2014 11 18 CCCITY COUNCIL AGENDA
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta
REGULAR MEETING ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 18, 20114
3:30 P.M. CLOSED SESSION | 4:000 P.M. OPEEN SESSION
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL: Counncilmemberrs: Evans, Franklin, Henderson, Osborne, Mayor Adoolph
PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA
At this ttime, members of the ppublic may address thee City Council on any mmatter not llisted
on the aagenda. Okdd`rd bnlokkdsd ` !qdpttdrs sn rod``j! enql `mmc khlhs xnttq bnlldmmsr sn
sgqdd lhmhmtsdr- The City Counccil values yoour commennts; howeveer in accorddance with SState
law, no action shall be taken on any iteem not apppearing on tthe agendaa unless it is an
emergenncy item autthorized by GC 54954.2(b).
CLOSED SESSION -
1. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTYYNEGOTTIATOR PUURSUANT TO
GOVERNMMENT CODDE SECTIOON 549566.8 FOR PROPERTY LOCATEDD AT
DUNE PALMS ROADD AND HIGGHWAY 111 (APN: 6600-020-0553).
CITY NEGGOTIATOR:: CITY MAANAGER
NEGOTIATTING PARTTY: MARTTIN DOLEMMO
UNDER NEGOTIATIOON: POTENTIAL TERRMS AND CONDITIOONS OF
ACQQUISITION AND/OR DDISPOSITIOON OF PROOPERTY
QDDBDRR SN BKNRDC RRDRRHNM
RECONVVENE AT 44:00 P.M.
PLEDGEE OF ALLEGGIANCE
CITY COUNCIL AGENDAA 1
NOVEMBEER 18, 2014
PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA
At this time, members of the public may address the City Council on any matter not listed
on the agenda. Okd`rd bnlokdsd ` !qdptdrs sn rod`j! enql `mc khlhs xntq bnlldmsr sn
sgqdd lhmtsdr- The City Council values your comments; however in accordance with State
law, no action shall be taken on any item not appearing on the agenda unless it is an
emergency item authorized by GC 54954.2(b).
CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
ANNOUNCEMENTS, PRESENTATIONS AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
PAGE
1. PRESENTATION ON PUBLIC HEALTH CONCERN: EBOLA -
SARAH MACK, DEPUTY DIRECTOR RIVERSIDE COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
1- K@ PTHMS@ BG@LADQNE BNLLDQBD ũTOC@SD 7
CONSENT CALENDAR
NOTE: Consent Calendar items are routine in nature and can be approved by one motion.
1. APPROVE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 4, 2014 11
2. DENIAL OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FILED BY LISA TURNER AND 19
LHBG@DK CNQM: C@SD NE KNRR ũ RDOSDLADQ 7+ 1/03
3. SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 520 21
APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND SILVERROCK DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY, LLC, RELATING TO THE VESTING OF CERTAIN
DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FOR THE SILVERROCK RESORT, AND
AUTHORIZING IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS RELATED THERETO
4. EXCUSE ABSENCE OF PLANNING COMMISSIONER 85
FITZPATRICK FOR NOVEMBER 25, 2014 MEETING
5. APPROVE DEMAND REGISTER DATED OCTOBER 31 AND 87
NOVEMBER 7, 2014
6. RECEIVE AND FILE REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORTS 109
DATED OCTOBER 31, 2014
7. RECEIVE AND FILE TREASUREQŬR QDONQS C@SDC RDOSDLADQ 117
30, 2014
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA 2
NOVEMBER 18, 2014
PAGE
8. ADOPT RESOLUTION TO EXTEND TIME TO COMPLETE OFF-129
SITE AND ON-SITE IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT MAP NO.
30092, PIAZZA SERENA
\[RESOLUTION 2014-061\]
BUSINESS SESSION
1. APPROVE ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP AND DAILY USE FEES FOR 137
THE WELLNESS ADDITION AT THE SENIOR CENTER
139
2. ADOPT RESOLUTION DESIGNATING SPEED LIMITS FOR
CERTAIN STREETS
\[RESOLUTION 2014-062\]
3. ORDINANCE TO AMEND SECTION 3.30.050 OF THE MUNICIPAL 147
CODE RELATING TO THE PREVAILING WAGE REQUIREMENT TO
ALLOW LA QUINTA TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR STATE FUNDS FOR
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS
STUDY SESSION - NONE
REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
1. CVAG CONSERVATION COMMISSION
(Evans)
2. CVAG ENERGY & ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE
(Evans)
3. GREATER PALM SPRINGS CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU
(Evans)
4. ANIMAL CAMPUS COMMISSION
(Franklin)
5. CALIFORNIA JOINT POWERS INSURANCE AUTHORITY
(Franklin)
6. COACHELLA VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
(Franklin)
7. COACHELLA VALLEY ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP
(Franklin)
8. COACHELLA VALLEY MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY
(Franklin)
9. JACQUELINE COCHRAN REGIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY
(Franklin)
10. CVAG PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
(Henderson)
11. CVAG TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
(Henderson)
12. LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES DELEGATE
(Henderson)
13 RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
(Henderson)
14. CVAG VALLEY-WIDE HOMELESSNESS COMMITTEE
(Osborne)
15. DESERT SANDS SCHOOL DISTRICT COMMITTEE
(Osborne & Franklin)
05- HHC DMDQFX BNMRTLDQRŬ @CUHRNQX BNLLHSSDD
(Osborne)
17. COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT POLICY COMMITTEE
(Adolph)
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA 3
NOVEMBER 18, 2014
18. CVAG EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
(Adolph)
19. SO. CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS DELEGATE
(Adolph)
20. SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY
(Adolph)
21. INVESTMENT ADVISORY BOARD MEETING MINUTES DATED 155
SEPTEMBER 10, 2014
22. COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES 157
DATED OCTOBER 13, 2014
DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS
1. CITY MANAGER
2. CITY ATTORNEY
2- BHSX BKDQJ ũ TOBNLHMF EVENTS AND CITY CALENDAR 159
3- BNLLTMHSX RDQUHBDRũNBSNADQ 1/03 163
4- OTAKHB VNQJR ũ NBSNADQ 1/03 171
L@XNQŬR @MC BNTMBHK LDLADQŬR HSDLR
PUBLIC HEARINGS ũ 39// O-L-
For all Public Hearings on the agenda, a complesdc ŮQdptdrs sn Rod`jů enql ltrs ad ehkdc
with the City Clerk prior to consideration of that item.
A person may submit written comments to City Council before a public hearing or appear
in support or opposition to the approval of a project(s). If you challenge a project(s) in
court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the
public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to the public
hearing.
1. ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING USE OF FISCAL YEAR 178
2015/2016 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS
AND AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT
APPLICATIONS TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
\[RESOLUTION 2014-063\]
2. ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A GENERAL PLAN 186
AMENDMENT, INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE TO ADOPT A ZONE
CHANGE FROM MAJOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES TO VILLAGE
COMMERCIAL, AND CONFIRM A DETERMINATION OF
EXEMPTION PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT SECTION 15061 (B)(3) REVIEW OF EXEMPTIONS
ũ FDMDQ@K QTKD
\[RESOLUTION 2014-064\]
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA 4
NOVEMBER 18, 2014
3. ADOPT RESOLUTION TO INCREASE VEHICLE IMPOUND COST 208
RECOVERY FEE
\[RESOLUTION 2014-065\]
ADJOURNMENT
The next regular meeting of the City Council will be held on December 2, 2014,
commencing with closed session at 3:00 p.m. and open session at 4:00 p.m. at
the City Hall Council Chambers, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253.
DECLARATION OF POSTING
I, Susan Maysels, City Clerk, of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare that the
foregoing Agenda for the La Quinta City Bntmbhk lddshmf v`r onrsdc nm sgd BhsxŬr
website, near the entrance to the Council Chambers at 78-495 Calle Tampico, and
the bulletin boards at the Stater Brothers Supermarket at 78-630 Highway 111,
and the La Quinta Cove Post Office at 51-321 Avenida Bermudas, on November
14, 2014.
DATED: November 14, 2014
SUSAN MAYSELS, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
Public Notices
The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special
dptholdms hr mddcdc enq sgd gd`qhmf hlo`hqdc+ okd`rd b`kk sgd Bhsx BkdqjŬr neehbd `s
777-7103, twenty-four (24) hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations
will be made.
If special electronic equipment is needed to make presentations to the City Council,
`qq`mfdldmsr rgntkc ad l`cd hm `cu`mbd ax bnms`bshmf sgd Bhsx BkdqjŬr neehbd `s
777-7103. A one (1) week notice is required.
If background material is to be presented to the Councilmembers during a City
Council meeting, please be advised that eight (8) copies of all documents, exhibits,
etc., must be supplied to the City Clerk for distribution. It is requested that this
take place prior to the beginning of the meeting.
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any
item(s) on this agenda will be made available for public inspection at the Community
Development counter at City Hall located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta,
California, 92253, during normal business hours.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA 5
NOVEMBER 18, 2014
7
BusinessesinLaQuinta
AsReportedonPlayInLaQuinta.com
{źŭƓğƷǒƩĻ9ǝĻƓƷƭ
hƷŷĻƩ
Ћі
Ћі
wĻƭƷğǒƩğƓƷ
ЋАі
DƚƌŅ
Њі
IƚƷĻƌ
Њі
wĻƷğźƌ
ЏАі
8
9
10
CONSENT:1
CITY COUNCIL
MINUTES
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2014
A regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council was called to order at 5:00 p.m. by
Mayor Adolph.
PRESENT: Councilmembers Evans, Franklin, Henderson, Osborne, Mayor Adolph
ABSENT: None
CLOSED SESSION
None
Mayor Adolph led the audience in the pledge of allegiance.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON AGENDA
Public Speaker: Lois Power, La Quinta Ms. Power requested assistance with a
Mayor Adolph referred the matter to Code Enforcement to investigate and report back to
Council and the speakers.
Public Speaker: Monica Lagasse, La Quinta Ms. Lagasse said she lives next door to
the barking dog and requested that the City take action to resolve the problem.
Public Speaker: Mark Johnson, Director of Engineering for Coachella Valley Water
District Mr. Johnson reported that the relocation of the Coachella Canal is complete
and has been restored to its original capacity. He presented a PowerPoint of the project
as it progressed.
Public Speaker: Chelsey Panchot, US Sales and Tour Manager for Up With People
-member cast will be coming to desert
cities in March. They will be contributing 1,000 hours of community service in local
school and community organizations, and will conduct two public performances of music
and dancing from all over the world. Ms. Panchot said the purpose of the organization
is to inspire people to get involved in their community. She explained the group was
looking for suggestions on ways to get involved in La Quinta because the money raised
from performances is donated back to organizations in the local communities.
Councilmember Evans asked Ms. Panchot to work with Community Services Director
Hylton on the event.
Public Speaker: Mark Moran, La Quinta Mr. Moran congratulated Councilmember
Henderson on her upcoming retirement and expressed his gratitude for her service.
CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
Confirmed
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 1
NOVEMBER 4, 2014
11
ANNOUNCEMENTS, PRESENTATIONS AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Mayor Adolph and Councilmembers presented the Government Finance Officers
Association Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting for fiscal
year ending June 30, 2013 to members of the Finance Department.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 21, 2014
2. APPROVE DEMAND REGISTERS DATED OCTOBER 17, OCTOBER 20, AND
OCTOBER 24, 2014
3. APPROVE TWO YEAR EXTENSION TO BANKING SERVICES AGREEMENT
WITH WELLS FARGO BANK
4. APPROVE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE BETWEEN SAVE
OUR LA QUINTA NEIGHBORHOOD, THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND LQR
PROPERTY, LLC AND ACCEPT SURRENDER OF ENTITLEMENTS FOR
SIGNATURE POOL PROJECT AT LA QUINTA RESORT
5. DENIAL OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FILED BY VERIZON; DATE OF LOSS
APRIL 16, 2014
6. ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A PURCHASE AND SALE
AGREEMENT WITH DESERT LAND HOLDINGS, LLC FOR SALE OF
CERTAIN CITY PROPERTY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF JEFFERSON
STREET BETWEEN PALM CIRCLE DRIVE AND THE WHITEWATER
CHANNEL
\[RESOLUTION 2014-058\]
MOTION A motion was made and seconded by Councilmembers Evans/Franklin to
approve the Consent Calendar as recommended with Item No. 6 adopting Resolution
2014-058. Motion passed unanimously.
BUSINESS SESSION
None
STUDY SESSION
None
Councilmember Evans reported that Karen Ross of the World Affairs Council spoke at
the Speaker Series about water issues, and Brian Nestande held a town hall discussion
on the Salton Sea at La Quinta City Hall. She said both were good discussions and
shed light on Coachella Valley issues and needs.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 2
NOVEMBER 4, 2014
12
Councilmember Franklin said the weekend airshow, a free public event held in the
Valley every two years at Jacqueline Cochran Airport, was maybe the best ever. Ms.
Franklin said she was glad La Quinta was a contributor.
Mayor Adolph reported that the Italian Festival held in Civic Center Park over the
weekend was a great success. Thousands of participants enjoyed wonderful food and
entertainment.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
ADOPT RESOLUTIONS APPROVING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
1.
AND PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT, AND INTRODUCE AN
ORDINANCE APPROVING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH
SILVERROCK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC FOR THE SILVERROCK
RESORT PROJECT
\[RESOLUTIONS 2014-059 AND 2014-060, ORDINANCE 520\]
City Manager Spevacek, Assistant to City ManagerChris Escobedo,
economic and real estate consultant Jon McMillen of Tall Man Group, and Community
Development Director Johnson presented the staff report, which is on file in the City
Councilmembers received clarification from staff on the sources of Transient Occupancy
Tax (TOT), bond restrictions regarding property sale and public revenue,
accommodating residents and hotel guests on one golf course, and clubhouse
financing.
Mayor Adolph declared the JOINT PUBLIC HEARING OPEN at 5:56 p.m. for the
two agreements: Development Agreement and the Purchase, Sale and
Development Agreement, both of which are by and between the City of La Quinta
and SilverRock Development Company, LLC.
Public Speaker: John Gamlin, SilverRock Development Company, LLC Mr. Gamlin
introduced members of the SilverRock Development Company, LLC and gave a brief
overview of the project.
Public Speaker: Gregory Mangus, La Quinta Mr. Mangus spoke against the
SilverRock development, specifically, selling parcels for $1 regardless of IRS
regulations-
family homes built on land sold to them for $1, and: considering a sales tax increase,
while offering sales tax and TOT rebates to developers.
Public Speaker: Robert Sylk, La Quinta Mr. Sylk said he is not in favor of the plan
because the developer has not won over the residents; there is no proof of funds
statement; if developer goes belly up and assigns it, it could go to someone who wants
to build a race track; the City is at risk, not the developer; it burdens the next generation,
and; the vote should be delayed until newly-elected councilmembers are seated.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 3
NOVEMBER 4, 2014
13
Public Speaker: Don Tannahill, Rancho Mirage Mr. Tannahill spoke in support of the
project. He has had offices in La Quinta since 1984 working first for Landmark Land
Company and now with Capitis Real Estate. Mr. Tannahill commended the Council for
approaching the development as a partnership because scary for project
financiers and stated that he has had successful dealings with this developer.
Mayor Adolph declared the JOINT PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED at 6:11 p.m.
Councilmember Osborne said that the City Council has been working on the
development of SilverRock since 2002 when the City purchased it for $2 a foot, which is
one of the best investments the City ever made. The City has gone through numerous
challenges since the purchase, including the worst recession since 1929 (2008
recession), the dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency (RDA), the Governor taking
$41 million from the City to balance the State budget, and numerous hurdles set by the
State Department of Finance. Mr. Osborne noted that the Council considered
numerous developers and thinks the Council has chosen the right developer who has
been straight with Council and staff from day one with an open set of books showing
everything they want to do, all they need to do, and negotiating with staff with the
understanding that the City must get what it needs as well. Mr. Osborne said that the
Council must look well beyond the initial 15 years of this deal to secure a level of
income to keep the City viable and it is serious business as the current revenue cannot
cover ongoing costs of public safety and services. The Council considered a sales tax
increase but if this development is successful, that may not be necessary. Mr. Osborne
continued to say that the agreements contain protection clauses for the City to take
back the property should the developer be unable to perform, and depending on the
stage of the development, the property could return to the City with over $40 million of
infrastruct and potentially much
more than that if hotels or residential units have been built. He further stated that this
developer is contributing substantial funds of its own, about $360 million. Mr. Osborne
explained that the agreements before the Council tonight have been available for public
review in full detail for three to four weeks full access has been available to everyone
in La Quinta or elsewhere and the public has had many opportunities to ask questions
of the Council or staff. He said all questions are welcome, and that everything is wide
open Mr. Osborne acknowledged that the
Council had few questions tonight because over the past year and one-half they have
studied this and have had many, many questions about every aspect of the deal. He
said that, as with all things in life, there are some uncertainties but he believes the right
developer is at the table, and the right protection clauses are in the agreements to
protect the people of La Quinta as much as possible with something of this size. Mr.
Osborne thanked the Council and staff for their 12 years of hard work on this SilverRock
project.
Councilmember Henderson stated that this complex process started 12 years ago with
great excitement, meetings until 2:00 a.m., disagreements, water issues, and finally all
parties got to the point of approval. She said the plan before the Council maintains the
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 4
NOVEMBER 4, 2014
14
integrity of the original purpose. Ms. Henderson said that if all goes well, the revenue
stream from this property will be precisely what is needed in the future. She recalled
that it was disheartening when the economy took a nosedive in 2008 and the first
developer, who lost $10 million, was not able to perform. That may happen again, she
continued, because La Quinta does not control Sacramento or Washington DC. Ms.
Henderson said she has no confidence in Sacramento because it does not seem to
have any understanding of how city revenue sources work. She said that although the
Governor, who as a former mayor used the RDA to its fullest and understands city
revenues, crippled cities once he became Governor by dissolving RDAs and relying on
the naivety of Legislators to go along. Ms. Henderson said again that she has no
confidence in Sacramento and no confidence in the next steps they will take against
cities such as SB 7 going into effect January 2015. She stated that she has no
problem with the integrity, ability or reputation of the developers to this deal and
believes they are as good as or better than any development team and further, that the
City has put together the best deal possible. However, Ms. Henderson stated that she
has very serious concerns about the future economy and about the State of California.
She thanked everyone for all the time and goodwill put into this project and stated that
she was pleased that the Council maintained the original purpose for buying the
property. Ms. Henderson said the Council has done its job with over 12 reviews,
presentations and hearings on this project.
Councilmember Evans said that she has been one of the loudest supporters of the
project from day one and echoes the summary of Councilmember Osborne. She said
the resident card matter is outside the scope of this agreement because it concerns a
City-owned facility, run by City rules. Ms. Evans noted that the Council was making a
very serious decision tonight that was also very exciting. She expressed that she was
proud of the work done by the entire team and the project the Council was bringing to
the City of La Quinta.
Councilmember Franklin recalled her first days on the Council when Councilmember
financial
future because once the City is fully built out, there must be revenue streams to support
services. She stated that the Council does not take this decision lightly every aspect
of the deal has been examined and much of it torn apart and rebuilt and she has great
confidence in the development team and is excited to move forward with it.
Mayor Adolph said that all his questions and concerns have been answered. He
explained that the Council in 2002, which included Councilmember Henderson and
himself, had a vision when the SilverRock land was purchased: the key was future
revenue. He said idue to the economic downturns, it has taken so
many years to put a shovel in the ground. Mayor Adolph said he understands both the
need to share TOT and that the future can bring unforeseen events that are not in the
Cest. He stated that he likes the development plan uses and design, but
wonders if adding 340+ rooms will affect the occupancy of existing hotels and
questioned where the saturation point is for hotel rooms in the Valley. He said
everything has been done to protect the City in the agreements during both the
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 5
NOVEMBER 4, 2014
15
development and operating stages. Mayor Adolph stated that the project is something
the City needs to move forward with and wished the best to the developer and to future
residents of the City. Although he expressed disappointment that the canal relocation
was not put underground, Mayor Adolph said he hopes the result is a project for which
everyone can be proud.
