►
From YouTube: City Council Meeting | November 29, 2017
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
C
D
D
On
November,
the
15th
I
reported
out
of
closed
session
that
there
was
in
fact
no
steam
spent
on
an
item
noticed
on
the
closed
session
agenda,
and
you
were
kind
enough
to
give
me
a
copy
of
the
actual
agenda.
Councilmember
Roberts,
so
I
have
it
here.
We
did
specifically
initiate
or
have
on
our
agenda
the
initiation
of
litigation
with
respect
to
two
cases
and
I.
Think
I
said
during
my
closed
session
report
out
that
we
didn't
address
that
and
I'd
like
to
correct
that
report.
I
made
a
mistake.
D
Even
though
one
of
our
initiation
of
litigation
matters
was
discussed
in
connection
with
and
in
relation
to
one
of
our
exposure
to
litigation
matters
and
I
neglected
to
make
two
check
marks
for
the
one
item,
so
I
made
that
mistake,
I'm
correcting
it
here
tonight
and
that
does
in
fact
relate
to
our
discussion
of
the
second
reading
of
the
development
agreement,
ordinance
with
respect
to
the
Virgen
we've
received,
as
I
think
you
know.
Mr.
D
mayor
and
members
of
the
council,
two
separate
complaints,
specific
requests
that
we
take
curative
action
for
alleged
violation
of
the
Brown
Act
and
also
alleged
violation
of
our
own
ethics
principles
that
we
last
took
action
on
in
the
month
of
October.
At
the
beginning
of
the
month.
You
recall
the
report
that
councilmember
core
is
delivered
with
my
assistance
regarding
some
30-plus
initiatives
that
you,
mr.
D
mayor
in
councilmember,
Coors,
put
together,
putting
together
the
fruit
of
Labor's
of
many
many
good
people
in
our
community
regarding
ethics
and
transparency,
and
we
still
have
action
to
take
in
that
regard.
But
with
respect
to
the
allegations,
there
were
two
of
them.
We
did
in
fact
have
a
special
closed
session
earlier
today,
at
4:00
p.m.
which
was
noticed
in
accord
with
the
Brown
Act.
We
did
in
fact
discuss
those
matters
at
that
special
closed
session.
I
reported
out
of
the
closed
session
that
no
reportable
action
was
in
fact
taken.
D
Both
matters
were
listed
because
under
the
Brown
Act,
that's
appropriate,
given
the
circumstances
of
these
Brown
Act
allegations,
because
I
was
personally
involved
with
these
alleged
violations,
dr.
Reddy
and
I
determined
internally
that
it
would
be
appropriate
to
consult
with
special
counsel
regarding
this
matter,
and
that
is
in
fact,
what
we've
done.
The
gentleman
seated
to
my
left,
you're,
looking
at
me
so
to
the
right
of
me
sitting
here
at
the
table,
is
mr.
Gary
Shawn's
and
mr.
Shawn's
is
someone
with
whom
I've
been
familiar
a
very
long
time.
D
I
think
you
all
know:
I
was
in
law
enforcement
for
eleven
years.
At
the
time
that
I
was
in
law
enforcement,
he
was
thought
in
law
enforcement.
He
was
a
supervising,
Deputy,
Attorney,
General
and
very
highly
regarded
in
law
enforcement.
He
now
heads
up
the
Public
Integrity
Department
and
I'm,
not
sure
that
that's
exactly
the
right
name
for
best
best
and
Krieger
close
enough
for
government
work
and
as
a
practical
matter.
It's
it's
mr.
F
F
Tanzi
that
they
alleged
violation
violations
the
brown
act
first,
that
there
was
an
improper
closed
session
I
in
advance
of
the
number
15
meeting
and
in
fact,
as
has
now
been
I,
think
partially
clarified
by
the
report
out
that
the
city
attorney
is
given
that
there
was
in
fact
discussions
at
that
meeting
of
not
only
existing
litigation
and
exposure
litigation,
but
also
initiation
of
litigation.
And
that's
what
was
at
least
the
part
of
the
meeting
that
I
actually
sat
in
part
of
that
closed
session
was
pertinent
relevant
to
the
initiation
of
litigation.
F
As
the
members
of
the
council
are
aware,
the
mention
of
contractual
waiver
I'm
not
really
certain
what
that
means.
It
may
be
that
in
closed
sessions
that
are
properly
noticed
and
properly
conducted
that
discussions,
may
you
know,
go
off-topic
a
little
bit.
But
the
idea
is
is
that
the
topic
of
it
was
litigation
in
the
1090
area.
I
guess
I'll
say
that
and
and
that
topic
was
related
the
second
all
the
violation
of
the
agenda
requirement
has
now
been
addressed
and
cured
by
the
city
attorney
the
violation,
the
public's
right
to
comment.
F
I
have
consulted
with
other
attorneys
in
my
firm
who
have
been
service
City
attorneys
for
decades
literally,
there
is
just
nothing
in
the
Brown
Act
which
in
any
way
states
or
suggest
that
matters
in
staff
reports
that
don't
necessarily
disclose
every
potential
aspect
of
an
action
that
a
border
council
might
make
somehow
violates
the
the
public's
right
to
to
address
the
body,
and
that
is
essentially
what
the
the
gravitons
claim
and
it
it
lacks
merit.
My
view:
the
violation
of
the
ownership
policy
item
29.
F
F
The
ownership
interest
was
in
fact
disclosed
in
the
supplemental
report
that
was
in
the
yellow
file
for
the
meeting,
and
so
I
don't
see
a
violation
of
that.
The
timeliness
report
policy
again
from
what
I
understand
there
is
nothing
in
the
timeliness
policy
which
I
believe
is
in
effect,
which
in
any
way
suggests
that
the
yellow
folder
policy,
that
the
count
that
the
city
and
the
council
was
had
for
years
is
somehow
displaced
by
the
72-hour
notice
requirement.
F
So
I
don't
find
that
that
allegation
has
merit
and
then,
as
to
the
second
complaint,
which
was
filed
or
emailed
in
by
my
Robert
stone,
it
essentially
is
overlapping
and
he
mr.
stone
complains,
the
Brown
Act
was
violated
because
the
public
hearing
emitted
the
names
of
the
sponsors
of
the
diversion
Hotel
again,
that's
not
a
Brown
Act
violation
in
and
of
itself,
and
perhaps
what
I
could
say
pertinent
to
that
is
you
can't
take
the
policy
and
transparency
policies
of
the
city
and
bootstrap
them
into
Brown
Act
violations.
F
D
Mayor
and
members
of
the
City
Council
I
wanted
mr.
Jones
to
speak
first
because,
obviously,
as
your
city
attorney,
who
took
a
role
in
these
proceedings,
I
didn't
want
to
simply
declare
that
there's
been
no
Brown,
Act
violation
and
no
violation
of
the
city's
policies
and
have
that
be.
The
final
word
you've
heard
from
outside
counsel,
who
doesn't
have
a
dog
in
the
fight,
so
to
speak.
I
think
that
his
comments
are
consistent
with
mine
that
I'm
about
to
make
just
very
briefly.
This
is
not
a
close
call.
I
understand
that.
D
There's
a
lot
of
passion
in
our
community
on
this
issue
and
I
respect
and
even
admire
the
people
who
express
that
passion
just
the
other
day.
I
thank
mr.
Freedman
very
much
for
taking
the
time
to
to
prepare
that
very
detailed
and
and
comprehensive
document
that
he
shared,
which
is
before
the
public.
We
in
Palm
Springs
welcomed
that
I
dare
say
that
my
background
in
law
enforcement
may
even
be
part
of
the
reason.
I
got
this
job
and
as
a
practical
matter,
this
council
has
made.
D
It
apparent
to
me
that
there
is
nothing
more
important
to
the
five
of
you
than
public
integrity
and
transparency.
Certainly
that
is
something
that
guides
my
actions
on
a
daily
basis
and
with
that
mr.
mayor
members
of
the
council,
I'll
simply
say
from
my
perspective,
as
your
attorney
there's
been
no
Brown,
Act
violation
with
respect
to
this
matter,
there's
been
no
violation
with
respect
to
the
ethics
principles
that
you've
all
looked
at
and
approved
as
recently
as
October
and
I.
D
Thank
you
for
allowing
me
the
short
amount
of
time
I've
tried
to
take
here
tonight
to
address
these
matters
I'll
be
happy
to
respond
to
questions
if
they
arise
later
in
the
evening.
I
did
want
to
note
that,
with
respect
to
my
comments
at
the
last
meeting,
November
15th
councilmember
Coors
did
in
fact
request
that
we
prepare
some
verbatim
minutes
that
covered
certain
comments
that
I
made.
Those
are
a
part
of
the
yellow
folder.
They
were
not
available
at
the
time.
