLC which is owned by a maximum of eight co-owners.

Moreover, and more fundamentally, the application of the City’s time share ordinance to Pacaso is misplaced since its model does not involve “time shares.” A “time share project” only applies to the “recurrent, exclusive use, right to use or occupancy” of certain property. This is starkly different from the rights inherent to real property ownership, including possession, control, exclusion, and disposition. Pacaso homeowners have more than merely the right to “exclusive use” or to “occupy” a property. Just like any other residential homeowner, Pacaso homeowners own a real property asset in a single-family home that includes real property interests, rights and obligations, such as the right to possession, to control, to use and quiet enjoyment, to privacy and to exclude others, to sell the property, to make improvements or refurbish the property, etc.

The City’s time share ban only applies to “projects” that have been “divided” into “use or occupancy periods,” such as the occupancy of a “segment of real property annually or on some other seasonal or periodic basis.” Section 3.24.020(7) and Section 93.23.11(A). (Emphasis added). Although these Municipal Code sections are too ambiguous and vague to understand, it is nonetheless clear that it imposes a structure that differs from co-ownership of a residential single-family dwelling as employed in Pacaso’s model.

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
January 21, 2022

Page 4 ends

transient, non-commercial purposes. Section 3.24.020(7). The City’s definition of a “time share” only applies to a “lot, parcel, unit room(s), hotel or portion thereof, or segment of real property annually or on some other seasonal or periodic basis”—all of which (to the extent they are defined in the Section) are commercial in nature and/or intended for a transient use.

A Pacaso home clearly falls outside the definition of a “time share project” under its plain meaning, and by no stretch of the imagination qualifies as a hotel, condominium, or commercial property that the City’s ordinance aims to ban. Pacaso is a purely residential co-homeownership structure that lacks any resemblance to a commercial or transient-like use. A co-owner of a Pacaso home is not a renter, an investor, or a transient occupant. A co-owner of a Pacaso home is an “acquiring owner” with ownership interest in the property. Co-owners are jointly committed to the principle that the relaxed enjoyment of the Pacaso home is one of their foremost objectives. This ownership structure facilitates a collaborative ownership experience with diverse individuals of their choosing.

Plainly, Pacaso’s homeowners do not merely own the “right or entitlement to occupancy,” or “the recurrent, exclusive use, right to use or occupancy” of a property “for a period of time that has been or will be allotted from the use or occupancy periods into which the time share program which is involved has been divided.” 3.24.020(7). Nor do Pacaso homeowners own the right to occupy only a “segment of real property annually or on some other seasonal or periodic basis.” Id. (emphasis added). Rather, Pacaso homeowners own a real property asset in a single-family home that includes real property interests, and rights and obligations shared among co-owners.

Several other factors differentiate Pacaso homeowners from time share participants. Pacaso homeowners together have control of their home and are involved in decision-making regarding the property. They vote on matters such as selecting and replacing the program manager, renovations on the home or other changes to the interior or exterior design, and various other fundamental homeownership matters. Co-owners can even sell the home outright. Pacaso is merely a service. .

Pacaso supports owners as a program manager, making their ownership experience seamless through LLC and property management services, interior design, scheduling service, and concierge services.

Co-owners are not purchasing intervals of time (not on an “annual” or “seasonal” basis, or otherwise). Nor are co-owners purchasing the right to occupy only a “segment” of the home for a certain period of time. Co-owners’ ability to schedule time in the home is fluid and flexible.

Pacaso homeowners are long-term oriented (like most homeowners) and have materially different incentives with respect to their conduct, use and treatment of the home as compared to short-term renters. This is because Pacaso homeowners are directly invested in the home, its surrounding neighborhood and community, and the long-term maintenance of the property and community at large. Pacaso owners are true homeowners in it for the long-haul. They own for their personal use and enjoyment, not for profit. They can sell their interest at any point after the first year of Item 3D Item 3A - 16 - Page 22
Jeff Ballinger, Esq.

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
January 21, 2022

Page 5 ends

ownership by listing the property on the MLS with a local real estate agent, and they are strictly prohibited from renting out the property at any point to anyone.

In contrast, a time share typically entails merely the right to use a fixed amount of time in a property. It is highly restrictive in terms of resell ability, pricing and control. Time share interests are usually held in multi-unit buildings or resort properties and use of the property is typically split across a large number of investors. Owners of a time share interest are unlikely to have any meaningful interactions with their neighbors, other time share participants, or other members of the community. Behaviorally (and due to the nature of the properties, the structure of time share ownership, and nature of the investment), time share owners resemble short-term renters or hotel guests.

For all these reasons, it is clear that Pacaso’s properties do not fall within the purview of the City’s time share ban.
(2) Pacaso Had Not Obtained a Business License to Pay the Applicable Business License Tax Since It Not Operating a Business.

The City asserts that its business license ordinance requires any party, including Pacaso, that is transacting any business within the City to first procure a business license and pay the applicable business license tax. (Palm Springs Municipal Code, § 3.48.010.) Pacaso is not required to obtain a business license in the City. The application of the above ordinance only is imposed upon the businesses, trades, professions, callings and occupations specified in Chapters 3.40 through 3.96 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code. A review of the ordinances in Chapters 3.40 through 3.96 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code do not provide for application of those provisions to Pacaso. For example, Palm Springs Municipal Code Section

3.44.020, defines “Business” as follows:
“Business” includes professions, trades, and occupations and all and every kind of calling whether or not carried on for profit. (Ord. 908 § 2, 1971: prior code § 2101(a))
That definition does not apply to Pacaso nor would it apply to any entity that purchased residential property in the City for its own use. The only function that Pacaso serves is to support owners as a program manager and possible property management services. If Pacaso homeowners collectively agree that Pacaso’s services are no longer desired, the owners that own their interest in full, can choose to terminate their relationship with Pacaso and self-manage their property.

Pacaso does not agree, then, that under its model it is required to obtain a business license in the City.
(3) Pacaso’s Business Model Does Not Negatively Impacts the Supply of Affordable Housing in the City, Rather, it Positively Impacts that Supply.

Item 3D Item 3A - 17 - Page 23
Jeff Ballinger, Esq.

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
January 21, 2022

Page 6 ends

Finally, the City asserts that Pacaso’s business model violates components of the City’s General Plan, i.e., the Housing Element, since it negatively impacts the supply of affordable housing in the City and its model “looks like” and operates like short term vacation rentals.

The City basis its assertion that Pacaso’s business model negatively impacts the City’s pool of affordable housing on its view of the laws of supply and demand, i.e., that for every home that is made unavailable to a full-time resident, whether “luxury” or not, necessarily reduces the supply of homes, and therefore reduces the affordability of housing in the City. This understanding of Pacaso’s business model is far too simplistic. Pacaso not only disagrees with this assertion it maintains that its model actually increases the supply of accessible housing in the City.

First, the homes targeted by Pacaso are not what anyone would be deemed to be pulled from the City’s pool of affordable or accessible housing. Pacaso targets homes that are typically between 2-4X the local median value, but in some cases more. In the City, Pacaso serves five (5) homes, which had an average purchase price of $2.9M and a range of $1.75M-$5.2M. In comparison, the median home value in Palm Springs was $614,194 as of November 2021. Pacaso also does not overbid for homes. The housing market is extremely competitive and Pacaso is often outbid on homes.

Pacaso’s overall involvement in the City’s housing market is small as well. In 2021, there were 2,270 homes sold in the City. Pacaso purchased only five (5) of those houses or 0.2% of total.

Second, Pacaso helps second home buyers “up level” their purchase which means that they aren’t pulling from the City’s pool of affordable or accessible housing. Today, a typical second homeowner uses their home 5-6 weeks out of the year. The rest of the time, these homes either sit empty or rented short term. This traditional approach is an inefficient utilization of the housing stock that reduces moderately-priced housing available to those who live and work in the community full time.

In contrast, Pacaso empowers second home buyers to redirect their focus towards luxury homes and away from homes at lower price points needed by the local workforce. Rather than 8 families competing at lower price points, Pacaso consolidates these families into a single luxury home instead. In other words, whereas eight (8) separate purchases may have purchased second homes for themselves they are now only purchase one home. Rather that negatively impacting the law of supply and demand for affordable housing then, Pacaso’s model positively impacts that supply.

Pacaso is proud to make second home ownership more accessible and enjoyable. By facilitating co-ownership, Pacaso lowers the barriers for all buyers, including traditionally underrepresented groups. As pointed out above, as much as 30% of Pacaso’s clients were non-white or identified as LGBTQ+.

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
January 21, 2022

Page 7 ends

change the character of the neighborhood.” (Housing Element, HS1.8, p. 3-63.) The City believes that Pacaso’s business model essentially will “look like” a vacation rental to neighbors of a Pacaso property. The City, then, argues that there is very little difference from a vacation rental and a Pacaso property. This argument is wrong on a number of counts.

First, as pointed out above, Pacaso’s model consolidates second home buyers into one dwelling.

Thus, rather than eight (8) families owning second homes, lightly occupied, they together own only one. This is important since those same eight (8) families not only may have purchased moderately-priced housing but they would have been more than likely to have rented those same dwellings out on a short-term basis when not using it. Pacaso’s business model eliminates those eight (8) other homes from the short-term rental market.