MOTION A motion was made and seconded by Councilmembers Franklin/Evans to
adopt RESOLUTION 2014-059 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 2002-453 (SCH
NO. 1999081020) AND ADDENDUM NO. 2006-568, FOR SILVERROCK
RESORT
Motion passed unanimously.
MOTION A motion was made and seconded by Councilmembers Osborne/Evans to
take up Ordinance No. 520 by title and number only and waive further reading.
Motion passed: Ayes 4, Noes 1 (Henderson voted against the motion)
City Clerk Maysels read the title of Ordinance No. 520 into the record:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND
BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND SILVERROCK DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY, LLC, RELATING TO THE VESTING OF CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT
RIGHTS FOR THE SILVERROCK RESORT, AND AUTHORIZING
IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS RELATED THERETO
MOTION A motion was made and seconded by Councilmembers Osborne/Franklin to
introduce Ordinance No. 520 on first reading.
Motion passed: Ayes 4, Noes 1 (Henderson voted against the motion)
MOTION A motion was made and seconded by Councilmembers Evans/Osborne to
adopt RESOLUTION 2014-060 entitled:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE PURCHASE, SALE, AND DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND
SILVERROCK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC, RELATING TO THE
DISPOSITION AND USE OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY FOR THE
SILVERROCK RESORT, AND AUTHORIZING IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
RELATED THERETO
Motion passed: Ayes 4, Noes 1 (Henderson voted against the motion)
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 6
NOVEMBER 4, 2014
16
REPORTS AND INFORMATIONAL ITEMS
participation in the following organizations meeting:
RIVERSIDE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
participation in the following organizations meeting:
CVAG VALLEY-WIDE HOMELESSNESS COMMITTEE
ve for 2014, Mayor Adolph reported on his participation in the
following organizations meeting:
SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY
DEPARTMENT REPORTS
Department Reports were received and filed
Office.
The Council expressed its support of the preparation of a Municipal Code Amendment
addressing agricultural and trade school uses as reported in the Department Report
from Community Development.
The Council suggested staff follow through with their plan to use the Coachella Valley
Fee for those found to be driving under the influence.
Mayor Adolph confirmed that the Council decided previously not to take action on a
plastic bag ban but to abide by the law the State is expected to pass on the matter in
early 2015.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, a motion was made and seconded by
Councilmembers Franklin/Evans to adjourn 6:52 p.m. Motion passed unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
SUSAN MAYSELS, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 7
NOVEMBER 4, 2014
17
18
CITY MEETING DATE: November 18, 2014
ITEM TITLE: DENIAL OF CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FILED
BY LISA TURNER AND MICHAEL DORN; DATE OF
LOSS — SEPTEMBER 8, 2014
AGENDA CATEGORY:
BUSINESS SESSION:
CONSENT CALENDAR: 2
STUDY SESSION:
PUBLIC HEARING:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Deny the claim for damages of Lisa Turner and Michael Dorn in its entirety.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
• A claim was filed by Lisa Turner and Michael Dorn with a reported date of
loss of September 8, 2014.
• It was forwarded to Carl Warren & Company, the City's claims administrator.
• Carl Warren reviewed the claim and recommends denial.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Stated damages are in excess of $1,029,000.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
The claimants allege their property and home were severely damaged by flood
waters generated during the September 8, 2014 storm that struck the City and
surrounding communities. Damage to the claimants' property appears to have
been caused due to sediment filling the homeowners association's storm channel,
permitting runoff storm water to breach the claimants' back yard retaining wall and
enter the property. Carl Warren & Company believes that under normal
circumstances the channel appears to be more than adequate to handle a large
volume of water. Additionally, the homeowners association (not the City) is
responsible for the maintenance of the storm channel. Therefore, Carl Warren &
Company recommends denying this claim.
`N
20
CITY MEETING DATE: November 18, 2014
ITEM TITLE: SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF
ORDINANCE NO. 520 APPROVING DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF LA QUINTA
AND SILVERROCK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC,
RELATING TO VESTING OF CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT
RIGHTS FOR SILVERROCK RESORT, AND
AUTHORIZING IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS
RELATED THERETO
AGENDA CATEGORY:
BUSINESS SESSION:
CONSENT CALENDAR: 3
STUDY SESSION:
PUBLIC HEARING:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt Ordinance No. 520 on second reading.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At the November 4, 2014 Council meeting, the City Council unanimously
approved a motion to take up and introduce Ordinance No. 520 on first
reading, which approved the Development Agreement by and between the
City and SilverRock Developmdms Bnlo`mx+ KKB 'ŮRCBů(-
The Development Agreement is one of three governing documents approved
by the City Council for the creation of a new development program at
SilverRock Resort.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The transaction requires City investment of an estimated $20.1 million in transient
occupancy tax (TOT) revenue rebate to SDC. The rebate is limited to TOT
generated from the luxury and lifestyle hotels and only during the first 15 years of
the respective hotel operation. Further, the rebate is paid only if these hotels do
not achieve an annual 11 percent return on cost during the 15-year period. After
15 years, TOT revenue sharing will end and the City will receive 100 percent of
TOT revenue.
21
Over the same 15-year period, it is projected that the City would receive $52.9
million in fee and tax revenue: $5,200,000 in development impact fee revenue,
$38,700,00 of TOT revenue (after the $20,100,000 TOT revenue rebate),
$6,000,000 of sales tax revenue, and $3,000,000 of property tax revenue.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
Development Program/Developer Investment
The projected value of the Development Program is $420 million. The
Development Program includes the following:
A.L`rsdq Rhsd Hmeq`rsqtbstqd ũ hmeq`rsqtbstqd hloqnudldmsr hmbktchmf l`rr
grading, wet/dry utilities, roads, re-routing of existing golf holes and storm
water retention at a cost of $42 million paid by SDC.
B.Gnsdkr ũ @ 03/,qnnl+ 4,rs`q pt`khsx ktxury hotel and spa and a 200-room, 4-
star quality lifestyle hotel.
C.Bnmedqdmbd ũ @ 60+/// rpt`qd enns bnmedqdmbd bdmsdq `mc rg`qdc rdquhbdr
facility shared by the luxury and lifestyle hotels.
D.Qds`hk ũ @ qdrnqs uhkk`fd vhsg 04/+/// rpt`re feet of resort residential units
and up to 40,000 square feet of retail space with recreation areas.
E.Aq`mcdc Qdrnqs Qdrhcdmsh`k ũ 24 ktwtqx and 60 lifestyle branded residential
homes that are associated with their respective hotels that generate TOT
(not subject to rebate).
F.Qdrnqs Qdrhcdmsh`k ũ 05/ qdrnqs rsxkd gnldr enq oqhu`sd nvmdqrgho vhsg sgd
option for owners to offer as short-term rentals as TOT generating units (not
subject to rebate).
G.@gl`mrnm Q`mbg Gntrd ũ Qdmnu`shnm ne the facility as a public event center
and to serve as an amenity to the resort.
H.Mdv Fnke Bktagntrd ũ 4+/// rquare feet of air conditioned space with large
outdoor patios and event lawn.
Cdudknoldms @fqddldms ũ Sghr `fqddldms is being processed pursuant to state
law and will be used to provide SDC a vested right to the current General Plan,
SilverRock Specific Plan, and other specified land use entitlements. This agreement
is intended to be for the limited purpose of providing certainty to SDC (and
successors-in-interest) that the permitted land uses will remain in place for a
sufficient time to allow construction and use of the property, as well as specifying
the amounts that will be required to be paid for certain processing fees and City-
22
issued permits and land use entitlements. Annual review of the progress of the
project will be conducted pursuant to the terms of this agreement. Prior to the
Bntmbhk adhmf `akd sn bnmrhcdq sgd Cdudknoldms @fqddldms+ sgd BhsxŬr Ok`mmhmf
Commission reviewed the matter on October 14, 2014. They unanimously
recommended approval of the Development Agreement.
ALTERNATIVES:
As Council approved this ordinance at first reading, and it is timely and warranted,
staff does not recommend an alternative.
Report prepared by: Pam Nieto, Administrative Technician
Report approved for submission by: Susan Maysels, City Clerk
23
24
ORDINANCE NO. 520
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA AND SILVERROCK DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY, LLC, RELATING TO THE VESTING OF
CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FOR THE SILVERROCK
RESORT, AND AUTHORIZING IMPLEMENTATION
ACTIONS RELATED THERETO
CASE NO.: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2014-1001
APPLICANT: SILVERROCK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC
WHEREAS, California Government Code Section 65864 et seq. (the
ŮCdudknoldms @fqddldms K`vů( `tsgnqhydr bhsies to enter into binding development
agreements with persons having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the
development of such property, all for the purpose of strengthening the public
planning process, encouraging private participation and comprehensive planning,
and identifying the economic costs of such development; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta did, on the
th
14day of October, 2014, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
Development Agreement 2014-1001, and did in fact unanimously adopt Planning
Commission Resolution 2014-026, recommending its approval to the City Council;
and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of K` Pthms`+ B`khenqmh` 'ŮBhsx
th
Bntmbhků(+ chc gnkc nm sgd 3 day of November, 2014, a duly noticed public hearing
to consider Development Agreement 2014-1001; and,
WHEREAS, at said City Council Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering
all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard,
said City Council did make the following mandatory findings to justify approving
the Development Agreement:
1. The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the La Quinta
General Plan, Municipal Code and the SilverRock Resort Specific Plan. The
development proposal as represented in the Agreement will not be developed
in any manner inconsistent with the General Plan land use designations of
Tourist Commercial and Recreational Open Space.
25
2. The proposed Development Agreement is compatible with the uses and
regulations as stipulated for the Tourist Commercial and Golf Course zoning
districts.
3. The proposed Development Agreement is in conformity with the public
necessity, convenience, general welfare and good land use practice. The
Development Agreement will allow development of hotel, commercial,
recreation and resort residential uses, and ensure provision of a desirable and
functional community environment and effective and efficient development
of public facilities, infrastructure, and services appropriate for the
development of the Project.
4. The proposed Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety and general welfare. All immediately surrounding property is
zoned for residential or golf course use development. Development of the
site for hotel, commercial, recreation and resort residential use will not
significantly impact quality of life for area residents.
5. The proposed Development Agreement will not affect the orderly
development of property or the preservation of property values.
Development of the subject site, pursuant to project application and this
Development Agreement, will enhance property values for other surrounding
area properties, as it facilitates development of a high-quality resort complex
with hotel, commercial, recreation and resort residential uses.
6. The proposed Development Agreement will have a positive fiscal impact on
the City, in that implementation of the Development Agreement will produce
revenues through payment of certain development fees, as well as the
generation of transient occupancy, sales and property taxes from the
proposed development.
7. Consideration of this Development Agreement has been accomplished
pursuant to California Government Code Section 65864 et seq. and the City
of La Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.250.030, which governs
Development Agreements.
WHEREAS, all actions required to be taken by the City precedent to the
adoption of this Ordinance have been regularly and duly taken.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California does
ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. APPROVAL. The City Council hereby approves and adopts the
Development Agreement attabgdc `r ŮDwghahs @ů rubstantially in the form
26
presented to the City Council concurrent with the approval and adoption of this
Resolution, authorizes and directs the City Manager to sign the Development
Agreement on behalf of the City, authorizes and directs the City Manager, in
accordance with City of La Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.250.030(C)(10)(a), to
make any modifications to the Development Agreement to effectuate the intent of
the City and Developer as presented to and approved by the City Council
concurrent with the approval and adoption of this Resolution, and authorizes and
directs the City Clerk to record the Development Agreement in the Official Records
of Riverside County in accordance with applicable law.
SECTION 2. ENVIRONMENTAL. An Addendum to a previously adopted Mitigated
Negative Declaration (EA 2002-453) and subsequent Addendum (EA 2006-568)
was prepared pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, was confirmed
and adopted by the City Council, on November 4, 2014. Said determination,
extends to include this Development Agreement, based on its incorporation as part
of the overall project, as defined under CEQA.
SECTION 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect
thirty (30) days after its adoption.
SECTION 4. POSTING. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of
this Ordinance, and shall cause the same to be posted in at least three public
places designated by resolution of the City Council, and shall cause this Ordinance
and its certification, together with proof of posting, to be entered into the Book of
Ordinances of this City.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED, at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
th
City Council held this 18 day of November, 2014, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
____________________________
DON ADOLPH, Mayor
City of La Quinta, California
27
ATTEST:
__________________________________________
SUSAN MAYSELS, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
(CITY SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
WILLIAM H. IHRKE, City Attorney
City of La Quinta, California
28
EXHIBIT "A"
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Attn: City Clerk
Space Above This Line for Recorder’s Use
(Exempt from Recording Fee per Gov’t Code §6103 and
§27383)
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN
THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA
AND
SILVEROCK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC
916799.3
29
30
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.GENERAL ....................................................................................................................................... 2
1.1Definitions............................................................................................................... 2
1.2Term. ....................................................................................................................... 6
1.3Effective Date. ........................................................................................................ 6
1.4Amendment or Cancellation. .................................................................................. 6
1.5Termination. ............................................................................................................ 7
1.6Statement of Benefits and Consideration. ............................................................... 7
1.7City Findings. .......................................................................................................... 8
2.AGREEMENTS AND ASSURANCES .......................................................................................... 8
2.1Agreement and Assurance on the Part of Developer. ............................................. 8
2.2Agreement and Assurances on the Part of the City. ............................................... 8
3.DEVELOPER’S OBLIGATIONS ................................................................................................. 11
3.1Development of the Project; Planned Development. ............................................ 11
3.2Mitigation Monitoring Program. ........................................................................... 12
3.3Payments to City by Developer. ........................................................................... 12
3.4Dedications and Improvements. ............................................................................ 12
3.5Indemnification. .................................................................................................... 13
3.6Insurance. .............................................................................................................. 14
4.CITY’S OBLIGATIONS ............................................................................................................... 16
4.1Scope of Subsequent Review/Confirmation of Compliance Process. .................. 16
4.2Project Approvals Independent. ............................................................................ 16
4.3Review for Compliance. ....................................................................................... 16
5.DEFAULT; REMEDIES; DISPUTE RESOLUTION. .................................................................. 17
5.1Notice of Default. .................................................................................................. 17
5.2Cure of Default. .................................................................................................... 17
5.3City Remedies. ...................................................................................................... 17
6.MORTGAGEE PROTECTION; CERTAIN RIGHTS OF CURE ................................................ 17
6.1Encumbrances on the Project Site......................................................................... 17
6.2Mortgage Protection. ............................................................................................. 18
6.3Mortgagee Not Obligated. .................................................................................... 18
6.4Notice of Default to Mortgagee; Right of Mortgagee to Cure. ............................. 18
7.TRANSFERS OF INTEREST IN SITE OR AGREEMENT \[REVISE AS PSDA
REVISED\] ..................................................................................................................................... 18
7.1Transfers of Interest in Property or Agreement. ................................................... 18
7.2Transfers of Interest in Property or Agreement Prior to City’s Issuance of
a Release of Construction Covenants. .................................................................. 19
7.3Assignment and Assumption of Obligations. ....................................................... 20
7.4Successors and Assigns. ........................................................................................ 20
-i-
916799.3
31
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
7.5Assignment by City. ............................................................................................. 20
8.MISCELLANEOUS ...................................................................................................................... 20
8.1Notices, Demands and Communications Between the Parties. ............................ 20
8.2Force Majeure. ...................................................................................................... 21
8.3Binding Effect. ...................................................................................................... 22
8.4Independent Entity. ............................................................................................... 22
8.5Agreement Not to Benefit Third Parties. .............................................................. 22
8.6Covenants. ............................................................................................................. 22
8.7Non-liability of City Officers and Employees. ..................................................... 22
8.8Covenant Against Discrimination. ........................................................................ 22
8.9Amendment of Agreement. ................................................................................... 23
8.10No Waiver. ............................................................................................................ 23
8.11Severability. .......................................................................................................... 23
8.12Cooperation in Carrying Out Agreement. ............................................................. 23
8.13Estoppel Certificate. .............................................................................................. 24
8.14Construction. ......................................................................................................... 24
8.15Recordation. .......................................................................................................... 24
8.16Captions and References. ...................................................................................... 24
8.17Time. ..................................................................................................................... 24
8.18Recitals & Exhibits Incorporated; Entire Agreement. .......................................... 24
8.19Exhibits. ................................................................................................................ 25
8.20Counterpart Signature Pages. ................................................................................ 25
8.21City Approvals and Actions. ................................................................................. 25
8.22Governing Law; Litigation Matters. ..................................................................... 25
-ii-
916799.3
32
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
This Development Agreement (the “Agreement”) is entered into as of the __ day of
____________ ___, 2014 (“Reference Date”), by and between the CITY OF LA QUINTA, a
California municipal corporation and charter city organized and existing under the Constitution
of the State of the California (“City”), and Silverrock Development Company, LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company (“Developer”), with reference to the following:
RECITALS:
A. Government Code Section 65864 et seq. (“Development Agreement Act”)
authorizes City to enter into a binding development agreement for the development of real
property within its jurisdiction with persons having legal or equitable interest in such real
property.
B. Pursuant to Section 65865 of the Government Code, City has adopted its
Development Agreement Ordinance (La Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.250.030) establishing
procedures and requirements for such development agreements (“Development Agreement
Ordinance”).
C. Prior to or concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, Developer has
entered into a Purchase, Sale, and Development Agreement (the “PSDA”) with City, pursuant to
which (1) City, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the PSDA, has agreed to sell to
Developer, in one or more phases, certain real property located at the southwest intersection of
Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 in the City of La Quinta, CA, as described in Exhibit A attached
hereto and shown on the Site Map attached hereto as Exhibit B (the “Site”); and (2) Developer
has agreed to construct on the Site the “Project,” consisting of a luxury resort hotel and spa and
associated branded luxury residential units, a lifestyle hotel and associated lifestyle branded
residential units, a conference and shared service facility, a permanent clubhouse for the
SilverRock Resort’s Arnold Palmer Classic Course, a mixed use village, a resort residential
village, and associated amenities. The Project is more fully described in, and subject to (i) this
Agreement, (ii) the SilverRock Specific Plan, also known as Specific Plan No. SP 2006-080
(“Specific Plan”); (iii) the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for an earlier version of the
Project, approved by the former La Quinta Redevelopment Agency (the “Agency”) on May 15,
2002, by Agency Resolution 2002-09, as updated by the Addendum to Mitigated Negative
Declaration, approved by the City Council on July 18, 2006, by City Council Resolution No.
2006-082, and by the Second Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration approved by the City
Council on ___, by City Council Resolution No. ________ (collectively, the “Updated Mitigated
Negative Declaration”); (iv) the PSDA, (v) any future discretionary or ministerial approvals
and/or permits issued for the Project, including all conditions of approval attached thereto
(collectively, the “Project Site Development Permits”); (vi) any future subdivision maps
approved for the Project, including all conditions of approval thereto (collectively, the “Project
Tract Maps”); and (vii) the conditions of approval associated with each and all of the foregoing
approvals (collectively, the “Conditions of Approval”). The documents, permits, approvals, and
conditions described in the foregoing clauses (i)-(vii) are collectively referred to herein as the
“Project Approvals,” and are, or when approved or issued shall be, on file with the City Clerk.
-1-
916799.3
33
D. By virtue of the PSDA, as of the execution of this Agreement, Developer has an
equitable interest in the Site. By its execution of the consent form attached to this Agreement,
City consents to recordation of this Agreement against the Site.