D
The
agenda
was
printed,
but
I
dare
say
that
everyone
in
our
community
is
probably
happy
that
they're
there
who
has
a
passionate
interest
in
this
matter.
So
those
minutes
are
there
they're
in
the
yellow,
folder
they're,
also
on
the
city's
website
and
as
a
practical
matter,
they
detail
my
conversation
with
mr.
Coors
regarding
certain
10/90
issues.
These
are
dicey
things
and,
during
our
public
meeting,
the
very
successful
I
think
community
forum
we
had
a
short
while
ago.
D
We
had
some
questions
and
inquiries
on
this
matter
and
I
I
want
to
say
that,
with
respect
to
that
meeting,
all
the
comments
there
it's
it's
a
little
bit
dicey,
because
I
said
at
that
meeting
and
I'll
say
again
here:
I,
don't
think
that
the
proper
place
for
me
to
be
giving
you
legal
advice
as
my
client
is
this
room
in
front
of
the
community
when
we
look
at
those
things,
I
prefer
to
do
that
for
you
in
closed
session.
That's
why
the
law
allows
closed
session.
D
Cities
are
not
at
a
disadvantage,
as
opposed
to
other
litigants
of
an
organizational
nature.
We
have
the
same
rights
and,
as
a
practical
matter,
I
understand
and
value
the
tradition
that
this
council
has
established
for
public
integrity
and
transparency.
I
know
that's
why
we
adopted
those
principles
and
I
know
that's
why
we
have
taken
consistently.
Dr.
Reddy
certainly
made
it
very
clear
to
me
before
I
accepted
the
job.
This
is
a
transparency
plus
environment.
This
is
a
place
where
nothing
short
of
absolute
public
integrity
will
fly
so
concluding
my
remarks.
D
G
H
A
A
G
B
A
A
I
Good
evening
my
name
is
Charles,
lamort
and
I'm
here
to
now
to
speak
about
item
4a
after
much
discussion
on
social
media
and
in
the
Desert
Sun
articles
about
the
revised
virgin
hotel
proposal.
I
have
many
questions
for
you
tonight
to
the
city
attorney
and
David
ready.
If
the
Tod
agreement
agreement
was
originally
voted
on
in
December,
2014
by
steve,
punier
and
then
transferred
to
the
virgin
hotel,
isn't
it's
subject
to
1090
protections
if
Kanye
or
John
Weston
is
convicted?
I
Also,
if
the
Virgin
Hotel
was
entitled
in
April
of
2016
and
the
Tod
was
transferred
to
the
virgin
in
May
of
2016,
when
John
Westman
was
managing
partner
of
Westman
development,
isn't
it's
subject
to
1090
protections
if
he
is
convicted
three?
If
the
draft
agreement
that
counsel
saw
on
July
26
2017
was
a
simple
amendment
of
the
Tod
agreement,
did
that
not
give
away
that
did
not
give
away
1090
protection?
Does
the
new
Tod
Agreement
give
away
the
1090
rights
in
the
event
of
a.
I
Another
question
who
negotiated
this
agreement
and
what
did
the
city
get
by
surrendering
1090
rights
to
Mara,
moon,
council
members
vote
and
Mills?
What
is
the
rush?
These
issues
deserve
a
full
hearing.
Why
don't
you
trust
a
new
council
to
sort
this
out
mayor,
moon,
didn't
you
campaign
on
transparency?
A
J
As
far
as
the
Virgin
Hotel
is
concerned,
we
have
been
giving
away
Hotel
approvals
and
t
ot,
like
drunken
sailors,
and
also
City
Hall,
doesn't
seem
to
care
anymore
about
mountain
views.
Now
I
heard
the
our
attorney
say
that
he
loved
this
town.
But
what
is
his
personal
philosophy
about
development?
We
don't
know
that's
very
important,
because
people's
legal
opinions
are
colored,
but
our
personal
beliefs.
Why
did
we
have
all
the
fuss
about
Gorsuch,
because
exactly
that
kind
of
issue
and
staff
and
the
city
attorney
are
very
important
for
what
happens?
J
After
all,
it
wasn't
just
pune
at
all
himself
that
did
all
the
stuff
about
downtown
staff
also
had
a
role
in
this
now
I've
been
involved
in
litigation
a
number
of
times,
but
generally
when
the
rules
are
broken
and
I
sort
of
feel
a
smell.
A
rat
here,
I
feel
there's
a
white
bus
job,
going
on
even
with
hired
guns
coming
in
I.
Think
that
this
city
council
ought
to
postpone
this
issue.
Don't
try
to
expose
yourself
unless
you
just
like
to
go
to
court
all
the
time.
J
A
K
K
For
this
reason,
I
have
opposed
the
massive
welfare
for
developers,
programs
that
the
past
councils
have
tailored
for
John
Westman
tonight,
I
request
that
the
second
reading
of
the
Virgin
Hotel
incentive
package
be
revert
to
the
being
of
first
reading.
As
the
transparency
council
recommends
in
light
of
large
unfunded
liabilities
and
potential
looming
fiscal
shortfalls,
it
is
unfair
to
the
newly
elected
members
to
be
saddled
with
the
questionable
financial
and
political
jeopardy
that
may
result
from
this
vote.
K
A
A
H
I
feel
that,
given
the
legal
ramifications,
possibly
of
passing
this,
it
may
not
only
affect
the
West
men.
Well,
of
course,
this
Westman
gets
indicted.
It
will
obviously
may
affect
the
people
on
the
council
who
voted
for
this
since
you're
voting
on
something.
That's
basically
is
criminal,
since
their
bribery
charges
so
in
to
safeguard
I.
Think
the
future
City
Council
I
think
this
should
be
waived.
I
think
the
consequences
could
be
not
good
for
the
city
if
you
go
ahead
with
this.
Thank.
A
E
E
Esmerelda
Hotel
in
large-scale
big-box
retail,
followed
to
Palm
Desert
and
La
Quinta
gone
from
Palm
Springs
were
Saks
Fifth
Avenue,
Robinsons,
Cartier,
Louie,
Vuitton,
USANA,
Ron,
&
Rohde
of
Paris,
as
well
as
other
high-end
retail
establishments.
Palm
Springs
is
successfully
capturing
national
and
international
attention
as
a
highly
desired
destination
spot.
We
don't
want
to
lose
the
momentum
we
have
gained
the
music,
the
museum
market
Plaza
and
the
new
Rouen
hotel
are
catalysts
for
drawing
more
visitors
to
our
town.
The
Virgin
Hotel
is
one
of
the
top
hotel
brands
in
the
world.
E
It
would
be
unwise
to
miss
this
once-in-a-lifetime
opportunity
with
the
development
of
the
Virgin
Hotel.
Palm
Springs
would
expand
its
worldwide
recognition
as
a
place
to
vacation.
It
would
ensure
financial
stability
for
its
future
I
urge
you
to
vote
YES
on
this
highly
anticipated
excited
exciting
project.
Also
I
want
to
give
us
a
big
shout
out
to
our
retiring
City,
Council
members,
Jenni
vote
and
Chris
Mills.
E
L
So
if
you
want
to
reintroduce
that
into
the
development
agreement,
then
we're
wasting
our
time,
because
the
project
is
not
financeable.
It's
the
job
of
the
City
Council
to
move
forward
for
the
benefit
of
the
citizen,
for
the
citizens
of
Palm,
Springs
and
I,
asked
you
not
to
let
the
temptation
of
being
judging
jury
for
John
Westman
cloud.
The
decision
as
to
what
is
the
best
thing
for
Palm
Springs.
If
you
think
you
don't
want
30
million
dollars,
you
don't
want
200
jobs
and
you
don't
want
new
clientele,
then
by
all
means
vote.
K
Good
evening,
mayor
good
evening,
council
members,
my
name
is
Michael
Brown
I'm,
the
president
of
great
developments
and
the
Virgin
project
is
my
project
and
nacho
investments.
Project
I
wanted
to
thank
this
council
for
giving
me
my
team
early.
It
is
here
the
opportunity
to
continue
to
work
on
the
downtown
project.
We
have
faced
many
challenges
in
the
last
year,
but
working
cooperatively.
We
have
been
able
to
move
forward
towards
an
exciting
future
for
this
city.
The
city,
the
community
and
wit,
have
come
to
know
each
other.
K
Well,
we
have
finished
together:
150
million
new
experience
for
downtown
Palm
Springs,
the
role
hotel
by
Kimpton
and
the
new
Starbucks
store,
which
opened
the
vembur.
Seven
teams
are
buzzing
with
activity
and
excitement.
Many
other
exciting
stores
would
open
in
the
next
few
months
as
well.
Now
imagine
we're
gonna
adapt
a
virgin
hotel
as
city
parks
will
from
this
council.
Good
development
wishes
to
give
special
recognition
to
Jeanne
Fulton
Chris
Mills.