Second, nothing about the City’s stated Housing Element goals is at odds with Pacaso. Pacaso is a purely residential co-homeownership structure that resembles, in structure and in use, any other residential home (whether co-owned or not). For this reason, for example, to the extent the City seeks to “prevent undue concentration of population” or “promote the public interest, health, comfort, convenience, safety and general welfare,” there is no rational basis between the City’s stated goals and targeting Pacaso. A Pacaso home is no different from any other single-family residence. Pacaso’s homes are subject to the same residential occupancy rules as other homes, and homeowners respect the same rules that other owners are expected to follow. Pacaso co-owners agree to several additional restrictions that ensure their use promotes public interest, safety and comfort. For example, there is a maximum of eight co-owners for any home, with only one family using the property at a time; co-owners are prohibited from having large events or parties that exceed the maximum occupancy for the Pacaso home; co-owners adhere to a 9 p.m. to 7 a.m. quiet hour policy; co-owners are prohibited from renting the home; and Pacaso encourages homeowners to avoid parking on the street unless absolutely necessary, etc. In sum, Pacaso homeowners are no different from other homeowners in the City, thus, efforts to preclude their homeownership does nothing to advance the “convenience, safety and general welfare” of the citizens of the City.

Pacaso takes neighbor relations seriously and has policies in place that reflect our commitment.

All owners agree to Pacaso’s Code of Conduct, which prohibits rental of the home for any length of time, large parties or events that would disrupt the neighbors, among others. If Pacaso learns that the policies have been violated, the company takes action and has the right to suspend owner stay rights. Below is a schedule of enforcement actions should policies be violated. ● After one (1) such policy violation in any eighteen (18) month period, Pacaso may deliver a written warning.
● After two (2) such policy violations in any eighteen (18) month period, Pacaso may deliver a subsequent written warning and/or suspend owner stay rights for up to one (1) month.
● After three (3) such policy violations in any eighteen (18) month period, Pacaso may suspend owner stay rights for up to three (3) months.
● After four (4) such policy violations in any eighteen (18) month period, Pacaso may suspend owner stay rights for up to four (4) months.

Item 3D Item 3A - 19 - Page 25
Jeff Ballinger, Esq.

CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
January 21, 2022

Page 8 ends

● After any subsequent policy violations in any eighteen (18) month period, Pacaso may suspend owner stay rights for up to four (4) additional months.

Pacaso has the potential to be an excellent partner of the City and local businesses. Pacaso’s new homeowners are part and parcel of the underlying economic ecosystem. Unlike absentee second homeowners, Pacaso owners occupy their home and support local businesses year-round, including those disproportionately impacted by COVID-19, such as restaurants and retail shops.

Therefore, Pacaso’s business model should positively impact not only the coffers of local business but that of the City’s. Additionally, Pacaso itself employs on average between 8-10 local businesses per property, including real estate agents, property managers, landscapers, pool cleaners, home cleaners, laundry services, handymen, local artists, and more.

As a demonstration of how Pacaso is working in the real world, Pacaso now operates in more than 30 markets across the United States. Most local leaders have acknowledged that coownership is a common practice and property right, and none have implemented regulations that target co-ownership.

Conclusion
Pacaso’s business model will provide second homes to a diverse clientele base who will be homeowners who are invested in the local community for the long-term. These homeowners will both enrich and diversify the City’s community. Additionally, because Pacaso’s model will concentrate would-be second homeowners into upper scale residential housing, the City’s pool of affordable or accessible housing is not negatively impacted but is, rather, positively impacted. We believe the City of Palm Springs should embrace the opportunity that Pacaso’s business model provides and we invite a response by the City confirming that it will abandon its challenge to Pacaso’s operations in the City. Pacaso believes strongly in its mission to enrich lives by making second home ownership possible for more people and will pursue all necessary courses of action to defend the rights of the homeowners Pacaso serves.

Sincerely,

SBEMP LLP
Bruce T. Bauer, Esq.
cc: Justin Clifton, City of Palm Springs City Manager
[email protected]
Item 3D Item 3A - 20 - Page 26

ATTACHMENT B

Item 3D - Page 27

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: FEBRUARY 21, 2023 BUSINESS & LEGISLATIVE
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION REGARDING REGULATORY APPROACH TO MANAGED

CO-OWNED PROPERTIES (PACASO)
FROM: Teresa Gallavan, Interim City Manager
BY: Jeffrey S. Ballinger, City Attorney
SUMMARY:

RECOMMENDATION:

Discuss and provide direction to staff regarding a possible regulatory approach to managed co-owned properties.

BACKGROUND:

This agenda item provides the City Council an opportunity to discuss a relatively new business model that began operating within the City of Palm Springs in late 2021.

Specifically, a company named Pacaso purchases residential properties, then sells those properties to a limited liability company (“LLC”), which LLC is owned by up to eight (8) owners. The owners of the LLC are thereby entitled to use and occupancy of the residence for short periods of time. Pacaso also provides property management services to the LLC owners, though the owners are not required by Pacaso to use those services.

The City Council is requested to discuss this business model and land use and provide direction to City staff and the City Attorney as to what, if any, different approach the City Item Item 3E - Page 1 3D - Page 28
Council would like to take with regard to this business model/land use.

It should be noted that this agenda item is not a discussion of vacation rentals. Pacaso’s business model involves multiple property owners – not renters. Therefore, the City’s vacation rental ordinance does not apply to Pacaso’s business model. This agenda item is solely focused on the business model that Pacaso is currently operating under.

The City Council considered this matter at the March 10, 2022 City Council meeting. As discussed in the staff report for that meeting (Attachment 1), City staff and the City Attorney interpreted the City’s existing Zoning ordinance in a way that Pacaso’s operations qualify as a “timeshare” under the City’s Zoning ordinance. Under that interpretation, Pacaso’s operations would be prohibited in residential zones in the City.

Pacaso disagreed with the City’s interpretation.

At the March 10, 2022 City Council meeting, the City Council indicated that it did not wish to allow operations such as Pacaso’s, unless such operations were strictly regulated, as the City does with vacation rentals.

Following the March 2022 Council meeting, City staff and the City Attorney met with representatives of Pacaso twice. At those meetings, the City identified some of the primary concerns of the City. Namely, the City raised concerns with the potential impacts to neighbors arising from the semi-transient use of the properties by the multiple owners.

These secondary impacts include noise, parking and number of occupants staying at the residences. In addition, the City expressed concern about the impacts to property values that might be caused by the Pacaso model, and how that might affect the affordability of housing within the City.

As a result of those meetings, Pacaso presented to City staff and the City Attorney a draft regulatory approach to managed co-owned properties, such as Pacaso’s. Accompanying this staff report as Attachment 2 is a copy of Pacaso’s draft regulatory approach. Below is a summary of the approach.

STAFF ANALYSIS:

Under the regulatory approach proposed by Pacaso, the City Council would adopt an ordinance that permits, but regulates, operations such as Pacaso’s business model. The ordinance would require “co-owned property managers” to obtain a certificate from the City, similar to what the City requires for vacation rentals. A “Co-owned property manager” would be defined as “a person, corporation, trust, or entity that manages a Co-owned Housing Unit, including providing cleaning services and maintenance of the co-owned housing unit, on behalf of the owners of the Co-Owned Housing Unit.” A “Co-Owned Housing Unit”, in turn, would be defined as, “a residential dwelling unit, managed by a Co-owned Property Manager, and utilized for occupancy for dwelling, lodging, or sleeping purposes by up to ten owners or ten members of a Limited Liability Company that owns the dwelling unit, along with authorized guests.”
Item Item 3E - Page 2 3D - Page 29
In order to address the City’s stated concerns with regard to impacts on neighbors, the ordinance would go on to regulate the use of co-owned housing units. Specifically, the proposed regulatory ordinance would:
• Restrict co-owned housing permits to one home per block.

Note: The City would waive this density restriction if the applicant furnishes a development agreement or letter from a Homeowners Association endorsing such waiver.
• Establish annual fee for co-owned housing unit permits at no more than $5,000 per home.
• Authorize an annual fee Property Management registrations to be set by resolution of the City Council.
• Require applicants to prove that co-owned homes are not prohibited by the CC&Rs of a HOA at the time of the application submission.
• Establish occupancy limits at two (2) people per bedroom for overnight guests Note: this restriction excludes children under 12 years of age. • Establish normal home maintenance hours between 8am - 5pm on Monday-Friday, for such things as yard/garden work, pool cleaning, etc. • Require Co-owned Property Management companies to maintain a valid business license issued by the City.
• Require each home to maintain homeowner’s insurance with at least $2M in liability coverage.
• Prohibit weddings or commercial events at co-owned housing units. • Require occupants and guests to park all vehicles on the property Note: Proposed exception for landscape & maintenance commercial vehicles and any cars parked for less than 1 hour.
• Require occupants to comply with the City’s noise ordinance (PSMC Chapter

11.74).
• Establish penalties for noncompliance (misdemeanor, $500 for first offense, $1,000 for each subsequent violation).
• Establish a $5,000 fine and $10,000 fine for subsequent violations for failure to register as a co-owned housing unit.
• Establish a $5,000 fine and $10,000 fine for subsequent violations if the co-owned housing unit is used as an STR.
• Establish a $5,000 fine and $10,000 fine for subsequent violations for reporting false claims against a co-owned property manager or co-owned housing unit.

In addition, in order to address the City’s stated concerns with regard to impacts on residential property values, the ordinance would provide that the City would not issue a permit for a co-owned housing unit unless the property has a recorded purchase price greater than two (2) times the then median housing price, as measured at the time of the purchase. The cap of one home per block is also designed to limit the number of residential units that are used as secondary homes by multiple owners.