E. Consistent with Section 9.250.030 of the La Quinta Municipal Code, City and
Developer desire to enter into a binding agreement that shall be construed as a development
agreement within the meaning of the Development Agreement Act. This Agreement will
eliminate uncertainty in planning for and secure the orderly development of the Project, ensure a
desirable and functional community environment, provide effective and efficient development of
public facilities, infrastructure, and services appropriate for the development of the Project, and
assure attainment of the maximum effective utilization of resources within the City, by achieving
the goals and purposes of the Development Agreement Act. In exchange for these benefits to
City, Developer desires to receive the assurance that if it acquires the Site in accordance with the
PSDA, it may proceed with development of the Project in accordance with the terms and
conditions of this Agreement and the Project Approvals, all as more particularly set forth herein.
F. The Planning Commission and the City Council have determined that the Project
and this Agreement are consistent with the City’s General Plan and the Specific Plan, including
the goals and objectives thereof.
G. All actions taken by City have been duly taken in accordance with all applicable
legal requirements, including the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code
Section 21000, et seq.) (“CEQA”), and all other requirements for notice, public hearings,
findings, votes and other procedural matters.
H. On _________, 2014, the City Council adopted its Ordinance No. ___ approving
this Agreement.
AGREEMENT:
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing Recitals, which are incorporated
herein by this reference, the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein and other good
and valuable consideration, the receipt and legal sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged,
the Parties do hereby agree as follows:
1.GENERAL
1.1Definitions
Agreement
1.1.1“” means this Development Agreement and all amendments
and modifications thereto.
Applicable Rules
1.1.2“” means the rules, regulations, ordinances and officially
adopted policies of the City of La Quinta in full force and effect as of the Effective Date of this
Agreement, including, but not limited to, the City’s General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and
Specific Plan. Additionally, notwithstanding the language of this Section or any other language
in this Agreement, all specifications, standards and policies regarding the design and
-2-
916799.3
34
construction of public works facilities, if any, shall be those that are in effect at the time the
Project plans are being processed for approval and/or under construction.
CEQA
1.1.3“” means the California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Public
Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.) and the State CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regs.,
Title 14, Sections 15000 et seq.).
Certificate
1.1.4“” shall have the meaning set forth in Section 2.2.3 herein.
City
1.1.5“” means the City of La Quinta, a charter city and municipal
corporation, including each and every agency, department, board, commission, authority,
employee, and/or official acting under the authority of the City, including without limitation the
City Council and the Planning Commission.
City Council
1.1.6“” means the City Council of the City and the legislative
body of the City pursuant to California Government Code Section 65867.
Community Development Director
1.1.7“” means the Community
Development Director for the City or his or her designee.
Conditions of Approval
1.1.8“” shall have the meaning set forth in Recital C.
Developer
1.1.9“”means SilverRock Development Company, LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company.
Development Agreement Act
1.1.10“” means Section 65864 et seq., of the
California Government Code.
Discretionary Action
1.1.11“” means an action which requires the exercise of
judgment, deliberation or a decision on the part of City, including any board, commission,
committee, or department or any officer or employee thereof, in the process of approving or
disapproving a particular activity, as distinguished from an activity which merely requires City,
including any board, commission or department or any officer or employee thereof, to determine
whether there has been compliance with statutes, ordinances or regulations.
Discretionary Permits
1.1.12“” means any permits, approvals, plans, Project
Tract Maps, inspections, certificates, documents, and licenses that require a Discretionary
Action, including, without limitation, site development permits, grading permits, stockpile
permits, and encroachment permits.
Effective Date
1.1.13“” shall have the meaning set forth in Section 1.3 of this
Agreement.
General Plan
1.1.14“”means the General Plan of the City.
Impact Fees
1.1.15“” means impact fees, linkage fees, exactions, assessments or
fair share charges or other similar impact fees or charges imposed on and in connection with new
development by City pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 2013-006, which was approved by
-3-
916799.3
35
the City Council on February 5, 2013. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, none of
the following shall constitute Impact Fees: (i) Processing Fees, (ii) impact fees, linkage fees,
exactions, assessments or fair share charges or other similar fees or charges imposed by other
governmental entities and which City is required to collect or assess pursuant to applicable law,
including, without limitation, school district impact fees pursuant to Government Code Section
65995), fees required pursuant to the Coachella Valley Multiple Species Habitat Conservation
Plan, and the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee, or (c) other City-wide fees or charges of
general applicability, provided that such City-wide fees or charges are not imposed as an impact
fee on new development.
Meriwether
1.1.16“” means Meriwether Companies LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company.
Ministerial Permits and Approvals
1.1.17“” means the permits, approvals,
plans, inspections, certificates, documents, licenses, and all other actions required to be taken by
City in order for Developer to implement, develop and construct the Project and the Mitigation
Measures, including without limitation, building permits, foundation permits, and other similar
permits and approvals which are required by the La Quinta Municipal Code and Project plans
and other actions required by the Project Approvals to implement the Project and the Mitigation
Measures. Ministerial Permits and Approvals shall not include any Discretionary Actions or
Discretionary Permits.
Mitigation Measures
1.1.18“” means the mitigation measures described in the
Updated Mitigated Negative Declaration and in the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the
Project.
New Laws
1.1.19“” means amendments or modifications to the Applicable
Rules, and all ordinances, resolutions, initiatives, regulations, rules, laws, plans, policies, and
guidelines of the City and its City Council, Planning Commission, and all other City boards,
commissions, departments, agencies, and committees enacted or adopted after the Effective
Date.
Parties
1.1.20“”means collectively Developer and City. Each shall be referred
to in the singular as a “Party”.
Planning Area
1.1.21“” shall mean an area designated on the Site Map as a
planning area.
Planning Commission
1.1.22“”means the City Planning Commission and the
planning agency of the City pursuant to California Government Code Section 65867.
Processing Fees
1.1.23 “” means all processing fees and charges required by
City including, but not limited to, fees for land use applications, Project permits and/or
approvals, building applications, building permits, grading permits, encroachment permits,
Project Tract Maps, lot line adjustments, air right lots, street vacations, certificates of occupancy,
and any fees over which City has no authority with respect to setting the rates, which are
necessary to accomplish the intent and purpose of this Agreement. Processing Fees shall not
include Impact Fees. The amount of the Processing Fees to be applied in connection with the
-4-
916799.3
36
development of the Project shall be the amount which is in effect on a City-wide basis at the time
an application for the City action is made. Notwithstanding the language of this Section or any
other language in this Agreement, Developer shall not be exempt from the payment of fees, if
any, imposed on a City-wide basis as part of City’s program for storm water pollution abatement
mandated by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972 and subsequent amendments
thereto, unless a waiver of these fees is provided by City in a subsequent agreement.
Project
1.1.24“” means development of the Site as set forth in more detail in
Section 3.1.
Project Approvals
1.1.25“” shall have the meaning set forth in Recital C.
Project Component
1.1.26“” shall have the meaning set forth in the PSDA.
Project Tract Maps
1.1.27“”shall have the meaning set forth in Recital C.
PSDA
1.1.28“”shall have that meaning set forth in Recital C.
Reserved Powers
1.1.29“” means the rights and authority excepted from this
Agreement’s restrictions on City’s police powers and which are instead reserved to City, its City
Council, Planning Commission, and all other City boards, commissions, departments, agencies,
and committees. The Reserved Powers include the powers to enact or adopt New Laws or take
future Discretionary Actions after the Effective Date of this Agreement that may be in conflict
with the Applicable Rules and Project Approvals, except such New Laws which would prevent
or materially impair Developer’s ability to develop the Project in accordance with the Project
Approvals; provided, however, that with respect to such New Laws which would prevent or
materially impair Developer’s ability to develop the Project in accordance with the Project
Approvals, such New Laws shall apply to the Project if such New Laws are: (1) necessary to
protect the public health and safety, and are generally applicable on a City-wide basis (except in
the event of natural disasters as found by the City Council such as floods, earthquakes and
similar acts of God, which shall apply even if not applicable on a City-wide basis); (2)
amendments to Uniform Codes, as adopted by City, and/or the La Quinta Municipal Code, as
applicable, regarding the construction, engineering and design standards for private and public
improvements to be constructed on the Site; (3) required by a non-City entity to be adopted by or
applied by the City (or if optional the failure to adopt or apply such non-City law or regulation
would cause City to sustain a loss of funds or loss of access to funding or other resources, or (4)
necessary to comply with state or federal laws and regulations (whether enacted previous or
subsequent to the Effective Date of this Agreement).
RGC
1.1.30“” means The Robert Green Company, a California corporation.
Site
1.1.31“” means approximately 96 acres of real property located at the
southwest intersection of Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 in the City of La Quinta, California
92253. The Site is legally described in the Site Legal Description and depicted in the Site Map.,
attached hereto as Exhibits A and B.
Site Development Plan
1.1.32“” shall have the meaning set forth in Section
9.180.020 of the La Quinta Municipal Code.
-5-
916799.3
37
Site Map
1.1.33 “” means the map of the Site and immediately adjacent
properties, which is attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by this reference. The
Site Map depicts twelve (12) proposed planning areas within the real property covered by the
Specific Plan, numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10A,10B, 11, and 12.
Specific Plan
1.1.34“” shall have the meaning as set forth in Recital C.
Term
1.1.35“” means the period of time for which the Agreement shall be
effective in accordance with Section 1.2 herein.
Transferee
1.1.36“” means individually or collectively, Developer’s successors
in interest, assignees or transferees of all or any portion of the Site.
Uniform Codes
1.1.37“” means those building, electrical, mechanical, plumbing,
fire and other similar regulations of a City-wide scope which are based on recommendations of a
multi-state professional organization and become applicable throughout the City, such as, but not
limited to, the Uniform Building Code, the Uniform Electrical Code, the Uniform Mechanical
Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, or the Uniform Fire Code (including those amendments to the
promulgated uniform codes which reflect local modification to implement the published
recommendations of the multi-state organization and which are applicable City-wide).
Zoning Ordinance
1.1.38“” means Title 9 of the La Quinta Municipal Code.
1.2Term.
The term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall continue for
thirty (30) years thereafter, unless said term is otherwise terminated, modified, or extended by
circumstances set forth in this Agreement or by mutual consent of the Parties after the
satisfaction of all applicable public hearing and related procedural requirements.
1.3Effective Date.
This Agreement shall be effective, and the obligations of the Parties hereunder shall be
effective, as of ______________, 2014 (“Effective Date”), which is the date that Ordinance No.
_____ takes effect.
1.4Amendment or Cancellation by Mutual Consent.
Except as expressly stated to the contrary herein, this Agreement may be amended or
canceled in whole or in part only by mutual consent of the Parties and in the manner provided for
in Government Code Section 65867-65868 and the Development Agreement Ordinance.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event that any portion of the Site is under different
ownership at some time during the Term hereof, City and the then-owner of such portion may
amend the terms of this Development Agreement and the Project Approvals with respect to said
portion, without obtaining the approval or consent of the owners of the other portions of the Site.
-6-
916799.3
38
1.5Termination.
Unless terminated earlier, pursuant to the terms hereof, this Agreement shall
automatically terminate and be of no further effect upon the expiration of the Term of this
Agreement as set forth in Section 1.1. Termination of this Agreement, for any reason, shall not,
by itself, affect any right or duty arising from entitlements or approvals set forth under the
Project Approvals.
Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, (i) in the event the “Phase 1 Escrow” (as
that term is defined in the PSDA) fails to close within the time period set forth for such closing
in the PSDA, as such time period may be extended pursuant to the terms of the PSDA, and/or the
PSDA is terminated, this Agreement shall automatically terminate and the Developer and City
agree to execute and record such document as the “Title Company” (as that term is defined in the
PSDA) reasonably requires to remove this Agreement of record, and (ii) in the event the Phase 1
Escrow closes, but the “Phase 2 Escrow” (as that term is defined in the PSDA) fails to close
within the time period set forth for such closing in the PSDA, as such time period may be
extended pursuant to the terms of the PSDA, and/or the PSDA is terminated with respect to the
“Phase 2 Property” (as that term is defined in the PSDA), this Agreement shall automatically
terminate with respect to the Phase 2 Property and the Developer and City agree to execute and
record such document as the Title Company reasonably requires to remove this Agreement of
record from the Phase 2 Property.
The Parties acknowledge and agree that notwithstanding the provisions in the foregoing
paragraph providing for automatic termination of this Agreement on the occurrence of certain
events, each of the Development Agreement Act and Development Agreement Ordinance require
that prior to any such early termination of this Agreement, (a) the Quinta Planning Commission
must hold a public hearing regarding the proposed termination and make certain
recommendations to the City Council, and (b) the City Council must hold a public hearing
regarding the termination and make certain findings. The Parties further acknowledge and agree
that on the occurrence of any of the events described in the foregoing paragraph providing for
automatic termination, the Parties shall be deemed to have mutually consented to the early
termination of this Agreement for purposes of the Development Agreement Act and
Development Agreement Ordinance.
1.6Statement of Benefits and Consideration.
The Parties have determined that a development agreement is appropriate for the
construction and operation of the Project due to the substantial benefits to be derived therefrom.
The Project will promote the health, safety and general welfare of City and its residents.
In exchange for these and other benefits to City, Developer will receive the assurance that
Developer may develop the Project during the Term of this Agreement, subject to the terms and
conditions herein contained. City has undertaken the necessary proceedings, has found and
determined that this Agreement is consistent with the General Plan, and has adopted Ordinance
No._____ approving this Agreement. As a result of the development of the Project in
accordance with this Agreement, City will receive substantial benefits.
-7-
916799.3
39
In consideration of the substantial benefits, commitments and consideration to be
provided by Developer pursuant to this Agreement and in order to strengthen the public planning
process and reduce the economic costs of development, City hereby provides Developer
assurance that if Developer acquires title to the Site, Developer can proceed with the
construction and operation of the Project for the Term of this Agreement pursuant to the
Applicable Rules and this Agreement. Developer would not enter into this Agreement or agree to
provide the public benefits, commitments and consideration described in this Agreement if it
were not for the certainty provided by the agreement of City that the Project could be constructed
and operated during the Term of this Agreement in accordance with the Applicable Rules and
this Agreement.
1.7City CEQA Findings.
City finds that review of the environmental impacts of this Agreement and the Project has
been conducted in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the State and local guidelines
adopted thereunder, and City has given consideration to such environmental review prior to its
approval of this Agreement and the Project and has undertaken all actions necessary to comply
with CEQA.
2.AGREEMENTS AND ASSURANCES
2.1Agreement and Assurance on the Part of Developer; PSDA.
In consideration for City entering into this Agreement, and as an inducement for City to
obligate itself to carry out the covenants and conditions set forth in this Agreement, and in order
to effectuate the premises, purposes and intentions set forth in the Recitals of this Agreement,
Developer hereby agrees as follows:
2.1.1Project Development.
Developer shall develop the Project pursuant to all of the requirements set forth in the
PSDA.
2.1.2Conflicts with PSDA
To the extent there is any conflict between the terms and conditions of this Agreement
and the terms and conditions of the PSDA, the terms and conditions of the PSDA shall govern
and control.
2.2Agreement and Assurances on the Part of the City.
In consideration for Developer entering into this Agreement, and as an inducement for
Developer to obligate itself to carry out the covenants and conditions set forth in this Agreement,
and in order to effectuate the premises, purposes and intentions set forth in this Agreement, City
hereby agrees as follows:
-8-
916799.3
40
2.2.1Entitlement to Develop.
Developer has the vested right to develop the Project subject to the terms and conditions
of this Agreement, the Applicable Rules, Project Approvals and the Reserved Powers.
Developer’s vested rights under this Agreement shall include, without limitation, the right to
remodel, renovate, rehabilitate, rebuild or replace the existing development and the Project or
any portion thereof throughout the applicable Term for any reason, including, without limitation,
in the event of damage, destruction or obsolescence of the existing development or the Project or
any portion thereof, subject to the Applicable Rules, Project Approvals and Reserved Powers. To
the extent that all or any portion of the existing development or the Project is remodeled,
renovated, rehabilitated, rebuilt or replaced, Developer may locate that portion of the existing
development or the Project, as the case may be, at any other location of the Site, subject to the
requirements of the Project Approvals, the Applicable Rules, and the Reserved Powers.
2.2.2Changes in Applicable Rules.
(A)Nonapplication of Changes in Applicable Rules.
Any change in, or addition to, the Applicable Rules, including, without limitation, any
change in the General Plan or Specific Plan, zoning or building regulation, adopted or becoming
effective after the Effective Date, including, without limitation, any such change by means of
ordinance, City Charter amendment, initiative, referendum, resolution, motion, policy, order or
moratorium, initiated or instituted for any reason whatsoever and adopted by the City, City
Council, Planning Commission or any other board, commission, department or agency of the
City, or any officer or employee thereof, or by the electorate, as the case may be, which would,
absent this Agreement, otherwise be applicable to the Site and/or to the Project and which would
conflict in any way with the Applicable Rules, Project Approvals, or this Agreement, shall not be
applied to the Site or the Project unless such changes represent an exercise of City’s Reserved
Powers, or are otherwise agreed to in this Agreement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Developer
may, in its sole discretion, consent to the application to the Project of any change in the
Applicable Rules.
(B)Changes in Uniform Codes.
Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, development of the
Project shall be subject to changes which may occur from time to time in the Uniform Codes, as
such Codes are adopted by the City of La Quinta.
(C)Changes Mandated by Federal or State Law.
This Agreement shall not preclude the application to the Project of changes in, or
additions to, the Applicable Rules, including rules, regulations, ordinances and official policies,
to the extent that such changes or additions are mandated to be applied to developments such as
this Project by state or federal regulations, pursuant to the Reserved Powers. In the event state or
federal laws or regulations prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this
Agreement, such provisions shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with
such state or federal laws or regulations.
-9-
916799.3
41
2.2.3Subsequent Development Review.
Nothing set forth herein shall impair or interfere with the right of City to require the
processing of building permits as required by law pursuant to the applicable provisions of the La
Quinta Municipal Code and the provisions of Uniform Codes.
Prior to each request for a building permit, Developer shall provide City with a
Compliance Certificate (“Certificate”) in a form created by Developer and approved by City,
which shall describe how all applicable Conditions of Approval have been fully complied with.
Each Certificate shall be distributed by City to the relevant City departments for checking the
representations made by Developer on the Certificate.
2.2.4Effective Development Standards.
City agrees that it is bound to permit the uses, intensities of use and densities on the Site
which are permitted by this Agreement and the Project Approvals, insofar as this Agreement and
the Project Approvals so provide or as otherwise set forth in the Applicable Rules or the
Reserved Powers. City hereby agrees that it will not unreasonably withhold or unreasonably
condition any approvals and/or permits which must be issued by City in order for the Project to
proceed, provided that Developer reasonably and satisfactorily complies with all City-wide
standard procedures for processing applications for such approvals and/or permits.
2.2.5Moratoria or Interim Control Ordinances.
In the event an ordinance, resolution, policy, or other measure is enacted, whether by
action of City, by initiative, or otherwise, which relates directly or indirectly to the Project or to
the rate, amount, timing, sequencing, or phasing of the development or construction of the
Project on all or any part of the Site or the implementation of the Mitigation Measures adopted in
connection with approval of the Project, City agrees that such ordinance, resolution or other
measure shall not apply to the Site, the Project or this Agreement, unless such changes are
adopted pursuant to the Reserved Powers or other applicable provisions of this Agreement.
2.2.6Special Taxes and Assessments.
Developer shall not be obligated to support infrastructure financing undertaken by City or
others. Developer shall have the right, to the extent permitted by law, to protest, oppose and vote
against any and all special taxes, assessments, levies, charges and/or fees imposed with respect to
any assessment districts, Mello-Roos or community facilities districts, maintenance districts or
other similar districts.
2.2.7Impact Fees.
Impact Fees imposed by City with respect to the Project shall be only those Impact Fees
in full force and effect as of the Effective Date, in the amounts/rate in effect as of the Effective
Date.
