From:Kristie Ramos, CMC
To:Juan Guerra
Subject:Fwd: May 7 Public Comment; Lack of Credibility of City Reports, Cost Metrics, and Failure to Correct Inaccurate Reports
Date:Wednesday, May 6, 2026 9:36:36 AM
Attachments:city_seal_transparent_2__4b81bffe-bb95-4b18-a74a-4086edea3b60.png Juan,
Please provide a copy of the public comment below to Records for Laserfiche and print a copy for the public comment binder.
Thank you,
Kristie
Kristie Ramos, CMC
City Clerk
Phone: 760-324-4511 Ext. 488
E-mail: [email protected]
69-825 Highway 111, Rancho Mirage, California, 92270
www.RanchoMirageCa.gov
TRANSPARENCY NOTICE
Some or all of the content of this e-mail and its attachments may be subject to disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act (Government Code section 7920-7931, et seq.) Begin forwarded message:
From: Michael Harrington
Date: May 6, 2026 at 7:03:24 AM PDT
To: "Kristie Ramos, CMC"
Subject: RE: May 7 Public Comment; Lack of Credibility of City Reports, Cost Metrics, and Failure to Correct Inaccurate Reports
CAUTION: This email originated from outside The City of Rancho Mirage. DO NOT CLICK links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Warning: Unusual sender
You don't usually receive emails from this address.
Make sure you trust this sender before taking any actions.
Mayor and Council,
I want to raise concerns regarding the reliability of official City reports, fiscal
metrics, and information being presented to residents as the City discusses potential future tax increases and ballot measures.
POLICE STAFFING METRICS
During the May 5 Town Hall budget discussion, the City Manager stated Rancho Mirage has “double” the average number of deputies per 1,000 residents, apparently referring to figures previously cited in a public report by Councilmember Steve Downs comparing Rancho Mirage staffing levels to Riverside County contract averages.
However, FBI Uniform Crime Reporting police employee data has historically placed national policing averages around approximately 2.3 to 2.4 officers per 1,000 residents. See FBI UCR Police Employee Data tables:
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/topic-pages/police- employee-data
Accordingly, approximately 2 deputies per 1,000 residents is generally near the national average range — not “double the average.”
The City also repeatedly cited tourism and part-time residents as justification for maintaining elevated staffing levels year-round, despite most Coachella Valley cities also experiencing substantial seasonal fluctuations in visitors and part-time populations.
Residents deserve accurate comparisons, accurate metrics, and transparent fiscal assumptions before being asked to support future tax increases or ballot measures.
CITY REPORT ACCURACY AND HIDDEN COSTS
As an example of broader concerns regarding inaccurate City reports and deficient cost measurement, the written staff report regarding the Children’s Room shelving item specifically stated that the shelving needed to retain the ability to be removed annually to accommodate the Writers Festival.
During the May 5 Town Hall, when I first referenced the shelving report during public comment, the City Manager implied I was misleading the public regarding the purpose of the project. In response, I pulled up the official City agenda packet and read directly from the written staff report, which states:
“a key requirement of the new shelving is that it be fixed… while also retaining the ability to be removed annually to accommodate the Rancho Mirage Writers Festival.”
Only after the report language was read into the record did the explanations begin to change, with staff later claiming the report itself was incorrect and that the project was supposedly only about safety.
The head of the Library/Observatory, who authored the report, later acknowledged that he omitted the alleged safety rationale from the written report itself. The written report contains no mention of safety concerns, engineering findings, or expert safety analysis.
The public also heard conflicting statements regarding funding responsibility, including statements that the City would pay part of the cost, followed later by statements that no City funds would be used at all.
Most concerning, the head of the Library/Observatory publicly acknowledged the report was incorrect regarding the Writers Festival language and omission of the alleged safety rationale, yet also stated it would not be corrected prior to Council consideration despite the City having a formal process for late submissions or revisions.
I specifically suggested that staff contact the City Attorney or utilize the City’s established protocol for late submissions or addenda in order to correct the inaccurate report. Despite that suggestion, the public was again told the inaccurate report would not be corrected.
During the same May 5 Town Hall, in response to a citizen question regarding whether the Library/Observatory costs the City anything, the City Manager stated it costs the City “nothing” and is “completely donor funded.” However, donor funding of certain items or programs does not necessarily mean there is zero cost to the City. City staff time, planning, administration, procurement oversight, facility operations, coordination, maintenance, utilities, and use of public infrastructure still involve taxpayer-supported resources and indirect public costs.
MISLEADING PUBLIC MESSAGING AND CULTURAL PRIORITIES
During the Town Hall, residents raised concerns regarding discretionary spending and whether certain cultural programs should be reduced in order to prioritize core services such as police and fire.
In response, the City Manager stated the City could cut all cultural programs but that doing so would “be sad.”
Residents expressing concerns regarding cultural spending in the context of possible future tax increases are not attempting to make the City “sad.” They are asking legitimate questions regarding fiscal priorities, affordability, and allocation of limited public resources.
A rise in crime or inability to adequately fund core public safety services would also “be sad.”
In addition, many cultural and entertainment opportunities can be provided through private enterprise, nonprofits, sponsorships, and voluntary community participation rather than ongoing taxpayer-supported commitments.
Residents also deserve greater input regarding what cultural programming is actually desired by the public. Many discretionary cultural priorities appear to originate from long-standing boards, commissions, staff recommendations, and institutional preferences rather than broad direct public input.
This raises broader concerns regarding an apparent City practice of allowing
admittedly inaccurate reports to remain uncorrected in the official public record, while also failing to adequately account for indirect or hidden public costs associated with donor-funded or nonprofit-supported activities.
Residents cannot make informed decisions regarding future tax increases if official reports, budget assumptions, and fiscal presentations are inaccurate, misleading, emotionally framed, later verbally contradicted, and never formally corrected.
Thank you.
Mike Harrington