According to Pacaso’s analysis, as of approximately June of 2022, there were seventyItem Item 3E - Page 3 3D - Page 30 four (74) active real estate listings of residential units that also would not exceed the one per block cap.

City staff and the City Attorney’s Office believe that the proposed regulatory approach represents a good faith attempt to address the concerns raised at the March 2022 City Council meeting. Obviously, should the Council direct staff to pursue a regulatory approach, a key provision will have to be the enforcement provisions of any such ordinance. As the City has seen with its vacation rental program, enforcement is key to a successful regulatory approach.

Unlike vacation rentals, which are owned by a limited number of natural persons, and the permit for which can be revoked, the revocation of a managed co-owned housing unit would present a challenge for the property owners with respect to what can thereafter be done with the property. One option would be to provide that if a managed co-owned property no longer has a management company, that property would be classified as a prohibited use in residential zones, such as is the case with timeshares.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:

This agenda item is exempt from further environmental review. Should the City Council provide direction to further explore and potentially bring forward a regulatory ordinance, an assessment will be performed at that time in order to determine what level of environmental review is appropriate.

ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLANNING:

FISCAL IMPACT:

Any regulatory approach would be accompanied by a regulatory fee that would be collected by the City in order to appropriately offset the costs of administering the regulatory program.

REVIEWED BY:

City Attorney: Jeffrey S. Ballinger
Interim City Manager: Teresa Gallavan
ATTACHMENTS:

A. March 10, 2022 Staff Report
B. Draft Regulatory Ordinance
Item Item 3E - Page 4 3D - Page 31

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 10, 2022 BUSINESS
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION REGARDING PACASO AND SIMILAR

OPERATIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS
FROM: Justin Clifton, City Manager
BY: Jeffrey S. Ballinger, City Attorney

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Discuss and provide direction to City Staff regarding Pacaso, and other similar operations, within the City of Palm Springs.

SUMMARY:

Item Item 3E - Page 5 3D - Page 32
FACTUAL BACKGROUND:

Owners of two shares have the option to book stays up to 28 nights.

Item Item 3E - Page 6 3D - Page 33
prohibited from having large events or parties that exceed the maximum occupancy of the home; co-owners must adhere to a 9pm to 7am quiet hour policy; co-owners are prohibited from renting the home; and Pacaso encouraged homeowners to avoid parking on the street unless absolutely necessary. Pacaso does not provide any documentation or explanation of how these rules are enforced. Owner compliance with these rules is monitored not only by other co-owners, but also by Pacaso as the property manager.

Also, each owner can book the property to use themselves, or may allow guests to use the residence, whether or not the co-owner is present.

According to Pacaso, as of September of 2021, one residence within Palm Springs has been fully sold, and Pacaso was marketing four others in the City.

REGULATORY FRAMEWORK:

93.23.11(A).)
Section 3.24.020(7), in turn, defines a timeshare, as
“occupancy related to the situation wherein a purchaser receives the right or entitlement in perpetuity, for life, or for a term of years or other extended term, to the recurrent, exclusive use or occupancy of a lot, parcel, unit, room(s), hotel or portion thereof, or segment of real property, annually or on some other seasonable or periodic basis, for a period of time that has been or will be allotted from the use or occupancy periods into which the timeshare project which is involved has been divided. The said right or entitlement to occupancy may attach in advance to a specific lot, parcel, unit, room(s), or portion of a hotel, or segment of real property, or may involve designation or selection of the same at a future time or times.” Item Item 3E - Page 7 3D - Page 34
Despite Pacaso’s assertions to the contrary, the City Attorney believes that Pacaso’s business model meets the City’s definition of a “timeshare”. The City’s definition is broad.

But, broken down, it appears to apply to Pacaso.

OPTIONS:

Item Item 3E - Page 8 3D - Page 35
Option 1: Maintain the City’s current prohibition on time-shares As discussed in the City’s December 6, 2022 letter to Pacaso, there are several policy reasons why the City Council might want to continue prohibiting business models such as Pacaso’s in single-family residential zones. Namely, Pacaso’s business model of purchasing properties, not as a primary residence, but instead exclusively for secondary, vacation occupancy, limits the number of homes that would be available for use primarily as a residence.

Given the aggressive, litigious approach taken by Pacaso in St. Helena, as between this Option and Option 2, below, the City Attorney and City staff would recommend Option 2.

The City of Hermosa Beach’s Planning Commission is scheduled to consider a similar ordinance on March 15.

Item Item 3E - Page 9 3D - Page 36
CEQA DETERMINATION:

This discussion and possible direction does not constitute a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), as it is merely a discussion and possible research.

If any ordinance is brought forward, the City will analyze such ordinance, in accordance with CEQA.

FISCAL IMPACTS:

Assuming a Pacaso property pays its Time-Share Occupancy Tax for every day of the year, the revenue to the City would be fairly minimal, at $1,460 per year, per property.

Pacaso asserts that its business model positively impacts local businesses and the City.

However, the City has seen no evidence of that, in the form of economic studies or analyses.

CONCLUSION:

Therefore, City staff and the City Attorney request that the City Council provide policy direction with regard to whether and how to address business models such as Pacaso’s.

REVIEWED BY:

City Attorney: Jeffrey S. Ballinger
City Manager: Justin Clifton
ATTACHMENTS:

1. City Attorney Letter to Pacaso, dated December 6, 2021.

2. Pacaso Response Letter dated February 10, 2022.

Item Item 3E - Page 10 3D - Page 37
55575.18100\34590098.1

As you know, this law firm serves as City Attorney for the City of Palm Springs, California.

In that capacity, we are writing to advise Pacaso.com that Pacaso’s current operations within the City are unlawful and must cease immediately.

From buying to closing here’s how Pacaso works. First, tell us a little about yourself and what you are looking for in a second home. Then, start shopping. If a listing currently on Pacaso is not a fit, find one you love on any real estate site and share it with us. If the home is a match for Pacaso, we will partner with you to purchase up to half of the property in a private and professionally managed LLC uniquely designed for co-ownership. This LLC is referred to as the Pacaso Home LLC. On behalf of Pacaso, we line up financing for the LLC and close quickly. In parallel Pacaso remarkets remaining ownerships shares in the home to interested buyers. Buyers can purchase their desired amount of ownership from one-eighth Item 3E - Page 11
BEST BEST & KRIEGER ~ ATT OR NEYS AT L A W
Item 3D - Page 38
55575.18100\34590098.1
VIA E-MAIL [email protected]
Ellen Haberle
December 6, 2021

Page 2 ends

According to Pacaso, as of September, one single-family residence within Palm Springs has been fully sold, and Pacaso was marketing four others within the City.

City of Palm Springs Timeshare Ordinance
The City of Palm Springs regulates where timeshares can be located within the City and taxes occupancy of timeshares. Specifically, under the City’s zoning ordinance, a timeshare Item 3E - Page 12
BEST BEST & KRIEGER ~ ATT OR NEYS AT LAW
Item 3D - Page 39
55575.18100\34590098.1
VIA E-MAIL [email protected]
Ellen Haberle
December 6, 2021

Page 3 ends

Specifically, Pacaso’s business model fits the following definition: “wherein a purchaser receives the right in perpetuity… or other extended term, to the recurrent, exclusive use or occupancy of a lot … annually or on some other … periodic basis, for a period of time that has been or will be allotted from the use or occupancy periods into which the time-share project which is involved has been divided.”
Here, purchasers of a Pacaso LLC receive the right, in perpetuity or some other period defined in the LLC agreement, to the recurrent and exclusive use of the lot on which the residence Item 3E - Page 13
BEST BEST & KRIEGER ~ ATT OR NEYS AT LAW
Item 3D - Page 40
55575.18100\34590098.1
VIA E-MAIL [email protected]
Ellen Haberle
December 6, 2021

Page 4 ends

is located. The right to such use is on some periodic basis, for a period of time that is allotted under the LLC agreement.

Thus, by its terms, the City’s ordinance applies to a use such as Pacaso’s. As such, Pacaso’s operations are not permitted in single family-zones within the City of Palm Springs, California.

One of the policies of the City’s Housing Elements is to “protect established single-family residential neighborhoods from the transition, intensification, and encroachment of uses that Item 3E - Page 14
BEST BEST & KRIEGER ~ ATT OR NEYS AT LAW
Item 3D - Page 41
55575.18100\34590098.1
VIA E-MAIL [email protected]
Ellen Haberle
December 6, 2021

Page 5 ends

Therefore, Pacaso’s current operations within the City are unlawful and must cease immediately.

Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,
Jeffrey S. Ballinger
of BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP
City Attorney
City of Palm Springs
Item 3E - Page 15
BEST BEST & KRIEGER ~ ATT OR NEYS AT LAW
Item 3D - Page 42
55575.18100\34590098.1
VIA E-MAIL [email protected]
Ellen Haberle
December 6, 2021

Page 6 ends

cc: Hon. Mayor and Councilmembers
Justin Clifton, City Manager
Teresa Gallavan, Asst. City Manager
Flinn Fagg, Development Services Director
Item 3E - Page 16
BEST BEST & KRIEGER ~ ATT OR NEYS AT LAW
Item 3D - Page 43
January 21, 2022

VIA EMAIL
Jeff Ballinger, Esq.