-10-
916799.3
42
2.2.8Timeframes and Staffing for Processing and Review.
City agrees that expeditious processing of Ministerial Permits and Approvals and
Discretionary Actions, if any, and any other approvals or actions required for the Project are
critical to the implementation of the Project. In recognition of the importance of timely
processing and review of Ministerial Permits and Approvals and Discretionary Actions, City
agrees to reasonably cooperate with Developer to establish time frames for processing and
reviewing such Ministerial Permits and Approvals and Discretionary Actions and to comply with
any timeframes established in the Project Approvals.
3.DEVELOPER’S OBLIGATIONS
3.1Development of the Project; Planned Development.
Developer shall construct the Project on the Site in accordance with the Project
Approvals. As depicted in the Project Approvals, as the same may be updated or amended from
time to time, the Project shall consist of a mixed-use resort development with the following
components:
(A)Modification of the existing Arnold Palmer Classic Golf Course
and rehabilitation of the Ahmanson Ranch House, along with the surrounding area within
Planning Area 1;
(B)a luxury hotel project within Planning Area 2 consisting of
approximately one hundred forty (140) luxury hotel rooms on approximately seventeen (17)
acres, consisting of approximately one hundred seventy thousand (170,000) square feet of air
conditioned and exterior spaces, and containing parking, spa and fitness center, and other
associated amenities, all as further defined by the submittal of a Site Development Plan as
prescribed by the Specific Plan;
(C)a residential development within Planning Area 3 consisting of
approximately thirty-five (35) luxury branded residential homes, potentially including lock-offs,
on approximately 14.0 acres, all as further defined by the submittal of a Site Development Plan
as prescribed by the Specific Plan;
(D)a shared service/conference facility building and associated
parking within Planning Area 4 consisting of approximately seventy-one thousand (71,000)
square feet of interior and exterior square feet (not including parking) on approximately 12.0
acres;
(E)a lifestyle hotel (“Lifestyle Hotel”) project within Planning Area 5
consisting of approximately two hundred (200) hotel rooms on approximately ten (10) acres,
consisting of approximately one hundred seventy thousand (170,000) square feet of air
conditioned and exterior spaces, and including other associated amenities, all as further defined
by the submittal of a Site Development Plan as prescribed by the Specific Plan;
(F)a residential development within Planning Area 6 consisting of
approximately sixty (60) luxury branded residential homes, potentially containing lock-off units
-11-
916799.3
43
for a potential total key capacity of one hundred twenty (120) keys for the Lifestyle Hotel, on
approximately ten (10) acres, all as further defined by the submittal of a Site Development Plan
as prescribed by the Specific Plan;
(G)a promenade mixed-use village (“Village”) within Planning Areas
7 and 9; in Planning Area 7 the Village would contain a mix of residential and commercial uses
consisting of approximately one hundred fifty thousand (150,000) square feet of livable space,
up to twenty-five thousand (25,000) square feet of mixed-use commercial, on ten and one-half
(10.5) acres; in Planning Area 9 the Village would contain either (1) a fifteen (15) acre public
park, or (2) a mix of public and private recreational uses and amenities, community cultural
elements, and residential and commercial development (not to exceed up to seventy-five
thousand (75,000) square feet of livable space and fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet of
commercial development), on approximately fifteen (15) acres, all as further defined by the
submittal of a Site Development Plan as prescribed by the Specific Plan;
(H)a resort residential village within Planning Area 8 containing one
hundred-sixty (160) residences and associated services and amenities on approximately thirty-
two and one-half (32.5) acres, all as further defined by the submittal of a Site Development Plan
as prescribed by the Specific Plan;
3.2Compliance with Government Code Section 66473.7
Developer shall comply with the provisions of Government Code section 66473.7 with
respect to any Project Tract Maps prepared for the Project.
3.3 Mitigation Monitoring Program.
The Developer shall also comply with the mitigation monitoring program set forth in
Exhibit “C” attached hereto (the “Mitigation Monitoring Program”).
3.4Payment of Fees.
During the Term of this Agreement, Developer shall timely pay all Processing Fees and
Impact Fees with respect to the Project.
3.5Other Fees and Charges.
Nothing set forth in this Agreement is intended to or shall be construed to limit or restrict
the City’s authority to impose its existing, or any new or increased, fees, charges, levies, or
assessments for the development of the Site, or to impose or increase, subject to the required
procedure, any taxes applicable to the Site including but not limited to transient occupancy taxes,
provided nothing set forth herein, subject to the following two sentences, is intended or shall be
construed to limit or restrict whatever right Developer might otherwise have to challenge any
fee, charge, levy, assessment, or tax imposed.
-12-
916799.3
44
3.6Dedications and Improvements.
Developer shall offer dedications to the City or other applicable public agency, or
complete those public improvements in connection with the Project, as specified in the
Conditions of Approval.
3.7Indemnification.
3.7.1Developer shall protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless City and
City’s officers, officials, members, employees, volunteers, agents, and representatives (any of the
foregoing shall be known individually as “Indemnitee” and collectively as “Indemnitees”), and
each of them, jointly and severally, against and from any and all claims, demands, causes of
action, damages, costs, expenses, losses and liabilities, at law or in equity, of every kind or
nature whatsoever, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and expert witness fees, but excluding
those resulting from (i) the gross negligence or willful misconduct of any Indemnitee, or (ii)
environmental contamination of the Site or other defects on the Site existing prior to Developer’s
entry thereon, but including, without limitation, injury to or death of any person or persons and
damage to or destruction of any property, threatened, brought or instituted (“Claims”), arising
out of or in any manner directly or indirectly connected with the entry upon the Site by
Developer or any of the Developer Representatives, including without limitation:
(A)any damage to the Site and any liability to any third party incurred
by reason of any acts or omission of, including, but not limited to, any commission of any
negligent or tortious acts, by Developer or the Developer Representatives, or any of them;
(B)any mechanics’ or materialmen’s liens, claims, demands, actions
or suits arising (directly or indirectly) from (i) any work performed or materials supplied to or for
Developer, or (ii) any activities of Developer or any of the Developer Representatives, or any of
them, on or relating to the Site (including, without limitation, any claims by any of such
Developer Representatives).
In the event of litigation, City agrees, at no cost to City, to cooperate with Developer.
Developer shall have the obligation to provide the defense of City in the litigation, either by
providing for legal counsel or, at City’s option, timely paying the legal costs incurred by City in
the defense of litigation, even though negligence or gross negligence of Developer or its
contractors, subcontractors, agents, employees or other persons acting on its behalf has not been
established at the time that the defense is provided.
3.7.2In the event of any court action or proceeding challenging the validity of
this Agreement or the Project Approvals, Developer shall indemnify, hold harmless, pay all costs
and provide defense for City in said action or proceeding with counsel chosen by Developer and
reasonably approved by City. City shall, at no cost to City, cooperate with Developer in any
such defense as Developer may reasonably request. In the event Developer fails or refuses to
provide such defense of any challenge to this Agreement or the Project Approvals, or any
component thereof, City shall have the right not to defend such challenge, and to resolve such
challenge in any manner it chooses in its sole discretion, including terminating this Agreement.
In the event of such termination, Developer, upon written request of City, shall immediately
-13-
916799.3
45
execute a termination document or other document reasonably required by a reputable title
company to remove this Agreement as a cloud on title.
3.8Insurance.
3.8.1Commencing with the Effective Date hereof and ending on the date that is
one (1) year following the later of (i) the date City issues a Release of Construction Covenants
pursuant to the PSDA for the final Project Component to be constructed on the Site (the
“Completion of Construction Date”), or (ii) the date City signs off on the last and final inspection
for the final Project Component to be constructed on the Site, Developer shall procure and
maintain, at its sole cost and expense, in a form and content reasonably satisfactory to the City
Manager, the following policies of insurance:
(A)A policy of commercial general liability insurance written on a per
occurrence basis in an amount not less than Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000.00) per occurrence
and Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000.00) in the aggregate.
(B)A policy of workers’ compensation insurance in such amount as
will fully comply with the laws of the State of California against any loss, claim or damage
arising from any injuries or occupational diseases occurring to any worker employed by
Developer in the course of carrying out the work or services contemplated in this Agreement.
(C)A policy of commercial automobile liability insurance written on a
per occurrence basis in an amount not less than Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000.00). Said
policy shall include coverage for owned, non-owned, leased, and hired cars.
(D)“All Risks” Builder’s Risk (course of construction) insurance
coverage on a replacement cost basis in an amount equal to the full cost of the hard construction
costs of the Project. Such insurance shall contain no coinsurance provision, and cover, at a
minimum: all work, materials, and equipment to be incorporated into the Project; the Project
during construction; the completed Project until such time as City issues the final certificate of
occupancy for the Project, and storage, transportation, and equipment breakdown risks. Such
insurance shall include coverage for earthquake (for the Luxury Hotel, Lifestyle Hotel, and
Conference and Shared Service Facility only), flood, ordinance or law, temporary offsite storage,
debris removal, pollutant cleanup and removal, preservation of property, landscaping, shrubs and
plants and full collapse during construction. Such insurance shall protect/insure the interests of
Developer/owner and all of Developer’s contractor(s), and subcontractors, as each of their
interests may appear. If such insurance includes an exclusion for “design error,” such exclusion
shall only be for the object or portion which failed. Notwithstanding the foregoing, such
insurance shall only be required for a particular Project Component at such time as construction
commences on such Project Component.
3.8.2Commencing on the date City issues a Release of Construction Covenants
pursuant to the PSDA for a Project Component, Developer shall procure and maintain, at its sole
cost and expense, in a form and content satisfactory to City Manager, “All Risks” property
insurance on a replacement cost basis in an amount equal to full replacement cost of the Project
-14-
916799.3
46
Component, as the same may change from time to time. The above insurance policy or policies
shall contain no coinsurance provision.
3.8.3The following additional requirements shall apply to all of the above
policies of insurance:
All of the above policies of insurance shall be primary insurance and, except the
Worker’s Compensation and All Risks insurance, shall name City and City’s officers, officials,
members, employees, agents, and representatives as additional insureds, using a pre-2004
additional insured endorsement (or equivalent). The insurer shall waive all rights of subrogation
and contribution it may have against City and City’s officers, officials, members, employees,
agents, and representatives, and their respective insurers. All of said policies of insurance shall
provide that said insurance may not be materially amended or cancelled without providing thirty
(30) days’ prior written notice to City. In the event any of said policies of insurance are
cancelled, Developer shall, prior to the cancellation date, submit new evidence of insurance in
conformance with this Section to the City Manager. Not later than the Effective Date of this
Agreement, Developer shall provide the City Manager with Certificates of Insurance or
appropriate insurance binders evidencing the above insurance coverages and said Certificates of
Insurance or binders shall be subject to the reasonable approval of the City Manager. Upon the
request of the City Manager, Developer shall provide City with complete copies of each policy
of insurance required by this Agreement.
The policies of insurance required by this Agreement shall be satisfactory only if issued
by companies (i) licensed and admitted to do business in California, rated “A” or better in the
most recent edition of Best Rating Guide, The Key Rating Guide or in the Federal Register, and
only if they are of a financial category Class VII or better, or (ii) authorized to do business in
California, rated “A+” or better in the most recent edition of Best Rating Guide, The Key Rating
Guide, or in the Federal Registry and only if they are of a financial category Class XV.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event that the policies required hereunder are not available
from such insurers at commercially reasonable rates, the City Manager shall have the authority,
in his or her sole and absolute discretion, to waive one or more of such requirements provided
the proposed policies will adequately protect City’s interests hereunder.
City may reasonably require coverage increases, provided that the percentage increase in
coverage shall not be required to exceed the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index
published by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, for Urban Wage
Earners and Clerical Workers, Los Angeles-Riverside-Orange County Average, All Items (1984
= 100) (the “Index”), from and after the date of this Agreement, or, if said Index is discontinued,
such official index as may then be in existence and which is most nearly equivalent to said Index
(the “CPI Adjustment”). Unless otherwise approved in advance by the City Manager, the
insurance to be provided by Developer may provide for a deductible or self-insured retention of
not more than Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000); provided, however, that the deductible or self-
insured retention for the earthquake coverage may be up to, but not exceed, ten percent (10%) of
the replacement cost of the damaged Luxury Hotel, Lifestyle Hotel, and/or Conference and
Shared Service Facility (as applicable).
-15-
916799.3
47
Developer agrees that the provisions of this Section shall not be construed as limiting in
any way the extent to which Developer may be held responsible for the payment of damages to
any persons or property resulting from Developer’s activities or the activities of any person or
persons for which Developer is otherwise responsible.
4.CITY’S OBLIGATIONS
4.1Scope of Subsequent Review/Confirmation of Compliance Process.
Nothing set forth herein shall impair or interfere with the right of City to require the
processing of building permits as required by law pursuant to the applicable provisions of the La
Quinta Municipal Code and the provisions of City’s Fire Codes and ordinances, Health and
Safety Codes and ordinances, and Building, Electrical, Mechanical, and similar building codes.
4.2Project Approvals Independent.
All approvals required for the Project which may be or have been granted, and all land
use entitlements or approvals generally which have been issued or will be issued by City with
respect to the Project, constitute independent actions and approvals by City. If any provision of
this Agreement or the application of any provision of this Agreement to a particular situation is
held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or unenforceable, or if this Agreement
terminates for any reason, then such invalidity, unenforceability or termination of this Agreement
or any part hereof shall not affect the validity or effectiveness of any such Project approvals or
other land use approvals and entitlements. In such cases, such approvals and entitlements will
remain in effect pursuant to their own terms, provisions, and the Conditions of Approval. It is
understood by the Parties that pursuant to existing law, if this Agreement terminates or is held
invalid or unenforceable as described above, such approvals and entitlements shall not remain
valid for the term of this Agreement, but shall remain valid for the term of such approvals and
entitlements.
4.3Review for Compliance.
City shall review this Agreement at least once during every twelve (12) month period
following the Effective Date of this Agreement, in accordance with City’s procedures and
standards for such review set forth in City’s Development Agreement Ordinance. During such
periodic review by City, Developer, upon written request from City, shall be required to
demonstrate, and hereby agrees to furnish, evidence of good faith compliance with the terms
hereof. The failure of City to conduct or complete the annual review as provided herein or in
accordance with the Development Agreement Ordinance shall not impact the validity of this
Agreement. If, at the conclusion of the annual review provided for herein, Developer shall have
been found in compliance with this Agreement, City, through City’s Community Development
Director, shall, at Developer’s written request, issue a Certificate of Compliance to Developer
stating that (1) this Agreement remains in full force and effect and (2) Developer is in
compliance with this Agreement. The Certificate of Compliance shall be in recordable form, and
shall contain information necessary to communicate constructive record notice of the finding of
compliance. Developer, at its option and sole cost, may record the Certificate of Compliance.
-16-
916799.3
48
5.DEFAULT; REMEDIES; DISPUTE RESOLUTION.
5.1Notice of Default.
In the event of failure by either Party substantially to perform any material term or
provision of this Agreement, the non-defaulting Party shall have those rights and remedies
provided herein, provided that such non-defaulting Party has first provided to the defaulting
Party a written notice of default in the manner required by Section 8.1 hereof identifying with
specificity the nature of the alleged default and the manner in which said default may
satisfactorily be cured.
5.2Cure of Default.
Upon the receipt of the notice of default, the alleged defaulting Party shall promptly
commence to cure, correct, or remedy the identified default at the earliest reasonable time after
receipt of the notice of default and shall complete the cure, correction or remedy of such default
not later than thirty (30) days after receipt of the notice of default, or, for such defaults that
cannot reasonably be cured, corrected or remedied within thirty (30) days, such Party shall
commence to cure, correct, or remedy such default within such thirty (30) day period, shall and
continuously and diligently prosecute such cure, correction or remedy to completion.
5.3City Remedies.
In the event of an uncured default by Developer of the terms of this Agreement, City, at
its option, may institute legal action in law or in equity to cure, correct, or remedy such default,
enjoin any threatened or attempted violation, or enforce the terms of this Agreement; provided,
however, that in no event shall City be entitled to consequential damages for any Developer
default. For purposes of this Agreement the term “consequential damages” shall include, but not
be limited to, potential loss of anticipated tax revenues from the Project or any portion thereof.
Furthermore, City, in addition to or as an alternative to exercising the remedies set forth in this
Section 5.3, in the event of a material default by Developer, may give notice of its intent to
terminate or modify this Agreement pursuant to City’s Development Agreement Ordinance
and/or the Development Agreement Act, in which event the matter shall be scheduled for
consideration and review by the City Council in the manner set forth in the City’s Development
Agreement Ordinance or the Development Agreement Act.
6.MORTGAGEE PROTECTION; CERTAIN RIGHTS OF CURE
6.1Encumbrances on the Project Site.
This Agreement shall not prevent or limit Developer from encumbering the Site or any
portion thereof or any improvements thereon with any mortgage, deed of trust, sale and
leaseback arrangement, or any other form of conveyance in which the Site, or a portion thereof
or interest therein, is pledged as security, and contracted for in good faith and fair value (a
“Mortgage”) securing financing with respect to the construction, development, use or operation
of the Project.
-17-
916799.3
49
6.2Mortgage Protection.
This Agreement shall be superior and senior to the lien of any Mortgage.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid,
diminish, or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value, and any
acquisition or acceptance of title or any right or interest in or with respect to the Site or any
portion thereof by a holder of a beneficial interest under a Mortgage, or any successor or
assignee to said holder (a “Mortgagee”) \[whether pursuant to foreclosure, trustee’s sale, deed in
lieu of foreclosure, lease termination or otherwise\] shall be subject to all of the terms and
conditions of this Agreement.
6.3Mortgagee Not Obligated.
No Mortgagee will have any obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform the
obligations of the Developer or other affirmative covenants of Developer hereunder, or to
guarantee such performance, except that (i) the Mortgagee shall have no right to develop or
operate the Site, and (ii) to the extent that any covenant to be performed by the Developer is a
condition to the performance of a covenant by the City, the performance thereof shall continue to
be a condition precedent to the City’s performance hereunder.
6.4Notice of Default to Mortgagee; Right of Mortgagee to Cure.
With respect to any mortgage or deed of trust granted by Developer, whenever City may
deliver any notice or demand to Developer with respect to any breach or default by Developer in
completion of construction of the Project or any component of the Project, City shall at the same
time deliver a copy of such notice or demand to each holder of record of any mortgage or deed of
trust which has previously requested such notice in writing. Each such holder shall (insofar as the
rights granted by City are concerned) have the right, at its option, within sixty (60) days after the
receipt of the notice, to cure or remedy or commence to cure or remedy and thereafter to pursue
with due diligence the cure or remedy of any such default and to add the cost thereof to the
mortgage debt and the lien of its mortgage. It is understood that a holder shall be deemed to have
satisfied the sixty (60) day time limit set forth above for commencing to cure or remedy a
Developer default which requires title and/or possession of the Site (or portion thereof) if and to
the extent any such holder has within such sixty (60) day period commenced proceedings to
obtain title and/or possession and thereafter the holder diligently pursues such proceedings to
completion and cures or remedies the default.
7.TRANSFERS OF INTEREST IN SITE OR AGREEMENT
7.1Transfers of Interest in Site or Agreement.
The qualifications and identity of Developer as the developer and operator of high quality
commercial resort developments are of particular concern to City. Furthermore, the Parties
acknowledge that City has negotiated the terms of this Agreement in contemplation of the
development and operation of the Project on the Site and the mutual benefits to the Parties.
-18-
916799.3
50
7.2Transfers of Interest in Site or Agreement Prior to City’s Issuance of a Release of
Construction Covenants.