We
had
many
challenging
times
together
with
one
purpose
in
mind:
only
the
completion
of
this
downtown
project.
Thank
you.
Thank.
B
Hi
I'm
Doug,
Hughes
and
I'm
a
Palm
Springs
resident
and
on
the
same
subject.
I
was
some
of
my
thoughts.
Sorry,
if
the
Virgin
Hotel
is
not
financially
viable
on
its
own,
without
the
Quixote,
then
I
questioned
the
financial
viability
as
a
whole,
and
maybe
we
don't
really
need
something.
That's
running
on
such
a
slim
margin
that
it
may
not
be
successful.
B
The
Quixote
that
was
given
to
John
Westman
was
part
of
the
bribery
allegations
which
are
going
to
court.
The
outcome
of
that
is
unknown,
so
why
would
the
city
want
to
waive
the
1090
its
1090
rights
unnecessarily?
There's
no
requirement
that
the
future
City
Council
acts
on
it.
Therefore,
I'm
just
wondering
why
is
the
City
Council,
the
existing
City
Council,
pushing
via
this
meeting
tonight,
to
tie
the
hands
of
the
incoming
city
council
Thank.
M
You
mayor
moon,
councilmembers
good
evening
and
staff
I'm
pleased
to
hear
again
the
promise
of
200
jobs.
Unfortunately,
Westman
development
never
puts
that.
In
writing.
It's
only
on
Facebook.
We
have
apparently
the
most
expensive
tot
abatement
program
in
the
entire
state.
I,
don't
understand
why
other
cities
negotiate
concessions,
things
like
preference
for
local
hiring
if
they're
going
to
say
that
they
will
hire
200
people.
Let's
put
that
in
writing
and
let's
give
preference
to
Palm
Springs
residents.
M
What
is
the
city
getting
up
giving
it?
What
is
the
city
getting
by
giving
up
close
to
50
million
dollars?
I,
don't
understand
why
the
city
cannot
negotiate
and
I
would
like
to
make
it
absolutely
clear.
I
have
not
heard
anyone
who
is
complaining
about
the
tot
abatement
program,
saying
they
don't
want
the
Virgen
hotel.
They
want
the
city
to,
for
example,
do
what
Cathedral
City
does,
which
is
give
discounts
to
hood
for
in
hotels
that
have
gotten
a
talk:
a
bait
'men!
Why
doesnt
Westman
development
give
up
give
Palm
Spring
citizens
a
discount?
M
In
other
words,
why
don't
you
try
to
negotiate
something
for
us?
The
citizens,
mayor
moon?
You
ran
on
transparency,
I
was
on
the
ethics
taskforce.
I
was
chairman,
co-chairman
of
the
Campaign
Finance
Committee.
The
way
this
has
been
done,
the
City
Council
has
violated
policies
that
it
has
recommended
adopting
and
that's
not
a
good
way
to
start.
You
ran
on
transparency,
you
wore
a
an
FBI
jacket
in
a
broom
because
you
were
going
to
sweep
out
City
Hall,
bring
that
broom
back
I.
M
K
I
Evening,
mayor
moon,
mayor,
pro-tem,
foud
and
council
members,
my
name
is
David.
Friedman
I
am
also
speaking
on
behalf
of
Roderick
tansy,
as
he
noted.
We
served
last
year
on
the
ethics,
transparency
and
governmental
reform
task
force
and
we're
also
speaking
on
item
4a,
the
Virgen
hotel
development
agreement.
As
noted
in
our
letter
included
in
your
staff
report,
we
have
substantial
concerns
on
the
lack
of
transparency
when
this
matter
was
approved
on
November
15.
I
Given
the
narrow
judicial
construction
of
the
brown
acts
flow
section
exception,
we
don't
think
the
discussion
of
the
development
agreement
at
closed
session
would
qualify
as
pending
litigation,
the
discussion
of
which
in
open
session,
would
prejudice
the
city.
The
development
agreement
is,
in
essence,
a
contractual
Novation
that
cuts
the
link
to
the
2014
operations,
covenant
for
the
Marriott
and
is
not
among
the
contracts
entitled
to
closed
session
protection.
In
addition,
the
city
did
not
follow
its
own
transparency
policies
adopted
based
on
the
task
force's
recommendations.
Mr.
I
Weston's
ownership
interests
in
the
entity
that
owns
the
parcel
was
not
included
in
the
staff
report
posted
prior
to
the
meeting
and
was
only
provided
at
the
time
of
the
meeting
to
those
of
us
present.
Then
the
public
had
no
notice
of
this
ownership
interest
or
the
Novation
issue
two
weeks
ago
and
was
thus
effectively
prevented
from
directly
counseling
or
drastically
addressing
counsel
and
matter
of
clear
public
interest.
As
we
see
tonight,
this
council
has
shown
its
commitment
to
transparency
by
creating
the
task
force
and
adopting
many
of
its
recommendations
which
exceeds
state
law.
I
Now
that
mr.
Weston's
ownership
has
been
disclosed,
the
city
attorney
has
noted
certain
communications,
Arizona
15th,
and
the
Novation
issue
is
being
discussed.
An
open
session
with
an
opportunity
for
public
comment
this
evening,
counsel
should
continue
on
this
transparency
path
and
remove
any
doubt
on
the
validity
of
its
action
on
15th
by
having
action
taken
tonight
beyond
first
reading.
Failing
that,
the
new
council
should
rescind
the
ordinance
the
next
month
before
it
goes
into
effect
and
start
over.
Thank
you
for
your
consideration.
O
Mr.
mayor
City
Council,
first
I
want
to
congratulate
Jenny,
foe
and
Chris
Mills
for
their
incredible
service
to
our
city
and
well.
I
have
disagreements
on
this
issue.
Nothing
changes
my
appreciation
for
your
work.
We
have
a
difference
of
opinion.
I
believe
that
lame-duck
session
should
be
reserved
for
matters
that
are
entirely
ministerial.
Are
those
that
have
an
unalterable
deadline.
This
matter
meets
neither
of
those
tests.
O
I
believe
that
City
Council
in
2015
exhibited
the
right
approach
when
it
cancelled
the
later
November
meetings
and
left
to
the
new
city
council
an
opportunity
to
begin
fresh
in
the
review
of
the
downtown
project.
I
support
the
Virgen
hotel
I
voted
for
the
Virgin
Hotel
on
the
Planning
Commission
I
want
to
see
this
hotel
built,
but
I
believe
this
agreement
is
weakened
by
approval.
O
N
Good
evening,
mayor
in
council,
members
I
wanted
to
congratulate
you
on
the
continuing
implementation
of
the.
What
I
think
is
a
remarkable
public-private
partnership
program
that
you
put
in
place
or
was
put
in
place
nearly
10
years
ago
by
previous
council
members.
I
also
wanted
to
congratulate
you
on
the
continuation
to
implement
the
museum,
specific
plan.
N
These
two
programs
and
policies,
of
course,
have
been
greatly
great
controversies
in
this
city,
but
I
think
any
reasonable
review
of
what
is
transpired
with
respect
to
the
performance
of
those
two
policies
has
to
be
considered
in
the
great
benefit
that
those
two
policies
have
provided
the
city
and
its
people
of
the
city.
These
two
policies
have
enhanced
palm
springs
brand.
These
two
policies
have
increased
the
economic
activity
in
the
city.
A
C
Lisa
Middleton,
you
were
awesome
tonight.
Thank
you
to
Chris
and
Ginny.
It's
your
probably
the
only
time,
I'm
thank
you
and
for
your
time,
I
am
really
confused.
Right
now,
by
what
Marian
Hemphill
said
that
Westman
would
not
have
any
financial,
he
would
not
benefit
financially,
but
his
name
is
on
the
LLC.
So
somebody's
gonna
have
to
explain
that
one
to
me-
and
this
is
such
a
no-brainer-
I
dude
I-
can't
even
understand
why
we're
talking
about
this.
C
If
Westman
is
on
the
LLC
which
he
is
and
he
is
convicted
of
a
crime
of
bribery,
we're
still
going
to
pay
him
75%
of
the
t
OT
for
the
next
30
years,
hello,
Palm,
Springs,
you're
crazy.
If
we
do
that,
I
can't
figure
this
out,
I
can't
feel
right.
Why
we're
defending
it?
I
cannot
tell
you
how
much
I
appreciate
jr.
and
Jeff
for
the
stand
that
they
took
on
November
15th.
C
I
adore
you
Jenny
you
and
I've,
never
gotten
along,
but
and
Chris
I
think
you're
great,
but
for
the
sake
of
the
city
for
us
as
citizens,
this
is
taxpayers
dollars
that
we
need
to
be
vigilant
over
and
I'm
just
amazed
that
we
would
give
this
away
in
the
fact
if,
if
Westman
is
indited-
and
he
is
on
this
LLC
and
marine
hemp
I'll
have
no
idea
what
you're
talking
about
when
you
say
he
won't
benefit
financially
Thanks.