As you know, our office has been retained to represent Pacaso in connection with the City of Palm Springs’ (the “City”) correspondence of December 6, 2021.

Item Item 3E - Page 17 3D - Page 44
Operating in this changed environment, Pacaso seeks to provide second home buyers a better option than a moderately-priced whole second home. By facilitating co-ownership, Pacaso empowers buyers to up level their focus toward luxury properties and away from lower price points, benefitting buyers and reducing competition for homes needed by those who live and work in Palm Springs full-time.

We will now analyze the three (3) points that the City raised in its December 6th letter.

Analysis
(1) Pacaso’s Operations Do Not Violate the City’s Time Share Ordinances.

3.24.020(7) of the Palm Springs Municipal Code into twelve (12) or more time periods of such rights or entitlement.” (PSZC, § 93.23.11(A).) Palm Springs Municipal Code Section 3.24.020(7) defines “time share occupancy” as follows:
. . . occupancy related to the situation wherein a purchaser receives the right or entitlement in perpetuity, for life, or for a term of years or other extended term, to the recurrent, exclusive use or occupancy of a lot, parcel, unit, room(s), hotel or portion thereof, or segment of real property, annually or on some other seasonable Item Item 3E - Page 18 3D - Page 45
or periodic basis, for a period of time that has been or will be allotted from the use or occupancy periods into which the time-share project which is involved has been divided. The said right or entitlement to occupancy may attach in advance to a specific lot, parcel, unit, room(s), or portion of a hotel, or segment of real property, or may involve designation or selection of the same at a future time or times.

A plain reading of the City’s time share ordinances makes clear that Sections 93.23.11(A) and

3.24.020(7) do not apply to Pacaso.

The misapplication of the City’s time share ordinance to Pacaso is further confirmed by the definition of a “time share,” which omits any reference to properties used for residential, nonItem 3E - Page 19 ----
Item 3D - Page 46
transient, non-commercial purposes. Section 3.24.020(7). The City’s definition of a “time share” only applies to a “lot, parcel, unit room(s), hotel or portion thereof, or segment of real property annually or on some other seasonal or periodic basis”—all of which (to the extent they are defined in the Section) are commercial in nature and/or intended for a transient use.

Pacaso supports owners as a program manager, making their ownership experience seamless through LLC and property management services, interior design, scheduling service, and concierge services.

Item Item 3E - Page 21 3D - Page 48
Finally, the City asserts that Pacaso’s business model violates components of the City’s General Plan, i.e., the Housing Element, since it negatively impacts the supply of affordable housing in the City and its model “looks like” and operates like short term vacation rentals.

Pacaso’s overall involvement in the City’s housing market is small as well. In 2021, there were 2,270 homes sold in the City. Pacaso purchased only five (5) of those houses or 0.2% of total.

The City has also identified another one of the policies of the City’s Housing Elements that it believes Pacaso’s model violates, i.e., to “protect established single-family residential neighborhoods from the transition, intensification, and encroachment of uses that detract and/or Item Item 3E - Page 22 3D - Page 49
change the character of the neighborhood.” (Housing Element, HS1.8, p. 3-63.) The City believes that Pacaso’s business model essentially will “look like” a vacation rental to neighbors of a Pacaso property. The City, then, argues that there is very little difference from a vacation rental and a Pacaso property. This argument is wrong on a number of counts.

First, as pointed out above, Pacaso’s model consolidates second home buyers into one dwelling.

Pacaso takes neighbor relations seriously and has policies in place that reflect our commitment.

Item Item 3E - Page 23 3D - Page 50
● After any subsequent policy violations in any eighteen (18) month period, Pacaso may suspend owner stay rights for up to four (4) additional months.

Sincerely,

SBEMP LLP
Bruce T. Bauer, Esq.
cc: Justin Clifton, City of Palm Springs City Manager
[email protected]
Item Item 3E - Page 24 3D - Page 51
DRAFT
DRAFT ORDINANCE - 6.30.22
Regulation of Co-ownership Property
Management
Definitions -
“Authorized Guests” means any guests of an owner of a Co-owned Housing Unit who have not provided compensation to an owner for dwelling, lodging, and sleeping purposes and are present in the Co-owned Housing unit while the owner is on-site and in the home.
“Co-owned Housing Unit” means a residential dwelling unit, managed by a Co-owned Property Manager, and utilized for occupancy for dwelling, lodging, or sleeping purposes by up to ten owners or ten members of a Limited Liability Company that owns the dwelling unit, along with authorized guests. The term “Co-owned Housing Unit ” is not a time-share project, as defined in [INSERT APPROPRIATE SECTION OF MUNICIPAL CODE], and usage of a Co-owned Housing Unit is not a time-share use. “Co-owned Property Manager” means a person, corporation, trust, or entity that manages a Co-owned Housing Unit, including providing cleaning services and maintenance of the co-owned housing unit, on behalf of the owners of the Co-Owned Housing Unit. The term Co-owned Property Manager does not include software used by the owners of a Co-owned Housing Unit to self-manage the co-owned housing unit. “Co-owned Property Management Registration Certificate” or “Registration Certificate” means the annual permit and/or a registration for a “Co-owned Property Manager.” “Co-owned Housing Unit Permit” means a permit granted to a Co-owned Property Manager for each Co-owned Housing Unit under management. “Good Neighbor Policy” is a policy that governs the operation of a Co-owned Housing Unit that summarizes general rules of conduct, occupancy limits, consideration, and respect, including without limitation provisions of the [INSERT NAME OF CITY] Municipal Code applicable to or expected of guests to the City. “Local contact person” means an individual who is available twenty-four hours per day, seven days per week for the purpose of responding within thirty (30) minutes to complaints regarding the condition, operation, or conduct of occupants of the Co-owned Housing unit, or any agent of an owner authorized by the owner to take remedial action and who responds to any violation of this code.

Item Item 3E - Page 25 3D - Page 52
DRAFT
“Usage Block” means the length of time, measured in consecutive days, that each owner of a Co-owned Housing Unit dwells in their unit.

Co-owned Property Management Registration Certificate Required (a) A Co-owned Property Manager shall not manage a Co-owned Housing Unit without obtaining a Co-owned Property Management Registration Certificate from the City. A Co-owned Property Manager shall obtain a Registration Certificate by submitting an application form signed by the applicant under penalty of perjury to the [INSERT APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENT]. Each application shall contain the following information:
(i) The name, address, and telephone number of the applicant; (ii) The name, address, and telephone number of the local contact for the Co-owned Property Manager;
(iii) A current list of every property that the applicant manages in the City; (iv) A copy of the Good Neighbor Policy that governs each Co-owned Housing Unit managed by the applicant which must contain the following requirements:
(1) Noise: occupants of the Co-owned Housing Unit shall comply with all provisions of the City’s Noise Ordinance [INSERT
APPROPRIATE SECTION OF MUNICIPAL CODE].
(2) Parking: occupants of the Co-owned Housing Unit shall comply with all provisions of the City’s parking regulations applicable to residential units.
(3) Trash: Trash and refuse shall not be left stored within public view, except in proper containers for the purpose of collection by the collectors and between the hours of five a.m. and eight p.m. on scheduled trash collection days.
(4) Occupancy Limits: the maximum number of occupants shall be no more than two (2) persons per bedroom within the Co-owned Housing Unit plus any minor children, age 12 or under.
(5) Home Repairs & Maintenance: all home repairs (external and internal), garden and yard maintenance, and pool cleaning and maintenance shall not be performed between the hours of 5:00 pm on Friday through 8:00 am on Monday, except in the case of an emergency or the occurrence of an unexpected event that reasonable warrants a timely or immediate response.

Item Item 3E - Page 26 3D - Page 53
DRAFT
(v) Evidence of a valid business license issued by the City for the separate business of operating Co-owned Housing Units or submission of a certificate indicating that the Owner is exempt or otherwise not covered by the City’s Business Tax Ordinance [INSERT APPROPRIATE SECTION OF MUNICIPAL CODE] for such activity.
(b) After receipt of a Registration Certificate, a Co-owned Property Manager may apply for additional Co-owned Housing Unit permits to be associated with its Registration Certificate.
(c) The Registration certificate shall be renewed annually pursuant to procedures provided by the [INSERT APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENT].
(d) Fees for a Registration Certificate will be established by resolution of the City Council.

Co-owned Housing Unit Permit Required
(a) A Co-owned Property Manager shall obtain a permit for each Co-owned Housing Unit in the City prior to the dwelling’s use as a Co-owned Housing Unit. (b) The City shall not issue a Co-owned Housing Unit Permit for a residential property unless the property has a recorded purchase price greater than two times of the then median housing price measured at the time of the purchase of the property. The Office of Special Programs Compliance shall have the authority to establish administrative rules and regulations regarding the calculation of the median housing price for purposes of this section.
(c) Prior to receipt of a Co-owned Housing Unit Permit, a Co-owned Property Manager shall submit an affidavit that the Co-owned Housing Unit has adopted a Good Neighbor Policy and a copy of the Good Neighbor Policy shall be submitted along with the Co-owned Housing Unit Permit.
(d) The City shall not issue more than one Co-owned Housing Unit Permit per block.