Except as provided in this Section 7.2, until the date City issues a Release of
Construction Covenants for a particular Project Component (the “Fee Transfer Release Date”),
as defined in the PSDA, (1) no voluntary successor in interest of Developer shall acquire any
rights or powers under this Agreement with respect to said Project Component; (2) Developer
shall not make any total or partial sale, transfer, conveyance, assignment, or lease of the whole or
any part of the Project Component or underlying real property; and (3) no changes shall occur
with respect to the ownership and/or control of Developer, including, without limitation, stock
transfers, sales of issuances, or transfers, sales or issuances of membership or ownership
interests, or statutory conversions (any of the above, a “Transfer”). Prior to the Fee Transfer
Release Date for a particular Project Component, City may approve or disapprove a proposed
Transfer in its sole and absolute discretion; provided, however, City agrees to reasonably
consider a Transfer to a transferee that has substantial experience in developing and operating
developments comparable in all material respects to the Project or Project Component (as
applicable), and the financial capability to develop and operate the Project or Project Component
(as applicable), as determined pursuant to the factors set forth in Section 311.1 of the PSDA.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, City approval of a Transfer prior to the Fee Transfer
Release Date for a particular Project Component shall not be required in connection with any of
the following:
(a) The conveyance or dedication of any portion of the Site to an appropriate
governmental agency, or the granting of easements or permits to facilitate construction of the
Project.
(b) Any assignment for financing purposes (subject to such financing being
permitted pursuant to Section 311 of the PSDA), including the grant of a deed of trust to secure
the funds necessary for land acquisition, construction and permanent financing of the Project or
of a Project Component.
(c) The Transfer to a lender who has provided financing to Developer (subject
to such financing being permitted pursuant to Section 311 of the PSDA) as a result of foreclosure
by such lender of the deed of trust securing funds necessary for land acquisition, construction,
and permanent financing of the Project or of a Project Component.
(d) The Transfer by Developer to an entity (i) whose managing member,
manager, or managing general partner is (A) Developer, or (B) an entity which is at least fifty-
one percent (51%) owned and controlled by Developer, Meriwether, or RGC, and (ii) which
engages as the project/development manager for the Project Component an entity which is at
least fifty-one percent (51%) owned and controlled by Developer, Meriwether or RGC.
(e) The sale by Developer of individual for-sale residential dwelling units to
third party buyers.
-19-
916799.3
51
7.3Assignment and Assumption of Obligations.
Except for the sale of individual for-sale residential dwelling units, any Transfer
(including Transfers not requiring prior City approval) by Developer of any interest in the Site or
of any interest in this Agreement shall require the execution of an assignment and assumption of
obligations substantially in the form attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “D” (an
“Assignment and Assumption Agreement”). Transfers of Developer’s rights and/or obligations
under this Agreement made without an executed Assignment and Assumption Agreement are
null and void. The requirement for the provision to City of an executed Assignment and
Assumption Agreement shall apply regardless of whether City approval is required for the
Transfer. Developer agrees that (a) at least thirty (30) days prior to any Transfer it shall give
written notice to City of such proposed Transfer; and (b) within five (5) days after any Transfer it
shall provide City with a copy of the fully executed Assignment and Assumption Agreement
evidencing that the assignee has assumed in writing all applicable obligations under this
Agreement. A Party proposing to assign its obligations under this Agreement (i) shall remain
liable for the obligations until and unless City has received a fully executed Assignment and
Assumption Agreement, and (ii) shall remain liable for any default hereunder that occurred prior
to the effective date of the assignment. Developer or Developer’s successor in interest shall
reimburse City for any costs (other than staff time) City incurs in reviewing any Assignment and
Assumption Agreement required hereunder.
7.4Successors and Assigns.
All of the terms, covenants and conditions of this Agreement shall be binding upon
Developer and its permitted successors and assigns. Whenever the term “Developer” is used in
this Agreement, such term shall include any other permitted successors and assigns as herein
provided, and the term “Developer shall only mean the owner of a Project Component from time
to time during the period of such entity’s ownership, provided that the procedures set forth in this
Agreement for that entity’s acquisition and or disposition have been followed, including, without
limitation, the provisions of Section 7.1.
7.5Assignment by City.
City may assign or transfer any of its rights or obligations under this Agreement with the
approval of Developer, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld; provided, however,
that City may assign or transfer any of its interests hereunder to a joint powers authority in which
City is a member at any time without the consent of Developer.
8.MISCELLANEOUS
8.1Notices, Demands and Communications Between the Parties.
Any approval, disapproval, demand, document or other notice (“Notice”) which either
Party may desire to give to the other Party under this Agreement must be in writing and shall be
sufficiently given if (i) delivered by hand, (ii) delivered by reputable same-day or overnight
messenger service that provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery, or (iii) dispatched
by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the principal offices
-20-
916799.3
52
of City and Developer at the addresses specified below, or at any other address as that Party may
later designate by Notice.
To City: City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
Phone No.: 760-777-7031
Attention: City Manager
With a copy to: Rutan & Tucker, LLP
611 Anton Boulevard, Suite 1400
P.O. Box 1950
Costa Mesa, California 92628
Phone No.: 714-641-5100
Attention: William S. Ihrke, Esq.
To Developer: SilverRock Development Company, LLC
c/o Meriwether Companies
11999 San Vicente Boulevard, Suite 220
Los Angeles, California 90049
Phone: 424-272-0470
Attention: Graham Culp
With a copy to:
The Robert Green Company
3551 Fortuna Ranch Road
Encinitas, California 92024
Attention: Robert Green
Any written notice, demand or communication shall be deemed received immediately if
personally delivered or delivered by delivery service, and shall be deemed received on the third
day from the date it is postmarked if delivered by registered or certified mail.
8.2Force Majeure.
In addition to specific provisions of this Agreement, performance by either Party
hereunder shall not be deemed to be in default, and all performance and other dates specified in
this Agreement shall be extended, where delays or Defaults are due to causes beyond the control
or without the fault of the Party claiming an extension of time to perform, which may include the
Force Majeure
following (each, a “”): war; insurrection; acts of terrorism; strikes; lockouts;
riots; floods; earthquakes; fires; casualties; acts of God; acts of the public enemy; epidemics;
quarantine restrictions; freight embargoes; lack of transportation; governmental restrictions or
priority; litigation; unusually severe weather; inability to secure necessary labor, materials or
tools; delays of any contractor, subcontractor or supplier; acts or omissions of the other Party; or
acts or failures to act of any public or governmental agency or entity (other than the acts or
failures to act of City which shall not excuse performance by City). Notwithstanding anything to
-21-
916799.3
53
the contrary in this Agreement, an extension of time for any such cause shall only be for the
period of the enforced delay and shall commence to run from the time of the commencement of
the cause, if notice by the Party claiming such extension is sent to the other Party within thirty
(30) days of the commencement of the cause. Times of performance under this Agreement may
also be extended in writing by the mutual agreement of City and Developer.
8.3Binding Effect.
This Agreement, and all of the terms and conditions hereof, shall be binding upon and
inure to the benefit of the Parties, any subsequent owner of all or any portion of the Project or the
Site, and their respective assigns, heirs or successors in interest, whether or not any reference to
this Agreement is contained in the instrument by which such person acquired an interest in the
Project or the Site.
8.4Independent Entity.
The Parties acknowledge that, in entering into and performing this Agreement, each of
Developer and City is acting as an independent entity and not as an agent of the other in any
respect.
8.5Agreement Not to Benefit Third Parties.
This Agreement is made for the sole benefit of the Parties, and no other person shall be
deemed to have any privity of contract under this Agreement nor any right to rely on this
Agreement to any extent for any purpose whatsoever, nor have any right of action of any kind on
this Agreement nor be deemed to be a third party beneficiary under this Agreement.
8.6Covenants.
The provisions of this Agreement shall constitute mutual covenants which shall run with
the land comprising the Site for the benefit thereof, and for the benefit of City’s adjoining
properties, and the burdens and benefits hereof shall bind and inure to the benefit of each of the
Parties hereto and all successors in interest to the Parties hereto for the term of this Agreement.
8.7Non-liability of City Officers and Employees.
No official, officer, employee, agent or representative of City, acting in his/her official
capacity, shall be personally liable to Developer, or any successor or assign, for any loss, costs,
damage, claim, liability, or judgment, arising out of or connection to this Agreement, or for any
act or omission on the part of City.
8.8Covenant Against Discrimination.
Developer and City covenant and agree, for themselves and their respective successors
and assigns, that there shall be no discrimination against, or segregation of, any person or group
or persons on account of race, color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, national origin or
ancestry, or any other impermissible classification, in the performance of this Agreement.
-22-
916799.3
54
Developer shall comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended (42
U.S.C. §§ 12101, et seq.).
8.9Amendment of Agreement.
This Agreement may be amended from time to time by mutual consent of the original
Parties or such party to which Developer assigns all or any portion of its interest in this
Agreement, in accordance with the provisions of the City’s Development Agreement Ordinance
and Government Code Sections 65867 and 65868. Developer shall be required to reimburse City
for all costs City incurs in negotiating, preparing, and processing any such alterations, changes,
or modifications requested by Developer or any lender or investor. In connection with any
request for an alteration, change or modification, Developer shall deposit with City the sum of
Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City Manager shall have
the discretion to authorize a lesser deposit, in the event he or she determines the proposed
alteration, change or modification is minor. In the event the funds on deposit are depleted, City
shall notify Developer of the same, and Developer shall deposit with City an additional Five
Thousand Dollars ($5,000) to complete processing of the requested alteration, change or
modification. Developer shall make additional deposits to City, as needed, pursuant to the
foregoing process, until the requested alteration, change, or modification is finalized. Within
sixty (60) days after such alteration, change or modification is finalized, City shall reimburse the
Developer any unused sums
8.10No Waiver.
No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and
signed by a duly authorized representative of the Party against whom enforcement of a waiver is
sought and referring expressly to this Section. No delay or omission by either Party in exercising
any right or power accruing upon non-compliance or failure to perform by the other Party under
any of the provisions of this Agreement shall impair any such right or power or be construed to
be a waiver thereof, except as expressly provided herein. No waiver by either Party of any of the
covenants or conditions to be performed by the other Party shall be construed or deemed a
waiver of any succeeding breach or nonperformance of the same or other covenants and
conditions hereof.
8.11Severability.
If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement is held by a court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this
Agreement shall continue in full force and effect, to the extent that the invalidity or
unenforceability does not impair the application of this Agreement as intended by the Parties.
8.12Cooperation in Carrying Out Agreement.
Each Party shall take such actions and execute and deliver to the other all such further
instruments and documents as may be reasonably necessary to carry out this Agreement in order
to provide and secure to the other Party the full and complete enjoyment of its rights and
privileges hereunder.
-23-
916799.3
55
8.13Estoppel Certificate.
Either Party may, at any time, deliver written notice to any other Party requesting such
Party to certify in writing that, to the best knowledge of the certifying Party, (i) this Agreement is
in full force and effect and a binding obligation of the Parties, (ii) this Agreement has not been
amended or modified either orally or in writing, or if so amended, identifying the amendments,
(iii) the requesting Party is not in default in the performance of its obligations under this
Agreement, or if in default, describing the nature and amount of any such defaults, and (iv) any
other reasonable information requested. A Party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and
return such certificate within ten (10) days following approval of the proposed estoppel
certificate by the City Attorney, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed.
The City Manager, Assistant City Manager, and Community Development Director are each
authorized to sign and deliver an estoppel certificate on behalf of City. City acknowledges that a
certificate hereunder may be relied upon by transferees and Mortgagees.
8.14Construction.
The terms of this Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the meaning of the
language used and shall not be construed for or against either Party by reason of the authorship
of this Agreement or any other rule of construction that might otherwise apply. As used in this
Agreement, and as the context may require, the singular includes the plural and vice versa, and
the masculine gender includes the feminine and vice versa.
8.15Recordation.
This Agreement shall be recorded with the County Recorder of Riverside County at
Developer’s cost, if any, within the period required by Government Code Section 65868.5.
Amendments approved by the Parties, and any cancellation or termination of this Agreement,
shall be similarly recorded.
8.16Captions and References.
The captions of the paragraphs and subparagraphs of this Agreement are solely for
convenience of reference, and shall be disregarded in the construction and interpretation of this
Agreement. Reference herein to a paragraph or exhibit are the paragraphs, subparagraphs and
exhibits of this Agreement.
8.17Time.
Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement and of each and every term
and condition hereof as to which time is an element.
8.18Recitals & Exhibits Incorporated; Entire Agreement.
The Recitals to this Agreement and all of the exhibits and attachments to this Agreement
are, by this reference, incorporated into this Agreement and made a part hereof. This
Agreement, including all Exhibits attached hereto, constitutes the entire agreement between the
Parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement, and this Agreement supersedes all
-24-
916799.3
56
previous negotiations, discussions and agreements between the Parties, and no parole evidence of
any prior or other agreement shall be permitted to contradict or vary the terms hereof.
8.19Exhibits.
Exhibits “A” -”D” to which reference is made in this Agreement are deemed appropriated
herein in their entirety. Said exhibits are identified as follows:
A Property Legal Description
B Site Map
C Mitigation Monitoring Program
D. Form of Assignment and Assumption Agreement
8.20Counterpart Signature Pages.
For convenience the Parties may execute and acknowledge this agreement in counterparts
and when the separate signature pages are attached hereto, shall constitute one and the same
complete Agreement.
8.21Authority to Execute; Representations and Warranties.
Developer warrants and represents that (i) it is duly organized and existing, (ii) it is duly
authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement, (iii) by so executing this Agreement,
Developer is formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement, (iv) Developer’s entering into
and performance of its obligations set forth in this Agreement do not violate any provision of any
other agreement to which Developer is bound, and (v) there is no existing or threatened litigation
or legal proceeding of which Developer is aware which could prevent Developer from entering
into or performing its obligations set forth in this Agreement.
8.22City Approvals and Actions.
Whenever a reference is made in this Agreement to an action or approval to be
undertaken by the City Manager, his or her authorized designee is authorized to act on behalf of
the City unless specifically provided otherwise or the law otherwise requires.
8.23Governing Law; Litigation Matters.
The internal laws of the State of California shall govern the interpretation and
enforcement of this Agreement without regard to conflicts of law principles. Any action at law
or in equity brought by either Party hereto for the purpose of enforcing, construing, or
interpreting the validity of this Agreement or any provision hereof shall be brought in the
Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of Riverside, or such other
appropriate court in said county, and the Parties hereto waive all provisions of law providing for
the filing, removal, or change of venue to any other court. Service of process on City shall be
made in accordance with California law. Service of process on Developer shall be made in any
-25-
916799.3
57
manner permitted by California law and shall be effective whether served inside or outside of
California. In the event of any action between the Parties hereto seeking enforcement of any of
the terms of this Agreement or otherwise arising out of this Agreement, the prevailing Party in
such litigation shall be awarded, in addition to such relief to which such Party is entitled, its
reasonable attorney’s fees, expert witness fees, and litigation costs and expenses.
\[end – signature page follows\]
-26-
916799.3
58
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Developer and City have executed this Agreement as of the
Reference Date.
DEVELOPER”
“
SILVERROCK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company
By:
Its:
CITY
“”
CITY OF LA QUINTA, a California municipal
corporation
By: ___________________________
Name: Frank J. Spevacek
Title: City Manager
ATTEST:
Susan Maysels
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM
RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP
William H. Ihrke
City Attorney
-27-
916799.3
59
State of California )
County of Riverside )
On _________________________, before me, ,
(insert name and title of the officer)
Notary Public, personally appeared,
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same
in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument
the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that
the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature (Seal)
State of California )
County of Riverside )
On _________________________, before me, ,
(insert name and title of the officer)
Notary Public, personally appeared,
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same
in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument
the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that
the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature (Seal)
-28-
916799.3
60
EXHIBIT “A”
PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION
\[The Property Legal Description will be inserted by the Parties upon the recordation of
the Parcel Map\]
EXHIBIT “A”
916799.3
61
62
EXHIBIT “B”
SITE MAP
EXHIBIT “B”
916799.3
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Attn: City Manager
Exempt From Recording Fee Pursuant to Government Code § 27383
ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT
This Assignment and Assumption Agreement (“Assignment”) is entered into this
____ day of ____ by and between SILVERROCK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company (“Assignor”) and ______________________, a
____________________________________ (“Assignee”) with reference to the
following:
RECITALS
A. Assignor is the owner in fee simple of certain real property located at the
southwest intersection of Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 in the City of La Quinta,
California (the “Site”). The Site is more particularly described on Exhibit “A”, which is
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
B. Assignor acquired the Site and certain other adjacent real property
(collectively with the Site, the “Development Property”) from the City of La Quinta, a
California municipal corporation and charter city (“City”) pursuant to the terms of that
certain Purchase, Sale, and Development Agreement dated on or about
__________________, 2014 (the “PSDA”). A Memorandum of Purchase, Sale, and
Development Agreement was recorded in the Official Records of the County of Riverside
on ____________, as Instrument No. ____________, to provide notice of the PSDA.
C. On or about the same date as the City and Assignor executed the PSDA, the
City and Assignor entered into that certain Development Agreement, which was recorded
against the Development Property in the Official Records of the County of Riverside on
_________________ 2014, as Instrument No. ______________________ (the
“Development Agreement”).
D. Pursuant to the terms of the PSDA and the Development Agreement, the
Property was to be used for a ___________________ (the \[“Project” or “Project
Component”\]).
E. Pursuant to the terms of the PSDA and the Development Agreement, the
City and Assignor entered into that certain \[insert other applicable documents
encumbering the Property, such as Option Agreement, Agreement to Share Transient
77
Occupancy Tax Revenue, and/or Agreement Containing Covenants, Conditions, and
Restrictions Affecting Real Property\].
F. The PSDA, Development Agreement, _________, and _____________
are collectively referred to hereinafter as the (“Project Agreements”).
G. Assignor now desires to transfer the Site to Assignee, and concurrently
therewith, to transfer to Assignee all of Assignor’s rights and responsibilities under the
Project Agreements to the extent that such rights and responsibilities relate to the Site.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing Recitals, which are
incorporated herein by this reference, and for good and valuable consideration, the receipt
and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:
1.Assignor hereby assigns to Assignee all of Assignor’s rights and responsibilities
under the terms of the Project Agreements, \[but only to the extent that such rights
and responsibilities arise from the ownership of the Project Component and/or
Site\] from and after the “Effective Date” (as that term is defined in Section 4
below) of this Assignment (collectively, the “Assigned Rights and Obligations”).
2.Assignee hereby accepts the foregoing assignment of the Assigned Rights and
Obligations, and agrees to be bound by the terms of the Project Agreements \[to
the extent that such terms affect or are affected by ownership of the Site\].
3.The parties hereto acknowledge and agree that Assignee shall not be responsible
for any of the obligations of the Project Agreements which arise from ownership
of any portion of the Site and which arise prior to the Effective Date hereof, \[or
which arise from any portion of the Development Property other than the Site
after the Effective Date hereof\]. As such, a default by Assignor under any of the
Project Agreements prior to the Effective Date hereof, \[or with respect to any
portion of the Development Property other than the Site\] after the Effective Date
hereof (“Assignor’s Default”) shall not be deemed a default by Assignee, and
Assignor shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Assignee from any and all
losses, claims or liability, including without limitation reasonable attorneys’ fees
and costs, arising from an Assignor’s Default. A default by Assignee under any
of the Project Agreements with respect to the Site after the Effective Date hereof
(“Assignee’s Default”) shall not be deemed a default by Assignor, and Assignee
shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless Assignor from any and all losses,
claims or liability, including without limitation reasonable attorneys’ fees and
costs, arising from an Assignee’s Default.
4.This Assignment shall be deemed effective upon the last of the following events
to occur: (a) conveyance of the Site to Assignee as evidenced by the recording of
the grant deed therefor in the Official Records of the County of Riverside,
California, and (b) the written consent to this Assignment by the City with respect
78
to the Assigned Obligations arising under the Project Agreement (herein referred
to as the “Effective Date”).