Thank.
P
So
I
want
to
thank
you.
I
wasn't
gonna
speak
on
this
issue
and
in
a
concern
that
it
would
be
construed
as
me
wanting
to
vote
on
an
issue,
and
it's
not
about
that
at
all.
But
I
thought
about
the
last
almost
year,
I
spent
campaigning
and
talking
to
residents
and
voters
and
citizens
of
Palm
Springs
who
care
about
transparency
and
ethics
and
public
input
and
I
think
we
have
a
lot
of
work
to
do
in
rebuilding
public
trust
together
and
coming
up
with
community
solutions
that
work
for
all
of
us
with
community
partners.
P
This
is
an
important
issue
that
deserves
serious
and
thorough
discussion
and
thought
and
research
I
look
forward
to
doing
that
on
this,
and
every
issue
and
I
hope
that
you'll
give
the
new
City
Council,
who
will
be
working
in
partnership
with
great
development
on
this
project,
the
opportunity
to
vote
on
it.
So
we
can
make
a
clear
message
to
the
community
as
a
community
that
our
poems
brings
values
that
we
value
the
Virgen
hotel
that
we
want
to
see
it
built.
P
A
K
Thank
you
very
much,
I'd
like
to
thank
the
Palm
Spring
City
Council,
very
much
for
recognizing
the
importance
of
having
an
on-site
consumption
with
thousands
of
visitors
coming
here
to
Palm
Springs
they're
going
to
need
places
to
legally
consume
it
and
that's
what
on-site
consumption
places.
I
do
have
an
objection,
though,
to
the
fact
that
all
on-site
consumption
places
must
have
a
dispensary
license.
That's
what's
in
here
now,
I
understand
from
mr.
K
cop
again
that
you're
going
to
have
an
unlimited
number
of
dispensary
licenses,
and
you
may
you
know,
make
the
requirements
not
quite
as
onerous
as
it
is.
If
you're
going
to
open
up
walk-in
dispensary
where
you're
selling
dispensary
items
but
we're
talking
about
small
business
owners,
small
restaurant
owners
that
would
like
to
have
a
sex
in
their
restaurant
aside,
where
people
can
consume
cannabis.
K
If
you're
going
to
require
them
to
get
a
sales
license,
not
only
will
they
have
to
meet
all
your
requirements
that
they
will
also
have
to
get
a
state
sales
license,
which
is
very
expensive
and
very
onerous.
This
is
making
it
impossible
for
small
business
owners.
Small
restaurant
owners
to
have
a
section
of
their
restaurant
where
they
can
have
cannabis
consumption,
it's
making
it
impossible
for
somebody
to
open
up
a
small
social
club.
K
There
is
no
reason
why
you
cannot
have
it
just
so:
a
person
get
a
little
license
or
whatever
to
have
a
section
where
they
allow
cannabis
or
their
customers
to
bring
their
own
cannabis
with
them
to
consume.
There
is
nothing
in
state
law
that
has
any
requirement
on
that.
There
is
no
such
thing
as
a
state
on-site
consumption
license.
So
you
are
perfectly
legal
and
within
your
right
to
say:
hey
Joe
Joe.
Do
you
want
your
Joe
restaurant?
You
can
have
a
cannabis
section
here
and
you
don't
have
to
get
a
special
license.
B
Good
evening,
as
the
resident
here
since
1974
and
a
business
owner
on
Palm
Canyon
I'm
here,
both
as
a
patient
and
a
principal
I,
can
tell
you
right
now.
The
one
thing
we
know
is
there
are
no
experts
at
this.
There
is
no
one
here
in
this
room.
That
knows
what
the
hell
is
going
on
with
this
medical
marijuana
ordinance.
B
As
far
as
the
state
is
concerned,
we're
learning
as
we
go
like
I
would
have
never
thought
in
the
end,
the
lounges
would
be
so
important,
and
this
is
why
the
lounges
aren't,
because
people
will
come
here
to
use
them.
Some
people
might
even
change
their
plans
and
say:
let's
go
there
instead,
but
we
have
to
make
sure
they're
good.
B
But
more
importantly,
we
want
to
make
sure
that
people
don't
want
to
have
marijuana,
have
what
we
what
they
come
for,
and
so
I
think
that
when
we're
making
this
ordinance,
we
make
it
for
people
that
do
smoke,
marijuana
and
don't,
and
we
have
to
give
the
people
that
do
smoke.
Marijuana
places
to
go
so
that
when
people
go
home,
the
goal
I
was
in
Palm
Springs
and
they
have
marijuana.
B
But
it
didn't
affect
my
trip
in
any
way
or
guess
what
I
wasn't
gonna
go
there,
but
now
I'm
gonna
go
to
Palm
Springs
because
of
their
ordinance.
So
there's
people
that
will
come
here
for
both
reasons
and
we
only
want
positive
comments.
Marijuana
is
not
for
everyone,
and
the
lounges
are
more
vital
than
ever
before.
I
asked
to
reduce
the
limits
to
zero
or
to
five
hundred
feet,
and
you
could
consider
two
classes
of
lounges.
You
could
have
a
small
lunch.
B
C
Good
evening
my
name
is
joy,
Brown,
Meredith
and
I'm
here
tonight
to
ask
you
to
please
consider.
Postponing
4c
I
think
that
there
just
is
still
more
discussion
to
be
had
between
the
merchant's
between
the
residents
that
are
bordering
downtown
and
uptown,
and
here
you
know
that
this
is
situation
here,
where
I
know
that
it
could
be
something
profitable
for
me
to
do.
I'm
just
not
sure
that
you've
that
it's
been
thought
through
thoroughly
enough
for
downtown
and
uptown,
where
we're
already
going
through.
C
So
many
changes
right
now,
so
I
just
would
like
to
request
on
behalf
of
the
board
of
Main
Street,
who
did
vote
unanimously
to
just
not
support
it
at
this
time.
Planning
Commission
also
voted
to
not
have
it
at
this
time.
The
cannabis
owners
existing
now
voted
also
not
to
have
it
at
this
time.
Just
in
these
zones,
I
don't
understand
why
it
has
to
be
pushed
through
quite
so
quickly.
You
at
first
reading
last
week.
Second
reading
this
week,
I
I,
just
don't
understand
why
you
don't
have
to
have
this
done
by
January
1st.
C
A
K
Evening,
mr.
mayor
City,
Council
and
staff,
my
name
is
Steve
Rosenberg
and
I'm.
A
longtime
resident
city
of
Palm
Springs
I
spoke
to
members
of
the
Subcommittee
on
cannabis
earlier
this
week
and
gave
them
in
writing
some
information
about
separation
distances
that
I
thought
was
relevant
to
the
ordinance
that's
before
us
this
evening.
K
The
ordinances
it
was
introduced
last
week
only
slight
distance
requirements
in
certain
cases
both
attachment
a
and
attachment
B.
This
week,
two
revised
versions
take
those
into
entirely
new
directions
and
I
think
that
that's
unwise
I
think
that
we
need
to
proceed
with
the
ordinance
as
first
read
last
week
with
limited
if
or
no
separation
distance
is
required,
depending
on
the
nature
of
the
business.
K
Two
minutes
doesn't
allow
us
to
go
into
all
the
details,
but
certainly
there's
no
reason
to
have
separation
distances
between,
let's
say
a
lounge
and
a
dispensary
or
a
lounge
and
a
manufacturing
facility,
and
so
on.
I
suggest
we
go
ahead
with
the
ordinance
we
get
our
zoning
in
place
so
that
businesses
and
individuals
can
begin
to
make
their
plans
and
move
forward
important
to
industry.
That's
gonna
bring
five
million
dollars
of
additional
revenue
to
this
city
in
the
next
fiscal
year.
Five
million
dollars
it's
going
to
happen.
K
It's
going
to
happen
here
and
we
can
do
it
right.
If
there's
problems
downloading,
we
can
amend
our
zoning.
We
can
Institute
separation
distances.
I,
don't
predict
those
problems,
I,
don't
foresee
them.
Chris
I
know
you
were
a
great
skeptic
of
this
when
it
first
started.
Unfortunately,
your
fears,
your
concerns
with
the
existing
collectives,
have
not
materialized,
I.
Think
it's
a
bright
future
here
and
I
think
we
should
proceed
as
originally
read
last
week.
Thank
you
and
by
the
way,
Chris
Jenni.
K
A
That
we
will
close
public
testimony
on
agenda
items,
City
Council
subcommittee
and
city
manager's,
common
reports.
This
time
is
set
aside
for
the
City
Council
to
provide
additional
general
comments,
reports
and
announcements.