For the purpose of this section, block means one side of a street between two consecutive intersecting streets. The City shall waive this density restriction if the applicant furnishes a development agreement or letter from a Homeowners Association endorsing such waiver.
(e) The City shall not issue a Co-owned Housing Unit Permit for a residential property unless the owner obtains and shall at all times maintain the following insurance coverage: (i) a policy of fire and casualty insurance covering the Item Item 3E - Page 27 3D - Page 54
DRAFT
property and personal property in the Co-owned Housing Unit in an amount equal to the full replacement value of the property and the estimated value of the personal property in the Co-owned Housing Unit; and (ii) a policy of general liability insurance that include liabilities arising from usage of the Co-owned housing Unit by all owners and authorized guests, with limits of liability not less than $2,000,000.
(f) The Co-owned Property Manager shall obtain a Co-owned Housing Unit Permit by submitting an application form signed by the applicant under penalty of perjury to the [INSERT APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENT]. Each application shall contain the following information:
(i) The address of the Co-owned Housing Unit;
(ii) The name, address, and telephone number of the applicant; (iii) The name, address, and telephone number of the local contact for the Co-owned Housing Unit;
(iv) Documentation showing the recorded purchase price of the Co-owned Housing Unit was greater than two times the median housing price at the time of the purchase.
(v) A copy of the Good Neighbor Policy that governs the operation of the Co-owned Housing Unit;
(vi) Documentation demonstrating that the Co-owned Housing Unit has the insurance coverage required by subsection (d).
(vii) If applicable, evidence that a Co-owned Housing Unit would not violate the permissible use for housing within a Homeowners Association in accordance with the Homeowners Association’s Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions.
(g) The Co-owned Housing Unit Permit shall be renewed annually pursuant to procedures provided by the [INSERT APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENT] (h) The [INSERT APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENT] shall process applications for Co-owned Housing Unit permits in the order in which they are received by the department and shall issue permits no later than 5 business days after receiving an application.
(i) Fees for a Co-owned Housing Unit Permit will be established by resolution of the City Council and shall not exceed $5,000.

Prohibited activities
(a) No Co-owned Housing Unit should be used as Vacation Rental or for Homesharing.

Item Item 3E - Page 28 3D - Page 55
DRAFT
(b) No weddings or commercial events shall be hosted in a Co-owned Housing Unit. (c) Guests of Co-owned Housing Unit shall park all vehicles on the property except for vehicles parked for less than one hour or commercial vehicles conducting maintenance, landscaping, or deliveries.
(d) Any radio receiver, musical instrument, phonograph, loudspeaker, sound amplifier, or any machine or device for the producing or reproducing of any sound shall be conducted within a fully enclosed Co-owned Housing Unit and shall not be audible at the property line of the Co-owned Housing Unit.
(e) No Co-owned Housing Unit shall be used by guests without a co-owner present.

Violations
(a) Any person who violates a provision of this Chapter is subject to criminal sanctions and administrative penalties pursuant to [INSERT APPROPRIATE CHAPTERS] of this Code and the specific penalties as provided in this Chapter.

Any person who uses, or allows the use of, residential property in violation of the provisions in this Chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor for each day in which such residential property is used, or allowed to be used, in violation of this Chapter. An administrative citation issued pursuant to [INSERT APPROPRIATE CHAPTERS] for a first violation shall be five hundred dollars ($500.00) and each subsequent violation shall be one thousand ($1,000.00) dollars. Each administrative citation for a violation of any provision of this Chapter shall be levied or assessed against the Co-Owner who is occupying the Co-owned Housing Unit and any entity that owns the Co-owned Housing Unit.
(b) Any Co-owned Property Manager who manages a Co-owned Housing Unit without obtaining a Co-owned Property Management Registration Certificate or Co-owned Housing Unit permit is subject to criminal sanctions and administrative penalties pursuant to [INSERT APPROPRIATE CHAPTERS] of this Code. An administrative citation issued pursuant to [INSERT APPROPRIATE CHAPTER] for a first violation shall be five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) and each subsequent violation shall be one thousand ($10,000.00) dollars. (c) Any Co-owned Property Manager or any other person that uses a Co-owned Housing Unit as a Vacation Rental or for Homesharing is subject to criminal sanctions and administrative penalties pursuant to [INSERT APPROPRIATE CHAPTERS] of this Code. An administrative citation issued pursuant to Chapter [INSERT APPROPRIATE CHAPTER] for a first violation shall be five thousand dollars ($5,00.00) and each subsequent violation shall be ten thousand ($10,000.00) dollars.
(d) Any violations of provisions of the Municipal Code, other than this Chapter, by Item Item 3E - Page 29 3D - Page 56
DRAFT
the owners of a Co-owned Housing Unit related to noise, nuisance, parking, trash, or occupancy limits shall be punishable by administrative fines and/or remedies as specified in the provisions of the Municipal Code. (e) Any person who fails to pay any fee or charge provided in this Chapter within the time required, shall pay a penalty in the amounts established by the City Council by resolution. Such penalty may also include interest, at the rate of 10% per annum,from the date on which the fee or charge became due and payable to the City until the date of payment.
(f) The filing of knowingly false claims against a Co-owned Property Manager and/or Co-owned Housing Unit is prohibited. Administrative penalties pursuant to Chapters [INSERT APPROPRIATE CHAPTERS] of this Code. An administrative citation issued pursuant to [INSERT APPROPRIATE CHAPTERS] for a first violation shall be five thousand dollars ($5,00.00) and each subsequent violation shall be ten thousand ($10,000.00) dollars.

Item Item 3E - Page 30 3D - Page 57

ATTACHMENT C
Item 3D - Page 58
55575.18000\42422578.1
ORDINANCE NO. ____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,
CALIFORNIA, ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 5.92 TO THE

PALM SPRINGS MUNICIPAL CODE STRICTLY

REGULATING CO-OWNED HOUSING UNITS, DIRECTING

THE PLANNING AGENCY TO STUDY PROPOSED
UPDATES TO THE CITY’S TIMESHARE DEFINITIONS,

AND DETERMINING SUCH ACTION TO EXEMPT FROM

FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO

THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
City Attorney’s Summary
This ordinance adopts a new Municipal Code Chapter to
strictly regulate certain managed co-owned housing uses, and directs the Planning Department and Planning Commission to study a proposed update to the City’s current definitions regarding “time-share” uses.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Regulation of Co-Owned Managed Housing. A new Chapter 5.92 (Co-Owned Managed Housing) is hereby added to the Palm Springs Municipal Code to read as set forth in Exhibit “A”, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein.

SECTION 2. Study of Updated “Timeshare” Definitions. The City’s Planning Department and Planning Commission are directed to conduct a study of updating the City’s current timeshare definitions contained in City ordinances, include a potential update based on the definitions set forth in Exhibit “B”, attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein.

SECTION 3. CEQA. The City Council finds and determines that this Ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) pursuant to Section 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the State Guidelines, because this Ordinance will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment and is not a “project” as that term is defined in Section 15378 of the State Guidelines. In addition, the City Council also determines that this Ordinance consists of regulations intended to ensure that co-managed owned property use of residential property, with the strict regulations implemented by the subject ordinance, remains consistent with other residential uses of property within the City and thereby preserves the residential character of the City’s residential neighborhoods as identified in the City’s adopted General Plan, and its concomitant Environmental Impact Report. Thus, to the extent there is any environmental impact for the adoption of this Ordinance, the City Council finds that the Environmental Impact Report for the adopted General Plan is the controlling environmental document.

Item 3D - Page 59
55575.18000\42422578.1
Ordinance No. _____

Page 2 ends

SECTION 3. Severability. The provisions of this Ordinance are severable. If any portion, section, subsection, paragraph, clause, sentence, phrase, work, or application of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each and every portion, section, subsection, paragraph, clause, sentence, phrase, word and application not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of this ordinance or application thereof would be subsequently declared invalid.

SECTION 4. The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same, or a summary thereof, to be published and posted pursuant to the provisions of law and this Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its passage.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED BY THE PALM SPRINGS CITY
COUNCIL THIS _____ DAY OF _____________________, 2024.

JEFFREY BERNSTEIN
MAYOR
ATTEST:

BRENDA PREE, MMC

CITY CLERK
Item 3D - Page 60
55575.18000\42422578.1
Ordinance No. _____

Page 3 ends

CERTIFICATION

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of the City of Palm Springs, California, this ______ day of ______________, _________.