5.Except as otherwise described in paragraph 4 above, the parties hereto each
warrant and represent that they have taken all necessary corporate action to
authorize the execution and performance of this Assignment and that the
individuals executing this document on behalf of the parties are authorized to do
so, and by doing so, create binding obligations as described herein of the party
represented.
6. This Assignment shall be governed by the internal laws of the State of California,
without regard to conflict of law principles.
\[End – Signature page follows\]
79
WHEREFOR, the parties hereto have executed this Assignment on the date first written
above.
“Assignor”
SILVERROCK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY,
LLC, a Delaware limited liability company
By: ____________________________________
It: ____________________________________
“Assignee”
__________________________________________
__________________________________________
By: ____________________________________
Its: ____________________________________
80
CONSENT
By execution below, the City hereby consent to the foregoing assignment.
CITY OF LA QUINTA, a California
municipal corporation and charter city
By:
Its: City Manager
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP
City Attorney
81
EXHIBIT “A”
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
\[To be inserted when map has been recorded identifying Site\]
82
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE ) ss.
CITY OF LA QUINTA )
I, SUSAN MAYSELS, City Clerk of the City of La Quinta, California, do hereby
certify the foregoing to be a full, true, and correct copy of Ordinance No. 520
which was introduced at a regular meeting on the 4th day of November, 2014 and
was adopted at a regular meeting held on the 18th day of November, 2014, not
being less than 5 days after the date of introduction thereof.
I further certify that the foregoing Ordinance was posted in three places within the
City of La Quinta as specified in the Rules of Procedure adopted by City Council
Resolution No. 2014-013.
__________________________________________
SUSAN MAYSELS, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
DECLARATION OF POSTING
I, SUSAN MAYSELS, City Clerk of the City of La Quinta, California, do hereby
certify that the foregoing ordinance was posted on November 19, 2014, pursuant
to Council Resolution.
__________________________________________
SUSAN MAYSELS, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
83
84
CITY MEETING DATE: November 18, 2014
ITEM TITLE: EXCUSE ABSENCE FOR PLANNING
COMMISSIONER FITZPATRICK FROM NOVEMBER
25, 2014 MEETING
AGENDA CATEGORY:
BUSINESS SESSION:
CONSENT CALENDAR: 4
STUDY SESSION:
PUBLIC HEARING:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Planning Commissioner to be excused from the
November 25, 2014 Planning Commission meeting.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
The Municipal Code does not allow a commissioner to be absent from two
consecutive regular meetings or three scheduled meetings within a fiscal year without
causing his/her office to become vacant. A request may be made for Council to
excuse a comm-the-fact, for extenuating circumstances, and
the absence would then not be counted toward the limitation on absences.
Commissioner Fitzpatrick requested to be excused from the November 25, 2014,
Planning Commission meeting due to being out of the area for a personal matter.
Ms. Fitzpatrick has had one excused absence during this fiscal year and staff
recommends this absence be excused by Council.
ALTERNATIVES:
Council may deny this request, which would result in the absence being counted
toward the commissioner limitation on absences as noted above.
Report prepared by: Teresa Thompson, Deputy City Clerk
Report approved for submission by: Frank J. Spevacek, City Manager
85
86
CITY MEETING DATE: November 18, 2014
ITEM TITLE: APPROVE DEMAND REGISTERS DATED
OCTOBER 31 AND NOVEMBER 7, 2014
AGENDA CATEGORY:
BUSINESS SESSION:
CONSENT CALENDAR: 5
STUDY SESSION:
PUBLIC HEARING:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Approve Demand Registers dated October 31 and November 7, 2014.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
None.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Demand of Cash: -- City $ 2,576,995.67
-- Successor Agency of RDA $ 600.00
-- Housing Authority $ 4,256.25
-- Housing Authority Commission $ 250.00
$ 2,582,101.92
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
Between City Council meetings, routine bills and payroll must be paid in order to avoid
late fees/penalties. Attachment 1 provides the detail for the weekly demand registers
from October 25 through November 7, 2014.
Warrants Issued:
104942 - 105001} $ 865,145.29
105002 - 105095} $ 1,169,787.70
Voids} $ (0.00)
Wire Transfers} $ 355,952.28
Payroll 37013} $ 152,049.14
Payroll Tax Transfers} $ 39,167.51
$ 2,582,101.92
87
The most significant expenditures on the demand registers listed above are as follows:
Significant Expenditures:
Vendor: Account Name: Amount: Purpose:
Riverside Co. Sheriff Various $ 984,647.39 Police Svc 8/21 - 9/17/14
O&J Golf Construction Construction $ 727,607.57 SilverRock Golf Restoration
Vintage Associates Various $ 42,271.94 Oct. Park Maintenance
Burrtec Waste Mgmt. $ 37,048.00 Property Tax FY 2013/14
Wire Transfers: Six wire transfers totaled $355,952.28. Of this amount,
$217,342.05 was to Landmark for golf course management; $82,753.74 to CalPERS
for health insurance premiums; and $47,215.99 to CalPERS for retirement costs (see
Attachment 2 for a full listing).
ALTERNATIVES:
City Council may approve, partially approve, or reject the register of demands.
Report prepared by: Sandra Mancilla, Account Technician
Report approved for submission by: Rita Conrad, Finance Director
Attachments: 1. Demand Registers
2. Wire Transfers
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
CITY MEETING DATE: November 18, 2014
ITEM TITLE: RECEIVE AND FILE REVENUE AND
EXPENDITURE REPORTS FOR THE MONTH OF
OCTOBER 31, 2014
AGENDA CATEGORY:
BUSINESS SESSION:
CONSENT CALENDAR: 6
STUDY SESSION:
PUBLIC HEARING:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Receive and file.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Revenue and expenditure reports are submitted monthly to City Council for
review.
The reports summarize year-to-date (YTD) revenues and
expenditures for the month of October.
Expenditures are generally on target or under budget.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
Revenues:
Below is a summary of the column headers used on the Revenue Summary Report
All Funds:
Original Total Budget represents the revenue budget the Council adopted in
June 2014 for Fiscal Year (FY) 2014/2015
Current Total Budget includes original adopted revenue budget, plus
carryovers, from the prior FY and Council-approved budget amendments.
The bulk of the carryovers are related to Capital Improvement Project (CIP)
matters. Each year total CIP projects are budgeted; however, project length
may span over multiple years. Therefore, unfinished projects from the prior
year are carried over (along with associated revenue reimbursements).
109
Period Activity represents actual revenues received in the reporting month
(October).
Fiscal Activity presents actual revenues collected year-to-date. For
example, the October report shows revenues collected in the Period Activity
column, but revenues collected from July through October 31, 2014 are
presented in the Fiscal Activity column.
Variance Favorable/ (Unfavorable) represents the difference between year-
to-date collections and the budgeted amount.
Percent Used represents the percentage of budgeted revenues collected
YTD.
The revenue report includes revenues and transfers into funds from other funds
(income items). Unlike expenditures, revenues are not received uniformly
throughout the year so there will be peaks and valleys depending upon large
payments received throughout the year. For example, large property tax payments
are usually received in December and April. Similarly, Redevelopment Property Tax
Trust Fund payments are typically received in January and June.
October Revenues
$830,851 in General Fund revenue was collected in October, bringing the total
YTD collections to 8.13% ($2,950,131). The four largest General Fund Payments
received in October were:
Sales Tax $323,200 13% collected YTD
No Low Property Tax $ 91,808 8% collected YTD
Transient Occupancy Tax $ 76,032 9% collected YTD
Document Transfer Tax $ 70,915 22% collected YTD
Total revenue collections in October for all funds totaled $2.7 million (6.95%
collected YTD).
Expenditures
Below is a summary of the column headers used on the Expenditure Summary
Report All Funds:
Original Total Budget represents the expenditure budget adopted by
Council in June 2014 for FY 2014/2015.
Current Total Budget includes the original adopted expenditure budget plus
any carryovers from the prior FY, and any Council approved budget
amendments. The bulk of the carryovers are related to CIP matters. Each
year total CIP projects are budgeted; however, project length can span over
multiple years. Therefore, unfinished projects from the prior year are carried
over (along with associated revenue reimbursements).
110
Period Activity represents actual expenditures made in the reporting month
(October).
Fiscal Activity presents actual expenditures made year-to-date. For
example, the October report shows expenditures made in the Period Activity
column, but expenditures from July through October 31 are presented in the
Fiscal Activity column.
Variance Favorable/(Unfavorable) represents the difference between YTD
expenditures and the budgeted amount (the amount yet to be expended).
Percent Used represents the amount of budget expended to date.
The expenditure report includes expenditures and transfers out to other funds.
Unlike revenues, expenditures are fairly consistent month to month. However,
large Debt Service payments, or CIP expenditures can cause swings.
October Expenditures
General Fund expenditures in October totaled $3.9 million; of this amount,
$577,777 is related to personnel costs (salaries, benefits, etc.). YTD General Fund
personnel costs are $2.4 million (28% expended), which is on target. Total YTD
General Fund expenditures are $8.6 million (22.7% expended.)
In addition to personnel costs, other significant expenditures in October include:
$1.8 million for police services contract (Riverside County Sheriff).
$264,803 in contract street maintenance costs (majority of invoices
related to flood clean-up).
$485,867 for General Fund portion of CIP projects.
Total expenditures for all funds equated to $6.9 million in October (12.82%
expended). The largest expenditures (not including the General Fund) related to the
CIP Fund expenditures ($1.8 million).
Summary
All Funds are generally on target or under budget with regard to expenditures.
Revenue collections appear low due to timing issues discussed in the revenue
section above; this revenue/expenditure receipt imbalance is one reason why the
City maintains a cash flow reserve. The FY 2014/2015 mid-year report will
provide updated projections for the remainder of FY 2014/2015 once there is six
months of activity to better make projections.
Report prepared by: Rita Conrad, Finance Director
Report approved for submission by: Frank J. Spevacek, City Manager
Attachment: 1. Revenue and Expenditure for October 2014
111
112
ATTACHMENT 1
/źƷǤ ƚŅ \[ğ vǒźƓƷğ
hĭƷƚĬĻƩͲ ЋЉЊЍ
wĻǝĻƓǒĻ ğƓķ 9ǣƦĻƓķźƷǒƩĻ wĻƦƚƩƷƭ
113
114
115
116
CITY MEETING DATE: November 18, 2014
ITEM TITLE: RECEIVE AND FILE TREASURER'S
REPORT DATED SEPTEMBER 30, 2014
AGENDA CATEGORY:
BUSINESS SESSION:
CONSENT CALENDAR: 7
STUDY SESSION:
PUBLIC HEARING:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Receive and file.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
the Investment Advisory
Board and the City Council for review.
This report summarizes all cash and investments of the City, Successor
Agency, Housing Authority, and Financing Authority.
There is sufficient investment liquidity and anticipated revenues available to
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
required by the California Government Code and City Municipal Code. It certifies
that all pooled investments are reported accurately and fairly in
compliance with the applicable codes and also certifies that there is sufficient
estimated expenditures. Due to the fact that the City pools all cash and
investments, this report combines all City entities including the Successor Agency,
Financing Authority, and Housing Authority.
117
The investment portfolio was stable and decreased by a net of $12.91 million,
ending the month at $112 million. The major reason for the decrease was due to
$11.64 million debt service payments and $1.27 million for Pavement Management
Program expenditures.
During the month, the Local Agency Investment Fund account decreased by $3.0
million, due to transfers to the General Fund to pay for operating expenses.
Overall portfolio performance remained the same as the previous month, earning
.36%.
ALTERNATIVES:
None.
Report prepared by: Rita Conrad, Finance Director
Report approved for submission by: Frank J. Spevacek, City Manager
Attachment: 1 Reports
118
ATTACHMENT 1
119
120
121
124
125
126
City of La Quinta
Comparative Rates of Interest
September 30, 2014
City of La Quinta
Commercial Paper
Annualized EarningsAverageTreasury Bills/NoteThree Month
YearMonthPooled Cash Fiscal Agent OverallMaturity (days)Three Month Six Month One Year Two Year Non-FinancialLAIF Rate
FY 10/11July 20100.50%0.15%0.47%1190.16%0.20%0.30%0.63%0.28%0.53%
August 20100.49%0.15%0.46%1080.15%0.19%0.26%0.38%0.25%0.51%
Sept 20100.55%0.15%0.51%1070.16%0.19%0.27%0.38%0.24%0.50%
Oct 20100.55%0.15%0.51%880.13%0.17%0.23%0.38%0.23%0.48%
Nov 20100.53%0.15%0.49%840.18%0.21%0.28%0.50%0.23%0.45%
Dec 20100.57%0.14%0.52%2650.15%0.19%0.30%0.63%0.23%0.46%
Jan 20110.51%0.14%0.43%2060.16%0.18%0.28%0.63%0.24%0.54%
Feb 20110.55%0.17%0.46%2100.15%0.17%0.31%0.63%0.23%0.51%
Mar 20110.54%0.17%0.45%2180.05%0.13%0.26%0.75%0.23%0.50%
Apr 20110.59%0.17%0.48%1920.05%0.10%0.28%0.63%0.20%0.59%
May 20110.48%0.17%0.41%1560.06%0.12%0.20%0.50%0.16%0.41%
June 20110.53%0.00%0.35%1260.03%0.10%0.20%0.38%0.15%0.45%
FY 11/12July 20110.53%0.00%0.35%1120.07%0.12%0.15%0.20%0.14%0.38%
August 20110.60%0.00%0.38%1020.02%0.05%0.10%0.13%0.16%0.41%
Sept 20110.58%0.03%0.39%1240.02%0.06%0.09%0.13%0.14%0.38%
Oct 20110.53%0.03%0.35%1170.01%0.06%0.12%0.25%0.15%0.39%
Nov 20110.52%0.03%0.37%940.03%0.07%0.10%0.25%0.14%0.40%
Dec 20110.48%0.03%0.35%860.02%0.06%0.11%0.13%0.14%0.39%
Jan 20120.45%0.03%0.34%740.05%0.08%0.11%0.25%0.14%0.39%
Feb 20120.49%0.05%0.36%720.12%0.15%0.17%0.25%0.17%0.39%
Mar 20120.44%0.05%0.34%740.08%0.14%0.19%0.25%0.18%0.38%
Apr 20120.44%0.09%0.35%610.10%0.15%0.19%0.25%0.20%0.37%
May 20120.43%0.09%0.34%620.09%0.14%0.19%0.25%0.19%0.36%
June 20120.38%0.08%0.29%470.10%0.15%0.21%0.25%0.21%0.36%
FY 12/13July 20120.41%0.08%0.31%1120.11%0.15%0.18%0.22%0.22%0.36%
August 20120.41%0.08%0.29%310.11%0.14%0.20%0.25%0.20%0.38%
Sept 20120.43%0.09%0.33%340.11%0.14%0.18%0.25%0.20%0.35%
Oct 20120.47%0.10%0.36%220.13%0.16%0.18%0.25%0.19%0.34%
Nov 20120.48%0.10%0.36%1610.10%0.15%0.18%0.25%0.20%0.32%
Dec 20120.47%0.10%0.36%1370.08%0.12%0.16%0.13%0.20%0.33%
Jan 20130.44%0.10%0.34%1110.08%0.11%0.14%0.25%0.16%0.30%
Feb 20130.37%0.10%0.29%1050.13%0.14%0.15%0.25%0.17%0.29%
Mar 20130.39%0.09%0.30%1230.08%0.11%0.15%0.25%0.15%0.29%
Apr 20130.31%0.08%0.25%1860.05%0.08%0.14%0.13%0.12%0.26%
May 20130.30%0.06%0.23%1750.05%0.08%0.14%0.25%0.10%0.25%
June 20130.30%0.07%0.23%2120.05%0.09%0.16%0.38%0.10%0.24%
FY 13/14July 20130.28%0.07%0.21%3360.03%0.07%0.12%0.25%0.11%0.27%
August 20130.28%0.06%0.21%3030.03%0.06%0.07%0.14%0.09%0.27%
Sept 20130.30%0.07%0.23%3210.01%0.04%0.01%0.25%0.08%0.26%
Oct 20130.48%0.06%0.31%4270.05%0.08%0.16%0.25%0.11%0.27%
Nov 20130.49%0.06%0.31%4440.05%0.08%0.16%0.25%0.09%0.26%
Dec 20130.49%0.05%0.31%3960.07%0.09%0.14%0.25%0.09%0.26%
Jan 20140.44%0.05%0.32%3810.04%0.06%0.13%0.38%0.09%0.24%
Feb 20140.44%0.03%0.30%3570.05%0.08%0.12%0.25%0.10%0.24%
Mar 20140.44%0.02%0.30%3520.05%0.07%0.12%0.38%0.10%0.24%
Apr 20140.47%0.02%0.33%3680.02%0.05%0.11%0.45%0.10%0.23%
May 20140.49%0.02%0.35%3730.04%0.06%0.10%0.39%0.10%0.23%
June 20140.44%0.02%0.33%3100.04%0.07%0.11%0.50%0.10%0.23%
FY 14/15July 20140.45%0.02%0.34%3050.03%0.06%0.11%0.50%0.10%0.24%
August 20140.49%0.02%0.36%3250.03%0.05%0.11%0.50%0.11%0.26%
Sept 20140.50%0.02%0.36%3250.02%0.04%0.12%0.50%0.10%0.25%
127
128
CITY MEETING DATE: November 18, 2014
ITEM TITLE: ADOPT RESOLUTION TO EXTEND TIME TO
COMPLETE OFF-SITE AND ON-SITE IMPROVEMENTS
FOR TRACT MAP NO. 30092, PIAZZA SERENA
AGENDA CATEGORY:
BUSINESS SESSION:
CONSENT CALENDAR: 8
STUDY SESSION:
PUBLIC HEARING:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt a resolution to extend the time to complete off-site and on-site improvements as
specified in the approved Subdivision Improvement Agreements for Tract Map No. 30092,
Piazza Serena.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Final Tract Map No. 30092 forthe Piazza Serena residential development was
approved in 2004. The development is located north of Avenue 58 and west of
Monroe Street (Attachment 1).
The developer, Cado La Quinta, LLC, has requested City Council approval of a time
extension of the Subdivision Improvement Agreements to August 2, 2015 to
complete the off-site and on-site improvements.
On-site improvements are not necessary at this time and there have been no
requests for either the on-site or off-site improvements.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None. Bonds of sufficient value are currently in place to secure the incomplete
improvements.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
On December 21, 2004, the City Council approved Tract Map No. 30092. The developer
has constructed most of the off-site and on-site improvements. The remaining off-site and
on-site improvements include median landscaping along Monroe Street, a traffic signal at
the development entrance on Avenue 58, capping of the interior streets near the vacant
129
lots, and minor repairs to some completed improvements. In a letter dated October 10,
2014 (Attachment 2), the developer requests an additional time extension due to the
existing real estate market conditions. Staff has received no requests regarding these off-
site and on-site improvements. With the current deficit in the Landscape and Lighting
District, staff believes that requiring the median landscaping to be constructed now would
not be fiscally prudent, and therefore recommends approval of an extension to the
Subdivision Improvement Agreements for this project to August 2, 2015.
ALTERNATIVES
:
Since no requests for the required improvements have been received, staff does not
recommend an alternative.
Report prepared by: Bryan McKinney, P.E., Principal Engineer
Report approved for submission by: Timothy R. Jonasson, P.E.
Public Works Director/City Engineer
Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map
2. Letter from Cado La Quinta, LLC
130
RESOLUTION NO. 2014
-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,GRANTING AN
EXTENSION OF TIME TO AUGUST 2, 2015 FOR THE
COMPLETION OF THE OFF-SITE AND ON-SITE
IMPROVEMENTS AS SPECIFIED IN THE SUBDIVISION
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENTS FOR TRACT MAP NO.