Additionally,
this
time
is
set
aside
for
the
city
manager
to
update
the
City
Council
on
important
items
initiated
by
staff
or
previously
requested
by
the
City
Council
city
manager,
mayor.
A
A
Second
reading
and
adoption
of
ordinance
number
of
1940
approving
a
development
agreement
with
DTP
sb3
LLC
related
to
construction
of
the
Virgin
Hotel,
located
on
Block
B,
one
of
the
downtown
Palm
Springs
specific
plan
at
the
northeast
corner
of
Bilardo,
road
and
museum
way
case
number
5.1,
2:04,
SP,
amended
case
number,
3.3,
908
and
case
number,
five
point,
one
four
to
seven
staff:
a
court
please.
Mr.
D
Mayor
members
of
the
council,
the
staff
report
is
hopefully
clear,
and
it
is
a
total
of
not
even
five
full
pages.
There's
a
lot
of
material
attached
to
the
staff
report
and
obviously,
we've
been
dealing
with
many
documents
since
time
immemorial.
It
seems
with
respect
to
this
project.
Iii
want
to
highlight,
for
you
some
of
these
business
principle,
disclosure
issues
which
have
come
up
quite
a
bit.
D
The
developer
of
the
Virgen
management
information
regarding
grit,
operational
management,
information
ownership
information
is
to
grit
trust
the
information
as
to
the
trust
that
we
had
referenced
in
our
previous
disclosures
regarding
ownership
and
membership
in
DT,
PS,
v3,
LLC
and
and
for
the
record,
and
so
there's
no
lack
of
clarity.
The
Westman
entity
is
no
longer
associated
with
or
affiliated
with
this
project
in
in
any
way
shape
or
form.
That's
not
the
status
quo.
That
is
the
past,
but
that's
not
where
we
are
on
November
29th
2017.
This
disclosure
is
accurate.
D
We
have
additional
information
from
the
developer
and
the
developers.
Accountants
specifically
included
here
with
this
documentation
in
your
staff
report
tonight
and
as
a
practical
matter,
there's
also
a
letter
from
mr.
Westman
that
ms
Hemphill
did
allude
to
in
her
remarks.
As
your
attorney
I
can
tell
you,
I've
had
dialogue
with
her
I've
had
dialogue
with
mr.
knows
the
attorney.
The
accountant
excuse
me,
and
even
with
individual
members
of
the
Council
regarding
these
issues.
What
I'll
say
here
for
purposes
of
the
staff
report
at
the
public
meeting
is
simply
that
mr.
D
Westman,
based
on
the
documents
that
I've
reviewed
no
longer,
will
get
direct
money
out
of
this
project.
That
doesn't
mean
that,
as
a
practical
matter,
I've
seen
complete
documentation
that
divests
him
completely
with
respect
to
community
property
interests
that
he
might
have
in
his
his
current
life
and
my
understanding
is
they
may
be
separating,
but
I
don't
want
to
get
too
deep
into
the
Westminster
Sinhalese.
But
a
lot
of
this
can
and
perhaps
will
be
discussed
tonight.
I,
don't
know
I'm
not
going
to
do
it.
D
The
bottom
line
is
that
there's
a
community
property
potential
interest
on
a
certain
level,
although
to
a
degree
that
community
property
divestment
has
already
taken
place.
That
DTP
sb3
interest
that
mr.
Weston's
wife
has
it's
not
a
community
interest
that
she
holds,
but
it's
an
indirect
interest
for
mr.
Westman
to
the
extent
that
miss
mrs.
Weston's
heirs
would
potentially
benefit
from
that.
So
I
don't
want
to
mislead
the
council
or
the
community
that
there
may
be
an
indirect
interest
on
some
collateral
level.
D
I
would
leave
it
to
the
developer
to
answer
any
council
questions
in
that
regard.
With
respect
to
the
statements
that
are
made
regarding
ownership.
Again,
that's
detailed
in
the
staff
report,
I,
don't
accept
and
I,
don't
think
the
council
should
the
fact
that
there's
an
allegation
here
that
the
city's
information
was
either
inaccurate
or
uninformed.
We
work
very
closely
with
the
developer,
to
ensure
accuracy
and
to
be
candid,
the
developers
been
extremely
forthcoming
and
very
cooperative
with
respect
to
all
of
these
issues.
D
I
would
say
that,
as
to
the
actual
development
agreement,
the
staff
reports
clear
with
respect
to
the
Planning
Commission's
recommendation
and
their
vote,
it
has
to
consistency
with
the
general
plan
and
the
specific
plan
that's
applicable
here.
They
recommended
certain
conditions
be
added
to
the
development
agreement.
D
Those
have,
in
fact,
been
added,
as
recently
as
today,
the
council
was
provided
per
council
member
of
a
request
with
a
redline
of
the
development
agreement
that
reflects
all
of
these
changes
in
four
part
harmony,
so
that
anyone
who
wants
to
see
exactly
what
was
changed
can
see
exactly
what
was
changed.
We
listed
in
the
staff
report,
a
modification
to
the
section
dealing
with
operating
memoranda.
D
You'll
recall
that
operating
member
end
are
somewhat
new
concept
here
in
Palm
Springs
to
deal
with
sort
of
ministerial
minor
changes
that
the
developer
and
the
city
staff
want
to
make.
Those
are
not
intended
to
ever
address
major
issues
which,
obviously
we
need
to
come
to
the
council
as
an
amendment.
We
did
in
fact
take
the
action
we
did
as
a
city
on
November
the
3rd
we've
had
the
Brown
Act
violations.
Alleged
you've
heard
those
addressed
by
legal
counsel,
the
people
who
spoke
tonight-
mister
screamin
and
tansy.
D
They
expressed
their
sincere
concern
about
the
integrity
of
the
proceedings.
Your
legal
counsels
told
you.
No,
that's
that's
not
a
concern
for
us,
so
whatever
action
you
take
tonight,
please
take
it
based
on
the
merits
of
the
project,
as
you
see
it
and
the
development
agreement.
That
is
our
request
as
a
staff
and
certainly
as
your
legal
counsel,
I'm
here
to
go
through.
With
your
permission,
some
of
the
changes
that
we
made
in
the
development
agreement
that
are
not
actually
reflected
in
the
staff
report
and
when
I
say
they're
not
reflected
there.
D
I
actually
had
some
very
constructive
direction
from
councilmember
Coors
and
they
are
not
at
all
substantive
changes,
which
is
respect
to
deal
points.
If
you
will
of
the
Virgen
deal
as
it's
been
presented
in
the
first
reading,
I
can
detail
those
for
you.
I
have
the
language
here.
The
first
change
that
we
contemplate
and
by
the
way
I
want
to
say
the
developer
is
amenable
to
all
of
these
changes.
I
spoke
with
the
developers
attorney
and
she's
agreed
to
all
of
these
changes.
D
D
Consideration
being
provided
in
the
termination
of
the
restated
covenant
that
we're
also
expecting
that
the
developer
will
in
fact
develop
the
project.
That
is
what
this
is
about.
There
were
questions
asked
well,
what's
being
done
by
the
developer.
Is
it
enough
is
a
question
for
the
City
Council,
but
the
developer
is
developing
the
project.
D
D
We
expressed
in
this
document
that
the
city
has
relied
very
heavily
on
the
developers
assurances
with
respect
to
the
performance
schedule
the
developer
agreed
to
that
language,
and
in
that
vein,
we've
agreed
that
4.03
will
be
changed
to
reference
the
developers
covenant
to
secure
a
building
permit
for
vertical
construction
of
the
corn
shell,
the
date
operative.
There
is
March
31st
2020.
D
The
next
change
is
parallel
to
the
one
I
said
would
be
in
4.0
three
similar
change
in
5.0
with
respect
to
permitting
the
development.
The
city
is
agreeing
to
permit
the
development
in
accordance
with
this
document,
and
we
would
make
the
same
reference
with
respect
to
securing
a
building
permit
for
vertical
construction
of
the
corn,
shell,
as
opposed
to
simply
commencing
construction.
D
Additional
changes
that
the
developer
and
I
have
agreed
upon,
which
again
aren't
of
substance,
add
to
section
7.09
a
requirement
with
respect
to
project
timing
that
all
project
timing,
despite
the
owners
or
developers,
discretion,
and
it
says
sole
discretion-
is
that
it's
also
in
accordance
with
this
agreement.
This
agreement
is
very
clear
that
the
city
has
relied
specifically
upon
the
performance
schedule
and
that
a
significant
deviation
from
the
performance
schedule
not
may
but
shall
be
reviewed
by
the
City
Council
in
the
context
of
an
annual
review.
D
We've
also
added
a
reference
which
was
just
inadvertently,
left
off
to
section
7.09
a
because
at
7.09,
a
and
B
that
are
addressed
in
Section
7.09
C.
When
we
start
talking
about
that
significant
deviation
from
the
performance
schedule,
we
want
to
keep
the
developer
to
the
schedule.