BRENDA PREE, MMC

CITY CLERK
Item 3D - Page 61
55575.18000\42422578.1
Ordinance No. _____

Page 4 ends

EXHIBIT “A”
“Chapter 5.92 CO-OWNED MANAGED HOUSING

5.92.010 Definitions

5.92.020 Co-owned Housing Unit Permit Required

5.92.030 Operational Standards

5.92.040 Administrative Regulations

5.92.050 Violations

5.92.060 Application to Pre-existing Co-owned Housing
Units

5.92.010 Definitions
“Guests” means any guests of an owner of a Co-owned Housing Unit who have not provided compensation to an owner for dwelling, lodging, and sleeping purposes and are present in the Co-owned Housing unit while an owner is on-site and in the home.
“Co-owned Housing Unit” means a residential dwelling unit, managed by a Coowned Property Manager, and utilized for occupancy for dwelling, lodging, or sleeping purposes by up to ten owners or ten members of a Limited Liability Company that owns the dwelling unit, along with guests. The term “Co-owned Housing Unit “is not a time-share project, as defined in Palm Springs Municipal Code section 93.23.11(A), and usage of a Co-owned Housing Unit is not a timeshare use. Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, if the property is not managed by a Co-owned Property Manager or is being managed without a Co-owned Housing Unity Permit, and the use of a property otherwise meets the definition of a “timeshare” pursuant to Section 93.23.11(A), the use of that property shall be deemed a “timeshare” use, subject to the regulation and prohibition of such by the City of Palm Springs.
“Co-owned Property Manager” means a person, corporation, trust, or entity that manages a Co-owned Housing Unit, including providing cleaning services and maintenance of the co-owned housing unit, on behalf of the owners of the CoOwned Housing Unit. The term Co-owned Property Manager does not include software used by the owners of a Co-owned Housing Unit to self-manage the coowned housing unit. “Co-owned Housing Unit Permit” means a permit granted to a Co-owned Property Manager for each Co-owned Housing Unit under management. “Co-owned Housing Unit Citywide Cap" means the maximum number of Co-owned Housing Units within the City, as such cap may be established and amended from time to time by City Council. The Co-owned Housing Unit Citywide Cap is hereby set at thirty (30) Co-owned Housing Units for the period starting on the effective Item 3D - Page 62
55575.18000\42422578.1
Ordinance No. _____

Page 5 ends

date of this ordinance and ending three years after the effective date of this ordinance. The City shall study the impact of Co-owned Housing Units in the City Council and may adjust the Co-owned Housing Unit Citywide Cap by ordinance or resolution.
“Co-owned Housing Unit Neighborhood Cap” means the maximum number of Coowned Housing Units allowed by the City Council in each Neighborhood. The Coowned Housing Unit Neighborhood Cap is hereby set at two (2) per neighborhood.

The City shall study the impact of Co-owned Housing Units in the City Council and may adjust the Co-owned Housing Unit Citywide Cap by ordinance or resolution. “Good Neighbor Policy” is a policy that governs the operation of a Co-owned Housing Unit that summarizes general rules of conduct, occupancy limits, consideration, and respect, including, without limitation, provisions of the 5.25.030 Municipal Code applicable to, or expected of, owners and guests. “Director” means the City of Palm Springs Director of Special Programs, or his or her designee.
“Local contact person” means a property management company, real estate broker, or agent, lawyer, or other individual that resides within 25 miles of the Coowned Housing Unit. The local contact person must be: (1) available by telephone, or otherwise, twenty-four (24) hours per day; (2) able to respond to telephone inquiries within one (1) hour of the receipt of inquiry; (3) authorized by the owner to take remedial action when responding to any violation of this code or the Good Neighbor Policy; and (4) designated as the owner’s agent for receiving all official communications from the City.
“Neighborhood” means a City-recognized neighborhood, as set forth in Palm Springs Municipal Code Chapter 2.55 (Office of Neighborhoods). For those areas within the City that are not located within a City-recognized Neighborhood, the City Council may, by ordinance or resolution, determine that, for purposes of this Chapter only, such area is contained in a particular City-recognized Neighborhood, or the City Council may recognize, for purposes of this Chapter only, a new Neighborhood.
“Operating Agreement” an Agreement that determines how the Co-owned Housing Unit is used, how to divide shares, and how the costs are shared. “Owner” means the Limited Liability Company, natural person or persons who is/are the owner of record of the Co-owned Housing Unit. The term “Owner” also includes members of the property specific Limited Liability Company, Tenancy in Common, or Real Estate Trust.

5.92.020 Co-owned Housing Unit Permit Required
(a) The occupancy of a Co-owned Housing Unit without a Co-owned Housing Unit Permit is prohibited.

Item 3D - Page 63
55575.18000\42422578.1
Ordinance No. _____

Page 6 ends

(b) Prior to the dwelling’s occupancy as a Co-owned Housing Unit, and annually thereafter, a Co-owned Property Manager shall obtain a permit for each Coowned Housing Unit in the City. (c) The City shall not issue a new Co-owned Housing Unit Permit for a property unless the property has a recorded purchase price greater than two (2) times of the then median housing price, measured at the date that the application for the Co-owned Housing Unit is deemed complete.
(d) The City shall not issue a new Co-owned Housing Unit Permit for a property in any Neighborhood in which the VR Neighborhood Percentage Cap, as outlined in Palm Springs Municipal Code Chapter 5.25 has been exceeded. (e) Prior to, and as a condition precedent to, the City’s issuance of a Co-owned Housing Unit Permit, a Co-owned Property Manager shall submit an affidavit, signed under penalty of perjury, declaring that all owners of the Co-owned Housing Unit have adopted a Good Neighbor Policy, which shall be binding on the Owner(s) of the Co-owned Housing Unit for so long as the property is used as a Co-Owned Housing Unit, and which must contain the following requirements:
(1) Noise: Occupants of the Co-owned Housing Unit shall comply with all provisions of the City’s Noise Ordinance, Palm Springs Municipal Code Chapter 11.74.
(2) Parking: Occupants of the Co-owned Housing Unit shall comply with all provisions of the City’s parking regulations applicable to residential units. In addition, all owners and guests of Co-owned Housing Units shall park their vehicles on the property of the Coowned Housing Unit whenever sufficient parking space is available at the property.
(3) Trash: Trash and refuse shall not be left stored within public view, except in proper containers for the purpose of collection by the authorized collectors and between the hours of five a.m. and eight p.m. on scheduled trash collection days. The Owner of the Coowned unit shall use reasonably prudent property ownership/management practices to ensure compliance with all the provisions of Chapter 6.04 of the Municipal Code (Waste Disposal and Diversion), and shall provide “walk-in service”. (4) Occupancy Limits: The maximum number of occupants shall be no more than two (2) persons per bedroom within the Co-owned Housing Unit, plus any minor children (defined for purposes of this Chapter as age 12 or under).

Item 3D - Page 64
55575.18000\42422578.1
Ordinance No. _____

Page 7 ends

(5) Home Repairs & Maintenance: Property repairs and maintenance (external and internal), garden and yard maintenance, and pool cleaning and maintenance shall be prohibited between the hours of 5:00 pm on Friday through 8:00 am on Monday, except in the case of an emergency or the occurrence of an unexpected event that reasonably warrants a more timely or immediate response. (6) Legal Compliance: All Owners must comply with the provisions of this Chapter 5.92 of the Palm Springs Municipal Code
(f) A Co-owned Property Manager applying for a Co-owned Housing Unit Permit must provide evidence of a valid business license issued by the City for the separate business of operating Co-owned Housing Units or submission of a certificate indicating that the Owner is exempt or otherwise not covered by the City's Business Tax Ordinance (Palm Springs Municipal Code, Title 3, Division II) for such activity. The Co-owned Property Manager shall maintain such license in good standing, including timely payment of the applicable business license tax, for so long as the Co-owned Property Manager provides management services within the City.
(g) The City shall not issue a Co-owned Housing Unit Permit for a property that is within 500 feet of the outer property line of any other Co-owned Housing Unit. (h) The City shall not issue any new Co-owned Housing Unit Permit for any property that previously had a Vacation Rental permit revoked in the 24-month period prior to the acquisition of that property by the Owner. (i) The City shall not issue a Co-owned Housing Unit Permit for a property unless the owner obtains the following insurance coverage: (i) a policy of fire and casualty insurance covering the property and personal property in the Coowned Housing Unit in an amount equal to the full replacement value of the property and the estimated value of the personal property in the Co-owned Housing Unit; and (ii) a policy of general liability insurance that include liabilities arising from usage of the Co-owned housing Unit by all owners and guests, with limits of liability not less than $2,000,000. The owner shall maintain such policy for so long as the property is used as a Co-owned Housing Unit.
(j) The Co-owned Housing Unit Permit shall be subject to renewal annually pursuant to procedures provided by the Director. Unless so renewed, the Coowned Housing Unit Permit shall expire one (1) year following the date of its last issuance.
(k) The Director shall process applications for Co-owned Housing Unit permits in the order in which complete applications therefore are received by the Special Programs department.

Item 3D - Page 65
55575.18000\42422578.1
Ordinance No. _____

Page 8 ends

(k) Fees for a Co-owned Housing Unit Permit will be established by resolution of the City Council and shall not exceed $5,000.
(l) A Co-Owned Property Manager shall at all times comply with the following minimum requirements and management regulations:
(1) A Co-Owned Property Manager must identify a local contact person.

The name, physical address, email address, and telephone number associated with any Co-Owned Property Manager and local contact person shall be provided to the City in writing, and written notice of any change to the foregoing shall be provided to the City within three (3) calendar days following any change.
(2) All Co-Owned Property Managers and each individual owner shall be required to sign a sworn affidavit agreeing and acknowledging that shortterm rentals are prohibited in the Co-owned Housing Unit. (3) A Co-Owned Property Manger must ensure that each Co-owned Housing Unit managed by the Manager is governed by an Operating Agreement.
(4) A Co-Owned Property Manager must provide the Director, at the written request of the Director, with a copy of the Operating Agreement. Such copy shall be provided to the Director within three (3) calendar days following the Director’s written request.
(4) Within three (3) calendar days after a request by the Director, the Coowned Property Manager must provide the name and contact information of any Owner that was residing at the Co-owned Housing Unit during a time period when the Director alleges a violation of this Chapter has occurred.
(5) A Co-Owned Property Manager must provide or contract for the provision of yard maintenance services, including landscaping, weed control, and irrigation to a level that is consistent with the level of landscaping and maintenance on adjoining and nearby properties. (6) A Co-Owned Property Manager must provide or contract for the provision of structural maintenance of any buildings on the property. (7) A Co-Owned Property Manager must provide or contract for the provision of routine upkeep, including painting and repair, to a level that is consistent with the level of maintenance on adjoining or nearby properties.
(8) A Co-Owned Property Manager must require the Co-Owners and guests of any Co-owned Housing Unit adopt and adhere to the Good Neighbor Policy described in section 5.92.020(e).
(9) Within three (3) calendar days after a written request by the Director, the Co-owned Property Manager must provide documentation
Item 3D - Page 66
55575.18000\42422578.1
Ordinance No. _____

Page 9 ends

demonstrating that the Co-owned Property Manager has complied with the requirements of this subsection.