30092, PIAZZA SERENA
WHEREAS
, the City Council approved the Subdivision Improvement Agreements
(SIA) for Tract Map No. 30092, Piazza Serena, on February 3, 2005; and
WHEREAS
, Section 6. Completion of Improvements, of the approved SIA
requires that the developer begin construction of the improvements within ninety days
and complete the construction within twelve months after the approval of the
Agreements; and
WHEREAS
, failure by the developer to complete construction of the
improvements by August 2, 2014 shall constitute cause for the City, in its sole discretion
and when it deems necessary, to declare the Subdivider in default of the approved
agreements; and
WHEREAS
, Section 8. Time Extension, of the approved SIA allows for, at the
City Council’s sole and absolute discretion, an extension of time for completion of the
improvements with additions or revisions to the terms and conditions of the
Agreements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
by the City Council of the City of La
Quinta, California, as follows:
SECTION 1. The time for the completion of the off-site and on-site improvements as
required by the approved SIA is extended to August 2, 2015.
SECTION 2. The time extension for completing the improvements shall expire when
City offices close for regular business on August 2, 2015 if the installation of the
improvements has not been completed.
SECTION 3. The provided security amount as required in the approved SIA is
satisfactory. No additional securities are required.
SECTION 4. All other terms, responsibilities and conditions as listed in the approved
SIA shall remain in full force and effect.
131
Resolution No. 2014-
Tract Map No. 30092
Adopted: November 18, 2014
Page 2
PASSED, APPROVEDADOPTED
and at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City
th
Council held on this 18 day of November 2014, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
______________________________
DON ADOLPH, Mayor
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
___________________________________
SUSAN MAYSELS, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
(CITY SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
WILLIAM H. IHRKE, City Attorney
City of La Quinta, California
132
TM 30092 ÏPIAZZA SERENA
V I C I N I T Y M A P
NOT TO SCALE
133
134
ATTACHMENT 2
135
136
CITY MEETING DATE: November 18, 2014
ITEM TITLE: APPROVE ANNUAL MEMBERSHIP AND
DAILY USE FEES FOR THE WELLNESS ADDITION
AT THE SENIOR CENTER
AGENDA CATEGORY:
BUSINESS SESSION: 1
CONSENT CALENDAR:
STUDY SESSION:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
PUBLIC HEARING:
Approve the annual membership and daily use fees as recommended.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
• The 5,900 square -foot expansion and renovation of the Senior Center is a
part of the City Council's vision to expand health and wellness services in
the community.
• Once completed, the new facility will have expanded operating hours, more
classes and programs, and will be open to all ages in the evenings and on
weekends.
• City Council requested that fees be established to recover the new cost of
services provided.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The annual cost to operate the expanded portion of the facility is estimated at
$50,000, which includes additional utilities, janitorial, supplies, maintenance, and
additional part-time staff during the early morning, evening and Saturday hours.
The itemizations are as follows:
Utilities
$11,000
Staffing
$12,000
Supplies and Services
$15,400
Operations and Maintenance
$12,000
Grand Total
$50,400
137
138
CITY MEETING DATE: November 18, 2014
ITEM TITLE: ADOPT RESOLUTION DESIGNATING
SPEED LIMITS FOR CERTAIN STREETS
AGENDA CATEGORY:
BUSINESS SESSION: 2
CONSENT CALENDAR:
STUDY SESSION:
PUBLIC HEARING:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt a resolution approving designation of legal speed limits on certain local streets,
as recommended in the "Engineering and Traffic Survey for the City of La Quinta" dated
November 2014, prepared by Willdan Engineering.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
State law requires that, in order for a police department to use radar enforcement
on city streets, the city’s speed limits must be updated every five years via an
engineering and speed survey.
The engineering and speed survey takes into account: 1) measurement of
prevailing speed, 2) accident history, and 3) roadway characteristics not readily
apparent to the motorist.
The survey designated five intersections for speed limit adjustments.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost of signs to implement the new speed limits is roughly $2,500 and is available
within the current sign budget.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
Speed limits must be set in accordance with the California Vehicle Code (CVC) to be
enforceable. The CVC relies on the behavior of the majority of drivers to determine safe
driving speeds under normal driving conditions. State anti-speed trap laws prohibit
jurisdictions from arbitrarily setting lower speed limits by making them unenforceable in
court.
139
A speed limit is intended to establish a maximum safe speed under normal conditions.
The CVC requires engineering and traffic surveys that verify the speed limit before
enforcement can be done using radar. The law specifies that these surveys be
conducted every five years. The surveys may be extended up to ten years if a traffic
engineer certifies that no changes in roadway or traffic conditions have occurred.
On November 20, 2007, the City Council adopted a resolution establishing speed limits
for 56 street segments within the City. The speed limits for the segments that had no
changes in roadway or traffic conditions (e.g., no added lanes, medians, curb and
gutter) had been extended to November 20, 2014. These speed limits were recently
further extended by a registered engineer to November 20, 2017 as allowed by the
CVC.
The November 2014 Speed Limit Study, prepared by Willdan Engineering and available
for review in the Public Works Department, addresses the 17 street segments where a
new engineering and speed survey was performed due to changes in the roadway
configuration from the last survey.
Per direction of the City Council, Avenida Bermudas from Avenue 52 to Calle Arroba
was surveyed and found to have approximately the same average speed as was
measured in 2011, when the speed limit was lowered to 40 mph. Since State law
requires the speed be set at the prevailing speed of most drivers, staff does not
recommend a change at this time; however, striping options to encourage slower driving
speeds could be investigated. Upon completion of any striping improvements, a new
speed survey would be necessary in order to post a lower speed limit.
All speed limits are proposed to remain the same with the exception of the following:
Street Segment Posted Proposed
Blackhawk Way Adams St. to Dune Palms Road 30 ** 35 **
Calle Tampico Eisenhower Dr. to Washington St.40 45
Highway 111 West City Limit to Adams Street 50 45
Highway 111 Adams Street to East City Limit 50 45
Monroe Street Avenue 60 to Avenue 62 60 50
** Blackhawk Way is already posted “25 mph When Children Are Present”
As with Avenida Bermudas, if there is a desire to lower posted speed limits, physical
changes must first be implemented in order to slow traffic. New speed surveys would
then be commissioned and if the speeds supported the lower speed limit, then the new
lower speed limits could become the posted limit.
ALTERNATIVES:
Since the City’s Police Department uses radar to enforce speed limits for streets, and a
traffic survey is required by State law in order for the speed limits to be enforced by
radar, no alternative is recommended.
140
Report prepared by: Ed Wimmer, P.E., Principal Engineer
Report approved for submission by: Timothy R. Jonasson, P.E.
Public Works Director/City Engineer
Attachment: 1. Speed Limit Map
141
142
RESOLUTION NO. 2014 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, DESIGNATING SPEED
LIMITS FOR CERTAIN LOCAL STREETS
WHEREAS,
the California Vehicle Code authorizes cities to designate and
regulate speed zones within their jurisdictions: and
WHEREAS,
the City Council finds it appropriate to designate speed limits on the
following local streets to facilitate safe and orderly traffic flow; and
WHEREAS,
said designation shall be made by resolution; and
WHEREAS,
the City Council adopted Resolution 2007-108 on November 20,
2007 designating speed limits for 56 street segments; and
WHEREAS,
the City Council adopted Resolution 2009-067 on August 4, 2009
designating speed limits for 16 additional street segments; and
WHEREAS,
the City Council adopted Resolution 2010-003 on
January 5, 2010 designating speed limits for two street segments within the Village
Area; and
WHEREAS,
the City Council adopted Resolution 2011-020 on March 15, 2011
designating speed limits for eight additional street segments; and
WHEREAS,
the City Council finds it appropriate to re-designate speed limits for
five additional street segments; and
WHEREAS,
in accordance with the provisions of Title 12.20.020 of the La Quinta
Municipal Code, an engineering and traffic survey has been performed on certain
specified streets; and
WHEREAS,
the following designated prima facie speed limits are based on the
results of the engineering and traffic survey; and
Street Segment Posted Proposed
Blackhawk Way Adams St to Dune Palms Road 30 35
Calle Tampico Eisenhower Dr. to Washington St. 40 45
Highway 111 West City Limit to Adams Street 50 45
Highway 111 Adams Street to East City Limit 50 45
Monroe Street Avenue 60 to Avenue 62 60 50
143
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED
by the City Council of the City of
La Quinta, California, as follows: the aforementioned prima facie speed limits are most
appropriate to facilitate the orderly movement of traffic and to be reasonably safe.
PASSED, APPROVED,ADOPTED
and at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
th
City Council held on this 18 day of November 2014, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
_____________________________
DON ADOLPH, Mayor
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
________________________________
SUSAN MAYSELS, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
(CITY SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________
WILLIAM H. IHRKE, City Attorney
City of La Quinta, California
144
ATTACHMENT 1
LEGEND:
CITY OF LA QUINTA
SPEED LIMITS
145
146
CITY MEETING DATE: November 18, 2014
ITEM TITLE: AMEND SECTION 3.30.050 OF THE
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO THE PREVAILING
WAGE REQUIREMENT TO ALLOW LA QUINTA TO BE
ELIGIBLE FOR STATE FUNDS FOR PUBLIC WORKS
PROJECTS
AGENDA CATEGORY:
BUSINESS SESSION: 3
CONSENT CALENDAR:
STUDY SESSION:
PUBLIC HEARING:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
A) Move to take up Ordinance No. ___ by title and number only and waive further
reading.
B) Move to introduce at first reading, Ordinance No. ___ amending Section 3.30.050 of
the Municipal Code.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
which means its governing system is defined by its
own charter document rather than by state, regional or national laws.
Senate Bill No. 7 (SB7), enacted in 2013, prohibits a charter city from receiving
or using state funding or financial assistance for any construction project if, after
January 1, 2015, the city has a charter or municipal code provision that
authorizes a contractor to not comply with prevailing wage provisions on any
public works contracts (Attachment 1).
Municipal Code currently contains the provision that authorizes a
contractor to waive prevailing wages on public works contracts.
A group of charter cities filed a lawsuit to invalidate the law because it violates,
among other laws, the fundamental principle of local control and the charter cities
doctrine of municipal affairs; however, the litigation was unsuccessful at the trial
court level, the requested stay was denied, and the matter is now pending in the
Court of Appeals.
Based on a cost-benefit analysis, the financial loss to the City would be greater if
it does not comply with SB7; therefore staff recommends amending the municipal
147
code, which will allow the City to become eligible for state funding on public
works projects.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The primary cost impact will be on contracts for maintenance services, which per state
requirements are subject to prevailing wages.
projects are subject to prevailing wages. The Public Works Department estimates City
costs will increase by $200,000 to $300,000 annually. If the City did not allow prevailing
wages, the City could loose over $1.0 million in State Gas Tax Street Improvement,
Surface Transportation Program, State Transportation Improvement Program and
Community Development Block Grant funds.
BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS:
La Quinta Municipal Code §3.30.050, adopted in 1998, states:
SB7 requires the City and 50 other charter cities to pay prevailing wages on starting
January 1, 2015, regardless of the funding source or become ineligible for all state
public works project funding.
Since becoming a charter city in 1996, the City has been able to build additional city
infrastructure through the costs savings it realized by being exempt from the prevailing
wage requirements. Under current Municipal Code provisions, prevailing wages are not
a requirement on projects funded entirely out of local funds. However, the City does
require payment of prevailing wages on state- or federally-funded contracts because it
is typically a condition of such funding.
While the California Supreme Court has held that the Legislature cannot compel charter
cities to pay prevailing wages on locally funded projects, SB7 indirectly accomplishes
this result by cutting off state construction funding for charter cities that choose to
exercise that right. The challenge to SB7 will continue in the Court of Appeal. If an
injunction or other legal act preventing the State from enforcing this law is issued, this
prevailing wage ordinance will be repealed. In the meantime, amended
prevailing wage ordinance must have its second reading and adoption by December 2,
2014 so that it becomes effective by January 1, 2015 to avoid the loss of critical state
funding.
If the ordinance is adopted, public works projects advertised for bid, and contracts
awarded after January 1, 2015 will include specifications requiring contractor and sub-
contractor compliance with the State prevailing wage law.
The additional cost of paying prevailing wages may be somewhat lessened due to the
use of higher paid and presumably higher skilled labor. For example, universal
application of prevailing wages may increase competition among contractors to drive
148
down non-labor costs; quality craftsmen may lower the incidents of corrective actions,
and; increased labor productivity may result in completion in fewer hours.
Prevailing wage is the rate established by collective bargaining agreements for each
individual craft within each locality, and is determined by the State Department of
Industrial Relations, based on an annual survey. The prevailing wage package includes
pay, health benefits, pension contribution and training.
ALTERNATIVES:
The Council could continue to exempt locally-funded projects from prevailing wage
requirements, but this would cause the loss of significant state funds for all public works
projects. Amending the prevailing wage ordinance will cause less financial harm to the
City than keeping the prevailing wage section as is; therefore, no alternative is
recommended.
Report prepared by: Susan Maysels, City Clerk
Report approved for submission by: Frank J. Spevacek, City Manager
Attachment: 1. Text of Senate Bill No. 7
149
150
ORDINANCE NO. 52__
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION
3.30.050 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO
PREVAILING WAGE REQUIREMENTS
WHEREAS,
the California Legislature adopted and the Governor signed Senate
Bill No. 7 (SB7), adding Section 1782 to the California Labor Code to prohibit a charter
for a construction
city from receiving or using state funding or financial assistance
project if the city has a charter provision or ordinance that authorizes a
contractor to not comply with the state law requirements relating to the
payment of prevailing wage on any public works contract
; and
WHEREAS,
the loss of state funds would result in a significant financial impact
that would make it infeasible for the City of La Quinta to undertake certain critical
infrastructure improvement projects on which local residents depend.
NOW, THEREFORE,
the City Council of the City of La Quinta does ordain as
follows:
SECTION 1. Effective January 1, 2015, Section 3.30.050 of Chapter 3.30 (Public
Works Contract) of Title 3 (Revenue and Finance) of the La Quinta Municipal Code is
hereby amended to read as follows:
Section 3.30.050 Prevailing wage requirement.
a. Labor
Code sections 1720 through 1743, as may be amended and including
the exceptions set forth therein.
b. For public works contracts for construction work over $25,000 and for
alterations, demolition, repair or maintenance work over $15,000,
entered into, or extended on or after January 1, 2015, the City shall
require compliance with California Labor Code sections 1770 through
1782 as may be amended from time to time.
EFFECTIVE DATE
SECTION 2.: This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect on
January 1, 2015 or thirty (30) days from the date of adoption, whichever is later.
POSTING:
SECTION 3. The City Clerk shall, within 15 days after passage of this
Ordinance, cause it to be posted in at least three public places designated by resolution
of the City Council, shall certify to the adoption and posting of this Ordinance, and shall
cause this Ordinance and its certification, together with proof of posting to be entered
into the Book of Ordinances of the City of La Quinta.
151
PASSED, APPROVEDADOPTED
and , at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
City Council held this ____day of December 2014, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
__________________________
DON ADOLPH, Mayor
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
_____________________________________
SUSAN MAYSELS, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
(CITY SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_____________________________________
WILLIAM H. IHRKE, City Attorney
City of La Quinta, California
152
ATTACHMENT 1
LABOR CODE, DIVISION 2, PART 7, CHAPTER 1, SECTION 1782
SENATE BILL NO. 7 ADDED OCTOBER 13, 2013
(a)A charter city shall not receive or use state funding or financial assistance
for a construction project if the city has a charter provision or ordinance
that authorizes a contractor to not comply with the provisions of this
article on any public works contract.
(b) A charter city shall not receive or use state funding or financial
assistance for a construction project if the city has awarded, within the
prior two years, a public works contract without requiring the contractor
to comply with all of the provisions of this article. This subdivision shall
apprenticeship requirement in a particular contract was inadvertent and
contrary to a city charter provision or ordinance that otherwise requires
compliance with this article.
(c)A charter city is not disqualified by subdivision (a) from receiving or using
state funding or financial assistance for its construction projects if the
charter city has a local prevailing wage ordinance for all its public works
contracts that includes requirements that in all respects are equal to or
greater than the requirements imposed by the provisions of this article
and that do not authorize a contractor to not comply with this article.
(d) For purposes of this section, the following shall apply:
(1) A public works contract does not include contracts for projects
of twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000) or less when the project is for
construction work, or projects of fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) or
less when the project is for alteration, demolition, repair, or maintenance
work.
(2) A charter city includes any agency of a charter city and any
entity controlled by a charter city whose contracts would be subject to
this article.
(3) roject that involves the
award of a public works contract.
(4) State funding or financial assistance includes direct state
funding, state loans and loan guarantees, state tax credits, and any other
type of state financial support for a construction project. State funding or
153
financial assistance does not include revenues that charter cities are
entitled to receive without conditions under the California Constitution.
(e) The Director of Industrial Relations shall maintain a list of charter cities
that may receive and use state funding or financial assistance for their
construction projects.
(f) (1) This section does not restrict a charter city from receiving or
using state funding or financial assistance that was awarded to the city
prior to January 1, 2015, or from receiving or using state funding or
financial assistance to complete a contract that was awarded prior to
January 1, 2015.
(2) A charter city is not disqualified by subdivision (b) from
receiving or using state funding or financial assistance for its construction
this article in performing a contract the city advertised for bid or awarded
prior to January 1, 2015.
154
REPORT/INFORMATIONAL: ITEM: 21
INVESTMENT ADVISORY BOARD
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER
Wednesday, September 10 , 2014
A regular meeting of the La Quinta Investment Advisory Board was called to order
at 4:06 p.m. by Vice -Chairperson Spirtos.
PRESENT: Board Members Park, Mortenson, Spirtos and Godbey
ABSENT: Chairperson Donais
STAFF PRESENT: Finance Director, Rita Conrad, and Senior Secretary, Vianka
Orrantia
PUBLIC COMMENT - None
CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA— Confirmed
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Approval of the Minutes of July 9, 2014
Motion — A motion was made by Board Members Park/Mortenson to approve the
Minutes of July 9, 2014. Motion passed unanimously.
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS
1. Receive and File Treasurer's Reports for June and July 2014
Mrs. Conrad presented and reviewed the staff report for the month of June 30,
2014 and July 31, 2014
Motion — A motion was made by Board Members Godbey/Park to receive and file
the Treasurer's Report for June and July 2014. Motion passed unanimously.
INVESTMENT ADVISORY MINUTES 1 September 10, 2014
MR
156
DEPARTMENT REPORT: 22
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION
MINUTES
MONDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2014
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the La Quinta Community Services Commission was called to
order at 5:30 p.m. by Commissioner Engel.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Commissioners Engel, Johnson, and Simonds
ABSENT: Commissioner Blakeley
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Johnson led the Pledge of Allegiance.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA — None.
CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA - Confirmed
PRESENTATIONS
1 . PRESENTATION BY THE LA QUINTA LIBRARY
Deputy Hylton introduced Library staff, Sherry Martinez, Zone Manager and Sue
Doran, City Librarian for a presentation of the current programs at the Library.
Future of Library: Trend is "Community Place" — 3`d space for the community
(next to home and work);
Seeking more partners in the community; we want book clubs
and local author series;
We want to be technologically up-to-date (TV monitor) and with
more computers or lap tops for computer classes;
Social media is big — blog, Pinterest, Twitter, and eblasts;
New space in North La Quinta — "Smallbrary"
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Motion — A motion was made by Commissioners Simonds/Johnson to approve the
July 14, 2014 Community Services Commission Minutes as submitted. Motion
passed unanimously.