The
developer
wants
to
keep
to
the
schedule.
One
thing
that
is
unusual
about
this
development
agreement-
I,
don't
know
if
I
reported
it
on
November
15th
is
really
the
extraordinarily
short
term
of
the
development
agreement.
Typically,
we
have
development
agreements
of
a
20
or
30
year
term.
D
This
development
agreement
is
much
much
shorter
in
its
contemplated
term.
It's
in
the
performance
schedule.
Mr.
Braun
and
his
company
want
a
plan
to
open
this
hotel
in
the
year.
2022
there's
a
performance
scheduled
through
which
they
can
do
that.
There
are
only
a
very
limited
number
of
things
that
constitute
an
acceptable
delay,
and
the
city
has
the
right
to
an
annual
review
where
it
can
look
at
all
of
these
things.
Each
and
every
one
of
them
on
an
annual
basis
and
should
by
law,
do
so.
D
I
would
also
add,
with
respect
to
the
provision
on
prevailing
wage
I've
added
some
language
that
the
final
and
not
appealable
matter
of
law
that
I
referenced
with
respect
to
the
developer's
capacity
to
modify
prevailing
wage.
We're
gonna
say
that
that
cannot
be
challenged
in
a
court
of
competent
jurisdiction
or
otherwise
secures
a
final
and
not
appealable
order
by
a
court
of
competent
jurisdiction.
Consistent
with
that
dir
determination
that
they're
looking
for
certainly
I
could
take
questions
on
some
of
this.
It's
very
technical
with
respect
to
section
8.0
one.
We
wanted
to
clarify
that.
D
It's
not
just
the
parties
as
an
abstract,
but
it's
the
developer
and
the
City
Council
would
need
to
agree
to
any
amendment
of
the
agreement.
We've
also
added
that
the
performance
of
schedule
will
not
be
modified
by
an
operating
memorandum.
In
other
words,
staff
won't
be
able
to
do
that.
I
think
staff
would
have
been
crazy
to
try
to
do
so,
but
it's
now
against
the
development
agreement
to
do
so
in
terms
of
the
remaining
portion
of
the
document.
I
think
that
has
the
total
of
the
changes
that
are
contemplated.
D
My
request
is
that
if
there's
a
motion
to
approve
this
item
on
second
or
first
reading,
that
that
motion
include
these
changes
because
I
think
that,
given
the
developers
agreement
with
these
changes
and
city's
proposal
of
them,
they're
not
controversial
they're,
not
substantive,
they
certainly
do
not
create
a
second
reading
if
the
council's
intent
is
to
proceed
with
second
reading
and
I.
Think
that
concludes
my
remarks.
D
I'm
available
for
questions
I
would
say,
as
in
that
munition
as
your
legal
counsel,
when
we
start
talking
about
10
90s
and
the
city's
rights
there's
a
certain
threshold
which,
after
you
cross
it,
there's
no
return.
If
you
waive
attorney-client
privilege
on
a
certain
level,
it's
gone
not
just
here
tonight
but
forever
on
the
issue.
So
please
be
circumspect
in
asking
for
any
of
those
waivers
of
attorney-client
privilege,
Thank.
H
Just
going
back
to
the
ownership
point-
and
this
is
not
about
punishing
Jon
Westman
and
in
fact
my
understanding
of
the
law
is,
as
it
pertains
to
a
1090
claim.
Unless
we
don't
have
to
send
it
be
specific,
if
you
prefer,
it
doesn't
matter
who
the
current
owner
is.
If
there
was
a
violation
and
the
contracts
violated
and
they
sell.
If
there's
a
violation,
the
violation
remains
correct.
Well,.
D
Said
a
1090
is
really
about
a
contract.
It's
about
a
contract
that,
if
it
is
based
on
that
type
of
a
corrupt
agreement,
is
void
at
its
inception.
So
in
this
particular
instance
absent.
Some
action
on
this
development
agreement
status
quo
right
now
would
be
that
you
still
have
the
potential
potential
I
emphasize
for
a
clawback
as
to
the
original
original
operating
covenant
for
the
AC
Marriott
hotel,
which
was
transferred
you'll
recall
by
council
action
in
2016
to
the
the
Virgin
Project,
which
is
before
you
tonight.
D
The
thing
that's
different
is
that
we
are
now
expanding
and
extending
the
term
of
that
operating
covenant
for
the
Tod
sharing
beyond
the
December
31st
2017
deadline.
That's
articulated
in
the
ordinance
and
I
want
to
say
something,
because
in
my
discussions
with
the
mayor
before
tonight,
he
asked
me
about
the
development
agreement
itself.
You
have
to
do
a
development
agreement.
If
you
want
the
Virgin,
you
can't
have
the
virgin,
if
you
don't
do
a
development
agreement.
D
The
reason
for
that
that
the
specific
plan
in
this
project
contemplated
a
development
agreement
for
one
very
important
purpose
to
get
to
the
sixty
nine
foot
height
approved
for
this
project.
As
council
members
have
indicated
tonight,
the
project
was
much
grander
and
bigger
and
everything
else
and
this
City
Council,
your
staff
I,
think
worked
very
hard
to
create
the
project.
That's
currently
envisioned
the
development
agreement
is
essential,
so
you
have
to
have
it.
It's
per
foot
note
in
the
specific
plan:
okay,.
H
H
H
F
H
F
F
That
was
approved
or
voted
on
by
a
body
like
the
council,
where
any
member
of
that
body
had
a
financial
incidence
in
the
contract
and,
in
this
circumstance,
the.
If
the
mayor
received
a
bribe
from
any
source
to
approve
that
contract
that
he
had
a
financial
interest
in
it
and
when
he
voted
that
violator,
1090
and
the
contract
is
void.
F
H
F
D
H
Go
obligation
we
go
together,
yeah
I,
just
I,
understand
that
but
I
think
it's
it's
a
question.
That's
come
up
a
lot
and
I
want
to
make
sure
people
understood
that
other
thing
I
want
to
say,
because
obviously
my
role
in
the
ethics
and
transparency
tied
to
this
issue
is
the
reason
we
have.
This
is
yes,
it's
so
the
public
knows
who's
involved,
but
primarily
it's
so
the
people
voting
know
if
they
have
a
conflict.
H
That's
why
we're
doing
that
and
on
this
issue,
even
though
it
should
have
been
in
the
original
staff
report,
we
made
sure
that
it
was
reported
that
night.
So
all
of
us
and
everyone
on
the
Planning
Commission
knew
so
they
could
make
their
independent
determinations
as
they
have
a
conflict.
So
that
is
the
reason
for
that
provision.
H
What
you
said
at
the
last
meeting
is
that
the
agreements
that
are
before
the
council
this
evening,
if
they're
approved
as
they're
presented
in
the
staff
report,
there'd,
be
no
feasible
way
for
the
city
of
Palm
Springs
to
seek
to
recover
the
potential
share
of
t
ot
that
might
be
realized
with
this
property
through
a
court
proceeding.
That
is
a
right
to
today
under
the
existing
agreements.
H
My
analysis
is
indicating
that
we
would
have
that
capacity
and
I
know
your
position,
because
you
said
it,
but
now
that
we
have
our
outside
counsel
on
it,
I
want
to
know,
if
that's
consistent
with
your
opinion
that
presently
we
have,
it
doesn't
mean
we're
gonna
win
right.
Having
a
claim
doesn't
mean
you're,
gonna,
win
ever
in
litigation
or
anything
else.
I.
D
G
G
In
fact,
I'll
go
a
step
further
as
a
planning
Commissioner
and
as
a
downtown
subcommittee
member
I've
helped
to
shape
and
mold
what
we
snow
as
the
design
for
the
Virgin
Hotel
today
and
I
think
that
the
design
that
finally
came
forward
on
that
for
that
project
he's
a
really
good
one
and
I
and
I
think
it
would
be
a
positive
addition
for
Palm
Springs
and
it's
cited
well
and
fits
well
into
the
new
Downtown
Development
I
also
want
a
state
for
that.
Well,
I
want
to
state
the
obvious
there.
G
There
are
people
who've
come
out
and
said
that
well,
there's
a
lot
of
misinformation,
unfortunately
floating
out
there,
but
some
have
come
forward
and
said
that
we,
some
of
us,
don't
want
to
approve
this
T
ot
extension
and
development
agreement,
because
we
don't
want
the
Virgin.
This
City
Council
has
consistently
and
publicly
stated
its
support
individually
and
as
a
group
for
the
Virgin
Hotel,
so
I
don't
understand
how
that
misinformation
got
out
there,
but
I
certainly
hope
that
tonight
we
can
correct
that.
G
How
much
do
I
support
the
hotel
do
I
support
it
enough
that
I
would
trade
away
our
protections
and
rights
on
section
1090
when
I
trade
away
the
protections
and
rights
for
our
community
for
a
shiny,
new
hotel.