5.92.030 Operational Standards
(l) No Co-owned Housing Unit shall be used as Vacation Rental or for Homesharing.
(m) No weddings or commercial events shall be conducted at a Co-owned Housing Unit.
(n) Any radio receiver, musical instrument, phonograph, loudspeaker, sound amplifier, or any machine or device for the producing or reproducing of any sound shall be conducted within a fully enclosed Co-owned Housing Unit and shall not be audible at the property line of the Co-owned Housing Unit. (o) No Co-owned Housing Unit shall be used by any guest(s) without a co-owner present.

5.92.040 Administrative Regulations
The City Manager shall have the authority to establish administrative rules and regulations, which may include, but are not limited to, registration conditions, property valuation determinations, reporting requirements, inspection frequencies, enforcement procedures, disclosure requirements, or insurance requirements, consistent with the provisions of this Chapter, for the purpose of implementing, interpreting, clarifying, carrying out, furthering, and enforcing the requirements and the provisions of this Chapter. No person shall fail to comply with any such regulation. A copy of such administrative rules and regulations shall be maintained on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

5.92.050 Violations
(a) Any person who violates a provision of this Chapter is subject to criminal sanctions and administrative penalties pursuant to Chapter 1.06 of this Code and the specific penalties as provided in this Chapter. Any person who uses, or allows, or causes, the use of property in violation of the provisions in this Chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor for each day in which such property is used, caused to be used, or allowed to be used, in violation of this Chapter.

Except as specifically set forth differently below, an administrative citation issued pursuant to Chapter 1.06 for a first violation shall be five hundred dollars ($500.00) and each subsequent violation shall be one thousand ($1,000.00) dollars. Each administrative citation for a violation of any provision of this Chapter may be levied or assessed against the Co-Owner(s), the Co-Owned Property Manager, or guest, or all of them, depending on who is responsible for committing, causing, or permitting such violation to occur. Upon the issuance of a third administrative citation for any violation of this Chapter, the City Manager may suspend or revoke the Co-owned Managed Housing Permit.

Item 3D - Page 67
55575.18000\42422578.1
Ordinance No. _____

Page 10 ends

(b) Any Co-owned Property Manager who manages a Co-owned Housing Unit without obtaining a Co-owned Property Management Permit is subject to criminal sanctions and administrative penalties pursuant to Chapter 1.06 of this Code. An administrative citation issued pursuant to Chapter 1.06 for a first violation shall be five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) and each subsequent violation shall be one thousand ($10,000.00) dollars.
(c) Any Co-owned Property Manager or any other person that uses, causes to be used, or allows to be used, a Co-owned Housing Unit as a Vacation Rental or for Homesharing is subject to criminal sanctions and administrative penalties pursuant to Chapter 1.06 of this Code. An administrative citation issued pursuant to Chapter 1.06 for a first violation of this subsection (c) shall be five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) and each subsequent violation shall be ten thousand ($10,000.00) dollars.
(d) Any owner of a Co-owned Housing Unit who violates, causes to violate, or allows a violation, of any ordinance related to noise, nuisance, parking, trash, occupancy limits, or the prohibition of weddings or commercial events, shall be punishable by administrative fines and/or remedies as specified in the provisions of the Municipal Code. An administrative citation issued pursuant to Chapter 1.06 for a first violation under this subdivision (d) shall be five hundred dollars ($500.00), $1,000 for a second violation in any 12-month period, and $10,000 for a third, and any subsequent violation in any 12-month period.
(e) Any person who fails to pay any fine, fee or charge provided in this Chapter within the time required, shall pay a penalty in the amounts established by the City Council by resolution. Such penalty may also include interest, at the rate of 10% per annum, from the date on which the fine, fee or charge became due and payable to the City until the date of payment.
(f) The filing of knowingly false claims against a Co-owned Property Manager and/or Co-owned Housing Unit is prohibited. An administrative citation issued pursuant to Chapter 1.06 for a first violation of this subsection (f) shall be five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) and each subsequent violation shall be ten thousand ($10,000.00) dollars.
(g) Notwithstanding any provision contained in chapter 1.06 to the contrary, no pre-citation or courtesy notice shall be required prior to the issuance of any citation or administrative penalty pursuant to this Chapter.

5.92.060 Application to Pre-existing Co-owned Housing Units Any Co-owned Housing Unit in which in which an interest was sold prior to March 10, 2022 shall be subject to the regulatory provisions of this ordinance, but shall not count toward the Co-owned Housing Unit Citywide Cap, the Co-owned Housing Unit Neighborhood Cap, or the prohibition on the issuance of a permit in Item 3D - Page 68
55575.18000\42422578.1
Ordinance No. _____

Page 11 ends

a Neighborhood in which the VR Neighborhood Percentage Cap, as outlined in Palm Springs Municipal Code Chapter 5.25 has been exceeded.” Item 3D - Page 69
55575.18000\42422578.1
Ordinance No. _____

Page 12 ends

EXHIBIT “B”

PROPOSED UPDATE TO TIMESHARE DEFINITIONS
Section 93.23.11(A) of the Palm Springs Municipal (Zoning) Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
“93.23.11 Use or Occupancy of Land on a “Time-Share” Basis.

A. Definitions.

For the purposes of this section, the following terms shall have the following meanings:
“Time-share interest” means the right to exclusively occupy a time-share property for a period of time on a recurring basis pursuant to a time-share plan, regardless of whether or not such right is coupled with a property interest in the time-share property or a specified portion thereof. “Time-share plan” means any arrangement, plan, scheme, or similar device, whether by membership agreement, bylaws, shareholder agreement, partnership agreement, sale, lease, deed, license, right to use agreement, or by any other means, whereby a purchaser, in exchange for consideration, receives the right to exclusive use of an accommodation or accommodations, whether through the granting of ownership rights, possessory rights or otherwise, for a period of time less than a full year during any given year, on a recurring basis for more than one year, but not necessarily for consecutive years.
“Time-share project” means a property consisting of one or more accommodations subject to the same time-share plan, together with any other property or rights to property appurtenant to those accommodations. “Time-share use” means the use of one or more accommodations or any part thereof, as a time-share property pursuant to a time-share plan.”

Item 3D - Page 70

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: JULY 9, 2024 BUSINESS & LEGISLATIVE
SUBJECT: DIRECTION REGARDING FEASIBILITY OF POTENTIAL ARENAS

BUSINESS DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING POSSIBLE FLAG

POLE, BISTRO LIGHTING, AND/OR ENTRY SIGNAGE
FROM: Scott C. Stiles, City Manager
BY: Office of Economic Development
Department of Public Works
SUMMARY:

At its June 27, 2024 meeting, City Council requested information be provided on the City’s ability to install a flagpole within the Arenas Business District.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Authorize staff to conduct additional due diligence for installation of a flag pole at the Arenas Business district; identify the processes and funding sources required; and, draft the appropriate legal instruments that conform with other City agreements for review and approval by Council at a future meeting.

BACKGROUND:

Over the past years, the Arenas Business District, now officially a business district under the City’s Commercial District Program (Ord. No. 2091), has discussed the installation of a flagpole along Arenas that serves as a district centerpiece and beacon for the LGBTQ+ community.

In concert with conceptualizing possible district improvements, City staff conducted preliminary feasibility analysis and due diligence research on the possible location of a 65-foot flagpole to be installed in the District. Staff has identified a site on the north side of Arenas, near the western edge of the district (photo attached). Additional due diligence needs to take place once the location is finalized. The preliminary site analysis is reviewed below.

The Arenas District has proposed funding a portion of the overall cost, including the flagpole itself, along with a memorial plaque and flags to mitigate the costs incurred by Item 3E - Page 1
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 2
Business District Improvements
the City as a result of installation. An estimate of the potential costs, and other considerations, are detailed below.

STAFF ANALYSIS:

Staff conducted an on-site inspection of the Arenas district along East Arenas Road between Indian Canyon and South Calle Encilia and identified the location noted in the attached map as the most feasible location (Attachment A). In addition, staff reviewed historic as-built plans and concluded the proposed site may be suitable for flagpole installation.

Staff researched the costs associated with installing a 65’ flagpole at this site. Preliminary cost estimates for the flagpole “kit” itself, without additional installation costs at the site in the attached map, were approximately $70,000. Adding 20% contingency for additional permits, fees and unforeseen costs, the total cost of the flagpole may reach $85,000. This does not include lighting the flagpole.

To further understand feasibility, staff would need to conduct potholing to verify the location of underground utilities. Correspondingly, staff could review the possibility of placing the flagpole on private property but concerns about cost and timing may make locating a flagpole on private land more challenging.