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION MINUTES OCTOBER 13, 2014
157
158
3
159
160
161
162
DEPARTMENTREPORT: 4
COMMUNITY SERVICES REPORT - OCTOBER 2014
164
165
166
167
168
169
1 ЎЊЊЏА
2 ЌЊЊЍА
3 ЊЉЊЋЏ
4 ЉЉЍВ
5 Ћ
6 ЊЉЋЌЊБЉ
7 ВЊЍЊЎЊ
8 ЍЊЊЍЊ
9 ЎЊЊЍЍ
10 БЋЊЋЍ
11 ЊЎЎ
12
13 ЊЋЋЊАЎ
14 ЊЊЍЊЎЍ
15 ЌЍЊЏЎ
16 ЎЊЋЊЎЏ
17 ЋЍЊЍЋ
18 ЋЌЍВ
19 Њ
20 ВЊЍЊБЌ
21 АЊЊЎЍ
22 БЌЊЏЌ
23 ЎЊЍЊ
24 ЏЎЊЋЍ
25 ЊЋВ
26
27 ЌЊЊВЍ
28 АЊЊЎА
29 ЎЋЊЏЏ
30 ЊЊЊЋЍ
31 ЍЋЊЊЉ
170
DEPARTMENT REPORT: 5
TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Timothy R. Jonasson, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer
DATE: November 18, 2014
SUBJECT: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT REPORT FOR OCTOBER 2014
1. Staff is advising the La Quinta community of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency’s (FEMA) release of revised flood insurance maps. These
maps are important because they show areas in La Quinta that are designated
as being within 100-year and 500-year floodplains. Homeowners within the 100-
year floodplain may be required to carry flood insurance by their mortgage
company. And, normally, flood insurance is optional for homeowners with homes
within the 500-year floodplain. Staff is getting the word out via the City’s website,
Facebook, a press release, and email. Comments are due to FEMA by
November 30, 2014.
2. The City turned in its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Annual
Report to Riverside County for inclusion in the report that goes to the Regional
Water Quality Control Board in January 2015. The report catalogs the inspection
of construction and private development projects as well as industrial and
commercial sites within the City that fall under the Regional Board’s
jurisdiction. The report also lists any illicit discharges during the past year and
documents staff training in water quality.
3. The Southern California Chapter of the American Public Works Association
announced that the City will be receiving an award for its Student Outreach
Program. The Public Works Department will be recognized for winning a “2014
Public Works Awareness” award at the Association’s Annual Awards Luncheon
taking place December 11, 2014 in Lakewood, California. A total of 15 students
from various Coachella Valley high schools completed the program with 25 to 30
hours of volunteer service and instruction in the public works field.
4. For the month of October 2014, the total for all maintenance expenditures
recorded in GORequest was $87,910 with debris removal, traffic signals, and
DEPARTMENT REPORT: 5
street sweeping being among the highest tasks in terms of cost. Public Works
maintenance workers recorded 1,011 task hours associated with this work. A
detailed breakdown of tasks and associated costs is presented in the attached
pie chart (Attachment 1).
5. Residents continue to submit Customer Satisfaction Surveys through the
GORequest system. The City received 16 surveys in the month of October 2014,
with residents commenting on how staff handled reported issues. Employees
were rated “superior” or “good” by 75 percent of respondents for Employee
Effectiveness, Time to Respond, and Employee Courtesy; and 69 percent of
respondents indicated “Exceeded” or “Met” under “Expectations Met”
(Attachment 2). Some of the positive comments staff received via the individual
surveys are highlighted below:
“User friendly app!”
“I appreciated the prompt response and the empathy to our
circumstances.”
“I am totally amazed how fast this request was completed. Wow…it was
fixed the next day! Great service. Thanks.”
“It is brilliant. All cities should use this app.”
“This was my first time…the response was far quicker than I expected…”
6. The contractor for the La Quinta Wellness Center project is remodeling the
interior of the building. The Center is closed and will remain closed for the
remainder of construction. The project is scheduled to be completed by early
2015.
Attachments: 1. Total Maintenance Cost for October 2014 pie chart
2. GORequest surveys for October 2014
ATTACHMENT 1
DEPARTMENT REPORT: 5
DEPARTMENT REPORT: 5
ATTACHMENT 2
DEPARTMENT REPORT: 5
CITY MEETING DATE: November 18, 2014
ITEM TITLE: ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING USE
OF FISCAL YEAR 2015/2016 COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS AND
AUTHORIZE CITY MANAGER TO SUBMIT
APPLICATIONS TO RIVERSIDE COUNTY ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AGENDA CATEGORY:
BUSINESS SESSION:
CONSENT CALENDAR:
STUDY SESSION:
PUBLIC HEARING: 1
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt a resolution approving use of $145,000 of Fiscal Year 2015/2016
Community Development Block Grant funds and allocating $20,300 to the Boys
and Girls Club of the Coachella Valley Fee Waiver/Reduction Program and
$124,700 to the City of La Quinta for certain American with Disabilities Act
improvements at multiple City public parks; and authorize the City Manager to
submit applications to the Riverside County Economic Development Agency.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
• The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program provides funds to
state and local governments for a variety of community development
activities designed to revitalize neighborhoods, promote economic
development, and improve community facilities and services.
• Approximately $145,000 in CDBG funds are expected to be available to the
City for Fiscal Year (FY) 2015/2016; of this amount, 14 percent can only be
used for public service projects and 86 percent for public works projects.
• Eligible projects must benefit either low or moderate- income individuals; aid
in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight; or meet a need having a
particular urgency.
• City -approved grant applications must be sent to the Riverside County
Economic Development Agency (EDA) no later than November 21, 2014.
The exact amount of CDBG funding will be confirmed in the second quarter
of 2015.
178
179
180
Sgd
Cdrdqs Rtm
181
the Community Development Block Grant Funds for Fiscal Year
2015/2016 is estimated to be approximately $145,000; and,
the City of La Quinta must submit to the Riverside County Economic
Development Agency project applications; and,
a public notice was published on November 7, 2014 announcing the
availability of funds, requesting proposals, and public hearing dates; and,
the merits of all proposals were openly discussed and considered; and,
by a majority vote of the City Council of the City of La Quinta,
California, the following proposal(s), or reprogramming(s), were selected:
PROJECT NAME SPONSOR AMOUNT
1.Miscellaneous Parks ADA City of La Quinta $124,700
Improvements
2. Fee Waiver/Reduction Program Coachella Valley $ 20,300
Boys and Girls Club
La Quinta Unit
by the City Council of the City of La Quinta
as follows:
SECTION 1. That the City of La Quinta does hereby select the above-named project(s)
or reprogramming(s), for the use of Community Development Block Grant funds.
SECTION 2. That the City Council hereby directs the City Manager to prepare and
submit the designated applications to the Riverside County Economic Development
Agency in a timely fashion proposing the named activities and use of funds.
and at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City
th
Council, held on this 18 day of November, 2014, by the following vote:
182
Resolution No. 2014 -
2015/2016 Community Development Block Grant
Adopted: November 18, 2014
Page 2
__________________________
DON ADOLPH, Mayor,
City of La Quinta, California
___________________________________
SUSAN MAYSELS, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
(CITY SEAL)
____________________________________
WILLIAM H. IHRKE, City Attorney
City of La Quinta, California
183
TTACHMENT 1
A
Etmcr Qdptdrsdc.Rdquhbd Oqnuhcdc9
Etmcr Qdptdrsdc.Rdquhbd Oqnuhcdc9
1|Page
184
185
CITY MEETING DATE: November 18, 2014
ITEM TITLE: ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, INTRODUCE AN
ORDINANCE TO ADOPT A ZONE CHANGE FROM
MAJOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES TO VILLAGE
COMMERICAL, AND CONFIRM A DETERMINATION OF
EXEMPTION PURUSANT TO THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT SECTION 15061
(13)(3) REVIEW OF EXEMPTIONS — GENERAL RULE
AGENDA CATEGORY:
BUSINESS SESSION:
CONSENT CALENDAR:
STUDY SESSION:
PUBLIC HEARING: 2
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
A) Adopt a resolution approving General Plan Amendment 2014-128.
B) Move to take up Ordinance No. by title and number only and waive
further reading.
C) Move to introduce at first reading Ordinance No. adopting Zone Change
2014-146.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
• The subject property is located in the Village on Avenida Bermudas south of the
Post Office. The property was sold by the City earlier this year to an individual
who is now using it as an office (Attachment 1).
• The current Zoning designation of Major Community Facilities was
representative of the former use of the property as the City's police substation.
The purpose of these amendments is to facilitate the current use of the property
as private office or retail space.
• The proposed General Plan and Zoning designations of Village Commercial are
compatible with the existing surrounding land uses and designations.
• The Planning Commission recommended adoption of the designations.
IK
187
Sgd Cdrdqs Rtm
188
189
190
191
192
193
EXHIBITͻ!ͼ
GENNERALPLANNAMENDMENT20114128
RESOLUTION2014____
MOONTEZUMA
CURRRENTLANNDUSE
DDESIGNATIION:
MAJJORCOMMMUNITY
FACILITIEES
CCALLEHIDALGO
OONTEZUMA
M
PRROPOSEDLANDUSEE
DESIGNAATION:
VC
VILLAGECOMMMERCIAL
CCALLEHIDALGO
194
195
196
197
198
199
EXHIBITͻ!ͼ
ZONECHHANGE20114146
ORDDINANCE##____
MOONTEZUMA
CUURRENTZOONING
DDESIGNATIION:
MAJJORCOMMMUNITY
FACILITIEES
CCALLEHIDALGO
OONTEZUMA
M
PPROPOSEDDZONING
DESIGNAATION:
VC
VILLAGECOMMMERCIAL
CCALLEHIDALGO
200
201
ATTACHMENT 1
202
203
AVEENIDAMONTEZUMAA
GENERRALPLAANAMENNDMENTT20141128
Project
ZONECHANGE20141146
AArea
NN
Map
204
205
ATTACHMENT 3
206
207
CITY MEETING DATE: November 18, 2014
ITEM TITLE: ADOPT RESOLUTION TO INCREASE
VEHICLE IMPOUND COST RECOVERY FEE
AGENDA CATEGORY:
BUSINESS SESSION:
CONSENT CALENDAR:
STUDY SESSION:
PUBLIC HEARING: 3
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt a resolution to increase the Vehicle Impound Cost Recovery fee.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
• The City collects a Vehicle Impound Cost Recovery (VICR) fee to recover
administrative costs associated with the removal, impound, storage, or
release of vehicles within the City.
• The VICR fee has not been updated since 2009, and the La Quinta Police
Department recommended that it be evaluated in order to increase cost
recovery for police services.
• The City commissioned ClearSource Financial Consulting to perform an
analysis of the VICR fee (Attachment 1), which estimates the City's current
cost at $195 per impounded vehicle.
• The current VICR fee is $124 per impounded vehicle, which is among the
lowest fees charged by other Coachella Valley cities.
• By increasing the VICR fee from $124 to $195, the City will recover 100
percent of costs associated with impound, storage and release of vehicles.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Based upon the annual number of impounds, staff estimates the new fee, if
approved, may generate roughly $11 ,000 in additional revenue or cost recovery per
year, or approximately $5,500 for the remainder of the current fiscal year.
PIZI
209
SgdCdrdqs Rtm
210
211
212
213
ATTACHMENT1
City of La Quinta
Cost of Service Analysis for
Vehicle Impound Cost Recovery Fee
- September 2014 -
214
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 2
Study Methodology ....................................................................................................................................... 3
General Findings ........................................................................................................................................... 4
Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................ 5
Appendix ....................................................................................................................................................... 6
215
Executive Summary
Section 22850.5(a) of the California Vehicle Code smay adopt a regulation, ordinance, or
resolution establishing procedures for the release of properly impounded vehicles and for the
imposition of a charge equal to its administrative costs relating to the removal, impound, storage, or
release of the vehicles
Cities throughout California and the Coachella Valley attempt to recover all, or a portion of, the
administrative costs of impounding and releasing vehicles through fees commonly identified as vehicle
impound fees or vehicle release fees. The City of La Quinta and several other cities in the Coachella
The Vehicle Impound Cost Recovery Fee has not been updated since 2009. The current fee is
$124. The proposed fee is $195.
providing the services for which the fee is collected.
Based upon the number of impounds staff estimates for Fiscal Year 2014/15, the new fee may generate
roughly $11,000 in additional revenue per year.
spectrum, but not the highest, of fees charged for similar services. A cursory examination indicates that
the majority of Coachella Valley agencies have not updated their impound/release fees for several years.
Vehicle Impound Cost Recovery Fee
$300
$265
$250
$200
$195
$166
$150
$150
$145
$140 $140
$125
$124
$100
$110
$50
$0
CathedralLa QuintaPalmCoachellaPalmRanchoIndianDesert HotLa QuintaIndio
City(Current)SpringsDesertMirageWellsSprings(Proposed)
1
216
Introduction
The City of La Quinta conducts periodic examinations of the various user and regulatory fees it collects.
Routinely examining the costs of providing fee related services and making deliberate decisions about
the recovery of costs and fee modifications helps cities maintain fiscal sustainability and respond to the
changing needs of citizens, changes in regulations, and changes in local and regional economies.
The scope of this study is limited to review and recommendations relating to
Cost Recovery Fee. This fee has not been updated since 2009.
The primary goals of the study were to:
Identify the estimated administrative costs relating to the impound of a vehicle
Determine current cost recovery levels
Examine the existing fee calculation methodology and modify, if necessary, to more closely align
the calculation methodology to the cost of services being provided
Assign targeted fee and cost recovery levels
Compare current and proposed fees to those imposed by neighboring communities
Estimate anticipated revenue impacts of any proposed fee modification
The outcomes and recommendations of the study are intended to comply with applicable federal, state,
and local laws including providing confirmation that the proposed fee (charge) recommended as a result
of this study is not a tax as defined in Article 13C of the California Constitution and that the proposed fee
addressed in this fee (charge) relating to the removal, impound, storage, or release of vehicles within
the City of La Quinta. Additionally, this report is intended to show that the manner in which the costs
are allocated to a payor
received from the vehicle removal, impound, storage, or release activities and services provided by the
City of La Quinta.
2
217
Study Methodology
agency may adopt a regulation, ordinance, or resolution establishing procedures for the release of
properly impounded vehicles and for the imposition of a charge equal to its administrative costs relating
The study calculated the estimated administrative costs relating to the removal, impound, storage,
or release of vehicles within the City of La Quinta.
Generally, the estimated cost of providing the vehicle impound activities and services examined in the
study can be calculated as the product of the estimated labor time required to process a typical
impound and release and the composite fully-burdened hourly labor rate of the staff responsible for
providing the activities and services.
Estimated labor times were developed by the City of La Quinta Police Department. The City contracts
Department for Police Department services. The Police personnel
that developed the labor time estimates have expert knowledge of the activities, services, and
estimated labor effort associated with impound and release of vehicles within the City of La Quinta.
Additionally, the consultant conducted multiple interviews reviewing the estimated labor time
assumptions and designation of staff responsible for providing services. Finally, the consultant
compared the labor times to those developed as part of other cost of service studies. This review
provided an additional test of the reasonableness of the time estimates.
The composite fully-burdened hourly rates calculated in the study are based on the actual contract labor
ment for the most recent fiscal year. While the
composite-fully burdened hourly rate typically includes a provision for citywide overhead, no citywide
overhead amounts have been included in the estimated cost of service calculation. The City does not
maintain a current citywide overhead cost allocation plan and the consultant estimates that any
citywide overhead costs associated with the typical vehicle impound process would be minimal because
any citywide overhead costs would be required to be allocated over the full range of police services
provided by the City. The typical impound and release process requires just over two hours of Police
Department effort. Since the City receives thousands of hours of Police support per year, any citywide
overhead costs allocated to the vehicle impound and release activities and services examined in this
study would be minimal.
3
218
General Findings
Cost of Service Calculation
examined in this study is $195 per impounded vehicle.
The calculation assumes 2.25 hours of total labor effort multiplied by hourly rates ranging from
$34 - $139 per hour. The cost of service calculation is illustrated in table form, below:
Estimated Labor Hourly Contract
Time (Hours) x Rate = Cost of Service
Personnel
Deputy1.00x$139=$139
Office Assistant0.50x$30=$15
Sergeant0.25x$92=$23
ISB Operator0.25x$35=$9
Accounting Technician0.25x$34=$8
Total2.25xvaries=$195
Current Fee and Cost Recovery Information
The current Vehicle Impound Cost Recovery Fee is $124.
charged by other Coachella Valley cities for similar services.
The current estimated cost recovery level is 64%. The current cost recovery level is illustrated in
table form, below:
Current Estimated Cost Current
Fee / of Service = Cost Recovery
Fee
Vehicle Impound Fee$124/$195=64%
Proposed Fee and Cost Recovery Information
The proposed Vehicle Impound Cost Recovery Fee is $195.
upper end of the spectrum, but not the highest, of the fees
charged by other Coachella Valley cities for similar services.
The proposed estimated cost recovery level is 100%. The proposed cost recovery level is
illustrated in table form, below:
Proposed Estimated Cost Proposed
Fee / of Service = Cost Recovery
Fee
Vehicle Impound Fee$195/$195=100%
4
219
Recommendations
The Vehicle Impound Cost Recovery Fee is set at the direction of the City Council. Consequently, the
City Council may adopt the proposed fee and modify it at a future date as costs of service change or city
policies and goals change.
If the City decides to adopt the proposed fee it should:
Ensure that City staff begins using the updated fee once the adopted fee is effective.
Additionally, the City may consider the following:
Adjust fee on an annual basis to reflect the change in contract labor rates for the Riverside
pace with any labor rate increases.
calculates updated labor rates. The City could include this in the list of fees it examines and
updates each July.
5
220
Appendix
The appendix provides detailed analytical findings from the study, including the amount of cost, or
estimated cost, required to provide the services for which the fee or service charge is levied and the
revenue sources anticipated to provide the service, including General Fund revenues. For any fees
targeted to recover less than 100% of the estimated reasonable cost of service, it is anticipated that
General Fund revenues of the City will fund the difference between the targeted recovery level and
100% recovery of the estimated cost of service. These amounts are identified in this appendix.
6
221
Appendix
Table of Contents
Page
Contents
Current and Proposed Fee2
Calculation of Estimated Cost of Service, Cost Recovery Analysis, and Revenue Analysis3
Regional Fee Comparison4
222
Appendix - Page 1
City of La Quinta
Police Vehicle Impound Cost Recovery Fee
Current Proposed Fee Fee
Fee DescriptionFee Fee Change ($)Change (%)
1Vehicle Impound Cost Recovery Fee$124$195$7157%
223
Appendix - Page 2
City of La Quinta
Vehicle Impound Cost Recovery Fee
Calculation of Estimated Cost of Service and Cost Recovery Analysis
Cost of Service Calculation
Estimated Hourly
Labor Time Contract Cost of
(Hours) x Rate = Service
Personnel
Deputy1.00x$139=$139
Office Assistant0.50x$30=$15
Sergeant0.25x$92=$23
ISB Operator0.25x$35=$9
Accounting Technician0.25x$34=$8
Total2.25xvaries=$195
Source: Labor time and hourly rate information provided by City of La Quinta Police Department.
Cost Recovery Analysis
Estimated Current Proposed Proposed
Current Cost of Cost Proposed Cost Fee
FeeFee / Service = Recovery Fee Recovery Increase
Vehicle Impound Fee$124/$195=64%$195100%$71
Revenue Analysis
Estimated Estimated
Annual Annual
Description Fee x Volume = Revenue
Current Fee$124x161=$20,000
Proposed Fee$195x161=$31,452
Annual Increase$71x161=$11,452
224
Appendix - Page 3
City of La Quinta
Vehicle Impound Cost Recovery Fee
Regional Fee Comparison
Vehicle Impound Cost Recovery Fee
$300
$250$265
$200
$195
$166
$150
$150
$145
$140 $140
$125
$124
$100
$110
$50
$0
CathedralLa QuintaPalmCoachellaPalmRanchoIndianDesert HotLa QuintaIndio
City(Current)SpringsDesertMirageWellsSprings(Proposed)
225
Appendix - Page 4