No
I
can't
do
that.
It
wasn't
what
I
was
elected
to
do.
I
believe
mine
was
elected
first
and
foremost
our
community
and
secondarily
think
about
how
to
develop
it
and
or
not
develop
it.
G
This
isn't
an
issue
for
me
about
punishing
anybody,
punishing
John
Westman,
frankly,
I,
don't
care
how
he
has
shifted
his
ownership
in
this
project.
It's
irrelevant
to
me.
This
all
comes
back
to
one
thing,
and
that
is:
are
we
willing
to
give
up
the
protections
that
we
now
have
that
we
may
or
may
never
pursue
on
this
particular
case
I'm?
Not
willing
to
do
that?
There's
nothing!
That
could
convince
me
to
do
that
and,
more
importantly,
there's
not
a
reason
to
do
that.
G
We
often
have
to
sit
up
here
as
council
members,
and
we
have
to
make
really
hard
uncomfortable
decisions
and
we
sweat
those
decisions.
This
is
the
case
that
I
don't
understand,
I'm
being
asked
to
vote
on
something
that
should
be
voted
on
by
a
future
Council
and
a
meeting
that
should
not
exist
and
for
no
reason
at
all
this
hotel
can
be
approved.
Its
development
agreement
can
be
approved.
G
The
development
agreement
that
is
in
front
of
us
right
now
and
the
Tod
extension
that
is
in
front
of
us
right
now
could
all
be
approved
if
we
hand
a
little
little
bit
differently
and
we
can
do
it
all
without
giving
up
our
ten-ninety
rights.
I
have
to
tell
you
that
in
my
political
career
for
this
city
and
another,
we
don't
usually
get
that
option
where
it's
a
win-win.
G
The
developer
may
claim
that
he
can't
build
this
hotel
with
the
10/90
section
in
place
or
our
rights
under
1090
I
struggle
with
that
and,
frankly,
that's
not
our
problem.
If
the
developer
has
worked
with
and
has
been
part
of
an
organization
that
has
been
indicted,
that's
not
really
the
city's
problem
to
solve
that.
It's
up
to
the
developer,
to
figure
out
how
they're
going
to
build,
though,
to
hell
with
the
challenges
that
they
have.
G
Furthermore,
the
developer
has
claimed
that
he
has
found
the
financing
for
this
hotel
long
before
this
particular
issue
came
up
now.
He
might
argue
that
that
was
based
on
his
hope
that
we
would
lift
our
protections
and
rights
under
the
1090
section
again.
I,
don't
think
it's
really
our
problem
to
solve
that
problem
for
him
it's
his
problem.
H
You
mr.
mayor,
so
I
have
two
issues
with
this
and
the
first
one
I
talked
about
two
weeks
ago,
which
is
the
process
I
think
this
process
is
awful
and
while
I
agree,
you
can't
bootstrap
city
policy,
which
we
haven't
finalized
even
on
to
the
Brown
Act
I
totally
get
that
when
the
fundamental
reason
for
this
agreement
as
the
developers
attorney
and
I
thank
her
for.
Finally,
someone
saying
it
to
us
was
to
lift
the
1090
and
waive
it,
and
that
was
never
mentioned.
H
There's
a
problem.
It's
one
thing
to
say:
we
can't
think
of
everything
and
put
everything
in
a
staff
report,
but
leaving
out
the
reason
this
is
being
done,
violates
the
entire
principles
of
what
our
ethics
and
transparency
taskforce
did,
and
we
can
fix
that
when
we
actually
adopt
the
policy,
because
that
is
very
different
than
oh.
We
missed
one
thing.
This
is
the
fundamental
reason
for
this
agreement.
H
How
can
you
negotiate
and
get
something
here,
we're
giving
everything
and
we're
getting
nothing
they're,
getting
everything
we're
getting
nothing
and
one
of
the
members
of
the
subcommittee
had
no
idea,
that's
what
they
were
negotiating.
How
could
that
be
an
okay
process
to
pass
anything
in
this
city?
It
is
one
of
the
most
important
things.
I
have
seen
and
I
find
the
process
to
be
awful
and
just
for
that
reason,
I
will
vote.
No.
H
That
said,
because
it's
been
said
otherwise
by
some
people,
I
have
voted
for
the
Virgen
hotel
and
this
downtown
project
every
single
time.
It's
come
to
us.
In
fact,
I
voted
for
it
once
with
councilmember
Mills.
When
my
three
colleagues
didn't
wanted
some
changes,
so
I've
always
supported
it
and
for
those
who
say
I,
don't
that's
simply
not
true
in
July,
when
we
continue
this
matter,
it
was
an
extension
which
would
not
have
waived
our
10/90
rights.
H
What
came
back
was
without
saying
it,
but
as
I
read,
it
became
clear
to
me
because
being
a
lawyer
that
that's
what
we
were
doing,
but
no
one
knew
I'm
not
willing
to
do
that.
I
think
it's
wrong,
I!
Think
it's
the
wrong
thing
to
do,
and
the
last
thing
I
just
want
to
say,
I
asked
for
that
economic
study,
because
I
think
it's
really
important
in
our
financial
situation
to
get
it
and
I
appreciate
what
we
got.
Thirty
million
dollars
I.
H
A
You
I'll
go
next
nice,
we'll
just
go
down
the
line
here.
There
is
expressed
by
some
the
need
to
reserve
the
right
to
clawback
funds
from
the
proposed
virgin
hotel
when
and
if
there
are
findings
of
guilt
on
the
part
of
the
parties
related
to
the
Downtown
Development
and
as
a
result,
and
as
a
result
of
such
findings
of
guilt.
The
previous
councils,
approval
of
the
original
Tod
sharing
agreement
with
the
formally
approved
AC
Marriott,
is
found
to
be
tainted.
I
very
respectfully,
do
not
agree
with
that
position.
A
On
April
20th
2016
at
a
joint
public
meeting
of
this
council,
the
architectural
Advisory
Commission
and
the
Planning
Commission.
The
decision
was
made
to
modify
the
downtown
specific
plan
in
several
ways,
and
one
of
those
changes
was
to
transfer
the
rights
to
build
the
AC
Marriott
Hotel
to
a
new
hotel
on
a
different
block
and
that
the
proposed
hotel
would
be
a
Virgin
brand
hotel.
The
next
month
on
May
4th
2016,
this
council
held
a
public
hearing
on
the
transfer
of
the
Tod
sharing
agreement
from
the
AC
Marriott
to
the
then
newly
proposed
virgin
hotel.
A
A
Thus
far,
no
city
funds
have
gone
in
to
the
Virgin
Hotel
proposal,
except
for
the
administrative
work
of
doing
staff
reports
to
Council.
There
is
therefore
currently
no
City
money
invested
in
invested
to
clawback
related
to
this
hotel
agreement.
Any
clawback
would
therefore
mean
cancelling
out
on
the
Tod
sharing
agreement
for
the
Virgin
Hotel
that
this
council
has
approved
in
the
past
and
is
now
considering
to
extend
in
a
similar
manner
to
recent
extensions
of
Tod
sharing
agreements
with
the
dream
hotel
on
the
orchid
tree.
A
Therefore,
a
no
vote
is,
in
my
mind,
a
vote
to
not
build
this
hotel
and
therefore
potentially
end
up
with
a
60-foot
apartment
building
on
this
site,
which
would
do
little
to
support
our
tourism
industry
and
provide
much
less
tax
revenue
to
our
city
or,
worse,
a
useless
foundation
that
is
fenced
off
and
left
as
an
eyesore
for
years
to
come.
When
and
if
there
are
findings
by
the
court
of
guilty
actions
by
parties.
The
city
contracts
related
to
the
Downtown
Development.
A
Those
contracts
that
are
tainted
will
be
scrupulously
reviewed
in
light
of
any
1090
rights.
The
city
retains
really
those
contracts.
If
and
when
that
happens,
there
are
certainly
areas
where
the
city
has
spent
taxpayer
dollars
on
the
Downtown
Development
project
that
could
potentially
be
looked
at
in
light
of
1090.
That
could
theoretically
be
issues
decided
by
the
previous
council,
such
as
the
purchase
of
the
parking
structure,
purchase
of
the
land
for
streets,
the
purchase
of
the
public
park
property
and,
potentially
even
the
Kimpton
hotel.
A
The
Virgin
Hotel
in
my
mind
is
a
separate
business
agreement
that
this
council
made
with
the
current
developer
Grit.
It
is
no
longer
an
agreement
between
the
former
council
on
Westman
development.
I
feel
we
need
the
Virgen
hotel
rooms.
We
need
the
additional
revenue
it
will
bring
in
our
share
of
t
ot,
the
sales
tax
and
the
tourist
dollars.