If the flagpole needs to be lit, negotiations with adjacent building owners may provide the best lighting solution for the flag, rather than attaching lights to the pole itself. (The United States Flag is required to be lit if flown after dusk and before dawn. According to the American Legion, the light must be sufficient for a casual observer to identify it as the US Flag.)
In early 2024, the Arenas Business District voted to form a flag committee which would both contribute funds toward the cost of the project, as well as oversee a flag policy to determine which flags will be purchased and when they can be flown. Any additional improvements such as memorial plaques and flags themselves will be solely the cost and control of the commercial district.

In order to allow the Arenas Business District to contribute to, and have oversight and maintenance of the flagpole, staff will need to confer with City Attorney on the appropriate legal instrument with which to finalize the project. The legal instrument would conform with other similar agreements made by the City in the past.

OTHER DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS:

In addition to a flagpole, other district improvements have been suggested that could be replicated in the future for other commercial districts as they form, in addition to the Arenas District. They include “bistro lighting,” banner poles and banners, archways and other ideas.

Item 3E - Page 2
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 3
Business District Improvements
Staff is conducting preliminary feasibility of adding “bistro lights” which can be strung across public streets to identify an area, serve as pedestrian wayfinding and improve public safety in the district. Lights of this kind must meet several safety, engineering and transportation requirements (e.g. height of lights to allow for emergency vehicles).

Other district improvements such as banner and banner poles, shade structures and gateway archways (similar to what is found at the entrance to the Gaslamp district in San Diego) were considered. Costs for those improvements have not yet been investigated by staff.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:

Staff will require additional time to review environmental requirements for this project.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The cost of the flagpole, at approximately $85,000 (without lights) would be funded by the City and in part by the Arenas Business District flag committee. Funding source(s) need to be identified in the City budget to cover costs of the project. Possible suggested sources for the City funds could be district discretionary funds or capital improvement funds from the general fund.

Staff can also continue to review costs of other district improvements over the course of the calendar year, and as districts are established. However, installation of and improvements at other business districts would have to rely on the ability of the district in which they are planned to raise funds to support the project(s).

REVIEWED BY:

Department Director: Wayne Olson
City Attorney: Jeffrey S. Ballinger
City Manager: Scott Stiles
ATTACHMENTS:

A. Map of possible location of flagpole
Item 3E - Page 3

ATTACHMENT A
Item 3E - Page 4
Item 3E - Page 5

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: JULY 9, 2024 BUSINESS & LEGISLATIVE
SUBJECT: CONSIDER PROPOSAL FROM RIVERSIDE UNIVERSITY HEALTH

SYSTEM AND BLUE ZONES, LLC TO PARTICIPATE IN

TRANSFORMATION PHASE
FROM: Scott C. Stiles, City Manager
BY: Teresa Gallavan, Assistant City Manager
SUMMARY:

Riverside University Health System has reached out to the City of Palm Springs to advise of their accomplishments in receiving $34 million in donations for the transformation phase of the Blue Zones projects for five Riverside County cities and communities and has requested the City join the effort and allocate $180,000 over the course of this 3-year project.

RECOMMENDATION:

Provide direction to staff.

BUSINESS PRINCIPAL DISCLOSURE:

According to the Public Integrity Disclosure form (Attachment A), IEHP Foundation is registered in the State of California.

BACKGROUND:

On October 17, 2022, City Council directed staff to present the proposal from Blue Zones, LLC for consideration at the next Council meeting. The proposal outlined the City’s participation in a feasibility study that assessed and made recommendations regarding the viability of Palm Springs obtaining designation as a Blue Zone. The feasibility study was done concurrently with several other cities and communities in Riverside County at the cost of $85,000 versus $100,000 if the City were to conduct its feasibility study at another time.

Blue Zones are places where entire communities live significantly longer, healthier, and more active lives. By participating in the feasibility study, Palm Springs received Blue Item 3F - Page 1
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 2
Allocate Funding for Blue Zones Transformation Phase
Zone Activation assessment, recommendations, and estimated costs to pursue designation. These findings were provided in a Readiness Report and Proposal, also called a “Blueprint for Transformation.” (Attachment B), and consisted of the following phases:
• Phase 1 – Community Leadership Presentation
• Phase 2 – Mutual Agreement to Start the Community Development Process • Phase 3 – Site Visit
• Phase 4 – Report and Proposal/Readiness Recommendations Delivery • Phase 5 – Final Decision Meeting
City Council authorized staff to enter into an agreement with Blue Zones, LLC to participate in the feasibility study and assessment on October 27, 2022. The feasibility study provided the City with an assessment of the community’s desire and readiness on whether it wanted to pursue designation as a Blue Zone as well as identify areas for improving community well-being. Three critical factors to Blue Zones include:
• Champions who lead and own the processes of educating and driving community stakeholder interest and support for bringing the necessary funding required for a successful Blue Zones Project. These champions typically are leaders of health plans, health systems, foundations, major employers, and philanthropic organizations.
• A broad base of stakeholders and leaders from multiple sectors who understand the value of Blue Zone Projects and are willing to pledge their support, drive engagement, participate in Blue Zones Projects and initiatives as volunteers and influencers, and provide the resources needed to be successful. • Funding sources and strategies that allow the momentum created during the community development process to be leveraged into a timely decision and Blue Zones Project implementation.

The City’s cost to proceed was outlined to cost $5.9 million over a three-year period, for the transformation phase of the project. Palm Springs was one of 5 additional cities taking part in this feasibility study and assessment, with a total transformation phase estimated to cost $40 million.

As part of the feasibility study and assessment, numerous outreach meetings were held for community engagement.

The ONE-PS Board took a stance against proceeding with the transformation phase. As noted in the ONE-PS Board Minutes of July 5, 2023, “...The Board reaffirmed our opposition to the Blue Zones program and feels that investment in existing initiatives and organizations is a less intrusive and more viable way to address local issues....” Item 3F - Page 2
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 3
Allocate Funding for Blue Zones Transformation Phase
STAFF ANALYSIS:

Since the conclusion of the feasibility study and assessment phase of the project Riverside University Health System (RUHS) has been seeking funding for the transformation phase of the project for all cities. RUHS has secured $34 million in funding from IEHP, Kaiser, and Molina, leaving a remaining $6 million unfunded.

With considerable funding in place, RUHS has reached back out to the cities seeking contributions equating to approximately 2-3% of each cities’ estimated transformation cost if participating and move this project forward while they continue to seek additional donations to close the funding gap.

The transformation phase of the project would kick-off with Blue Zones engagement with local community members to hire four (4) dedicated personnel to work solely on the transformation of Palm Springs. This task is estimated to take place during the first 9 months before kicking off the 3-year transformation phase. The transformation phase would focus on the following key elements:

Built Environment
Routine, daily movement and social connection are central tenets of the Blue Zones principles of a healthy, engaged lifestyle. This does not necessarily mean structured exercise of scheduled interactions, rather, through an environment that is supportive of walking, bicycling, and social connectedness. Essential Blue Zones goals for the built environment include moving naturally, encouraging social gathering places, completing neighborhoods, and increasing housing options.

Food Environment
Enjoying a nutritious diet daily, combined with social connection, and a sense of purpose are fundamental components of the healthy, active Blue Zones lifestyle. In the context of food, this means the community where we live and the environments where we spend most of our time offer affordable, culturally relevant, nourishing dietary choices and the opportunity to relax and enjoy our meals in the fellowship of others. It also means our local food system fosters a vibrant, healthy local food culture; access to nutritious options in the places we spend time; community food assets and infrastructure that promote local agriculture and healthy options; and the development of healthy food skills across the lifespan. Policy and systems changes, combined with shifts to community infrastructure, are ways to move the dial on health outcomes.

Tobacco
Tobacco policy addresses four major intervention arenas: 1) commercial tobacco retail environments, 2) secondhand/thirdhand smoke exposure, 3) youth prevention education, and 4) cessation support.

Worksites
The Blue Zones worksite transformation approach takes the focus off the individual and Item 3F - Page 3
City Council Staff Report
July 9, 2024 -- Page 4
Allocate Funding for Blue Zones Transformation Phase
targets the environment, buildings, and social networks to make the healthy choice the easy choice. Employers are encouraged to achieve minimum thresholds among five areas of best practice: leadership, purpose, physical environment, social networks/engagement, policy, and benefits. These initiatives nudge employees to move more, eat healthier, make meaningful connections, and help people to find and live out their purpose. Signification improvements in these areas would complete the city’s Path to Certification (Attachment C).

The four dedicated personnel would work with a steering committee, of which would include an assigned city staff member, to provide direction and elevate work through to completion. The steering committee would appoint members and additional city staff to subject specific work such as policy changes as required.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:

In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines the requested action is not a “Project” pursuant to Section 15378(b)(5). Organizational or administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment are not considered a “Project”. However, future phases of this project may require CEQA actions.

ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PLANNING:

This item aligns with the City Council Priority 1, Quality of Life.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Funding of $180,000 for the transformation phase would require an appropriation from General Fund Balance. Additionally, a commitment of staff time is required.

REVIEWED BY:

Assistant City Manager: Teresa Gallavan
City Manager: Scott Stiles
ATTACHMENTS:

A. Public Integrity Disclosure Form
B. Assessment, Readiness, and Feasibility Report
C. The Path to Certification
Item 3F - Page 4

ATTACHMENT A

Item 3F - Page 5
CITY OF PALM SPRINGS – PUBLIC INTEGRITY DISCLOSURE

APPLICANT DISCLOSURE FORM

Page 1 of 2 ends

Palm Springs City CouncilJuly 9, 2024

Palm Springs City Council
July 9, 2024