We
need
the
rooms
to
support
our
Convention
Center.
We
need
the
185
to.
A
A
That
comes
before
this
council
is
to
do
what
I
feel,
in
my
mind,
is
the
best
interest
of
is
in
the
best
interest
of
our
city
and
the
majority
of
our
residents.
In
my
opinion,
we
need
to
learn
from
the
mistakes
the
past,
but
move
forward.
That
concludes
at
this
point
approving
this
valuable
hotel
asset
for
our
city,
Thank
You,
member
Mayor,
Pro
tempo.
Yes,.
Q
I'm
also
going
to
read
a
statement
because
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
I
did
not
miss
anything
in
this
and
first
I
want
to
address
the
vitriolic
statements
that
have
been
made
about
me
and
my
colleagues
that
voted
for
the
Virgen
to
move
forward.
I
was
so
saddened
to
see
the
line
blurred
between
a
difference
of
opinion
on
this
issue,
morph
into
accusations
of
corruption,
friendship,
betrayal
and
every
other
vicious
attack.
That
could
be
launched.
Q
Fortunately,
there
were
so
many
people
said
that
they
either
agree
with
my
vote
or
said
that
they
didn't
agree
with
my
vote,
but
they
knew
because
of
the
14
years,
they've
known
me
that
I
always
voted
what
I
felt
was
bright
for
the
city.
I
also
refused
to
participate
in
the
feeding
frenzy
that
developed
on
Facebook
regarding
this
important
issue,
because
this
important
issue
should
be
decided
here
not
on
Facebook.
This
last
election
said
something
very
important
about
our
city
and
how
we
have
started
to
heal
from
the
pain
and
anger.
Q
We
all
felt
after
the
raid
on
our
City
Hall.
We
showed
that
recovery
by
electing
two
candidates
that
ran
a
positive
campaign
of
a
positive
future
for
our
city.
They
won
overwhelmingly
the
candidates
that
wanted
to
be
an
election
about
the
past
were
soundly
defeated.
They
said
to
me
that
said
to
me
that
the
citizens
of
the
city
know
it
is
time
for
us
to
move
forward,
and
my
vote
on
this
issue
was
to
move
forward
this
past
weekend
evening.
Q
I
with
my
partner
went
shopping,
a
West
Elm
walked
over
and
had
a
pizza
at
blaze.
Pizza
continued
on
to
the
plaza
outside
the
new
Starbucks
tried
to
sit
for
a
minute
and
take
it
all
in,
but
it
was
so
busy
with
people
sitting
on
the
stone
benches
talking
that
there
was
no
place
for
us
to
sit.
We
decided
to
take
the
elevator
to
the
top
of
the
Rowan
when
we
arrived.
Q
We
were
amazed
that
the
number
of
people
lounging
around
the
entire
rooftop
talking
and
enjoying
the
beauty
of
our
city
I
thought
about
how,
for
the
entire
time
that
I
have
lived
in
Palm
Springs,
the
whole
center
of
my
town
was
unusable
and
eyesore,
and
here
it
was
alive
again
through
something
we
had
done
on
this
council.
I
also
thought
about
the
merchants
that
have
been
suffering
all
these
years
with
that
dead
hole
in
the
middle
of
the
city,
which
reinforced
for
me
that
it
was
time
to
move
on.
Q
Q
The
Rowan
ran
70%
occupancy
in
its
first
weekend
and
we
are
working
on
the
final
planning
for
the
new
park,
and
now
we
have
a
chance
to
add
the
topic
on
the
cake
being
one
of
the
few
cities
in
the
world
that
will
have
a
worldwide
brand,
the
Virgin
Hotel.
To
fully
understand
the
history
have
to
look
back
to
2008.
Q
When
mr.
Mill's
and
I
sat
on
this
council,
the
country
was
in
dire
financial
straits
because
of
the
recession,
we
had
to
cut
about
fourteen
million
dollars
from
our
budget
to
stay
afloat,
that
meant
cutting
services
and
it
meant
cutting
people.
The
council
previous
to
this
decided
that
it
needed
to
come
up
with
innovative
financial
incentives
that
would
turn
our
city
around.
We
took
a
gamble
and
we
put
a
million
dollars
into
partnerships
with
our
businesses
to
help
regenerate
themselves
and
grow.
Q
We
created
the
hotel
incentive
program
to
assist
our
aging
hotels
and
refurbish
and
create
incentives
for
new
high-end
hotel
development
that
would
help
generate
new
tourists
and
convention
business.
We
truly
wanted
to
make
the
this
is
the
world-class
city
we
all
profess
it
to
be.
This
program
has
been
incredibly
successful
as
we
went
from
thirteen
million
dollars
in
T
ot
in
the
year
in
that
year,
2007
2008
to
29
million
dollars
in
T
ou
T
last
year.
That
didn't
just
happen.
That
happened
because
of
these
financial
incentives.
Q
I've
said
before
that
we
never
gave
tax
dollars
away.
We
invested
in
the
success
of
businesses
and
have
been
and
will
be
paid
back
a
hundredfold.
We
have
a
rebate,
you
must
have
a
rebate.
You
must
make
an
investment.
This
program
was
not
a
unique
idea.
Municipalities
across
the
country
partner
with
businesses
to
create
in
census
for
commerce,
must
bene
a
much
more
significant
way
than
what
we
have
done
here
now
I'd
like
to
adjust
why
I
voted
for
the
development
agreement
and
the
extension
of
the
Tod
covenant?
Let's
start
with.
Q
First
with
the
relationship
of
the
virgin
to
the
City
Council
in
2014,
this
council
sitting
here
tonight
removed
the
operations
covenant
originally
granted
the
Westman,
the
Marriott
Hotel
and
granted
it
to
great
development
for
the
virgin
on
may
4th
2016.
This
council
approved
an
operating
covenant,
granting
the
Virgin
the
program's
maximum
benefit
of
50
million
dollars
in
T
or
T
rebates.
I,
fully
believe
that
action
by
this
council
took
away
the
1090
change.
We
are
not
giving
away
50
million
we're
creating
a
way
to
get
30
million
in
our
pocket.
Q
The
second
reason
is
from
the
documents
that
we
received.
John
Westman
has
no
financial
interest
in
the
development
of
the
Virgin
Hotel.
This
is
a
great
development
project.
Monies
for
the
development
will
come
solely
from
Grit
development,
Michael,
Braun
and
investors,
thus,
in
my
mind,
further
removing
any
taint.
Thirdly,
1090
issues
exist
when
there
was
an
elected,
official
or
government
employee
involved
in
a
transaction
that
does
not
exist
here
as
the
property
that
the
virtual
sits
on
is
not
City
property.
The
city
has
not
given
any
City
monies
for
that
piece
of
land.
Q
Neither
John,
Westman
or
Steve
punier
have
any
monies
invested
in
the
Virgin,
nor
will
either
benefit
in
the
indictments,
which
are
still
accusations,
not
proven
fact
and
I
happen
to
believe
in
the
American
principle
that
you
are
innocent
until
you're
proven
guilty.
There
is
no
direct
check
from
John
Westman
to
Steve,
who
yay
no
proof
of
money
is
moving
from
John
Westman
to
Steve,
who
nay
so
for
me.
That
further
removes
the
1090
claim
further
from
this
project.
Q
It
will
never
be
built.
What
loan?
If
what
is
the
foot
here
should
be
stated,
financing
of
this
project
depends
on
the
guarantee
that
the
money's
alone
to
build
a
hotel
will
be
reimbursed
by
the
t
ot.
Why
would
a
bank
or
anyone
for
that
matter
just
lend
money,
because
it
looked
like
a
good
idea?
The
Tod
rebate
is
part
of
the
loan
documents
and
is
assigned
to
the
lender
not
assigned
to
Grit
development
or
Michael
Braun
or
Steve
punier
or
John
Weston,
or
anyone
else
for
that
matter.
Q
If
this
counsel
insists
on
putting
the
tank
back
on
this
agreement,
financing
will
be
as
impossible
as
anything
as
there
is
no
way
for
any
bank
investor
to
regain
their
money.
So
I
truly
believe
that,
in
that
scenario,
the
burgeon
will
not
and
logically
cannot
be
built
and
finally,
I
want
to
address
the
rushing
this
project
through
accusation
and
the
new
council
has
to
write
the
vote
on
this.
This
project
has
been
before
the
City
Council
sitting
here
since
May
4th
2016.
That
is
not
a
rush.
Q
We
as
like
this
council
and
this
subcommittee
have
been
working
on
this
a
year
and
a
half
in
July.
We
postponed
a
final
vote
for
several
reasons,
one
being
that
we
wanted
further
economic
study
and
also
because
we
wanted
to
see
how
financially
restricted
we
would
be
if
measure
D
didn't
pass
if
it
wasn't
for
measure
D,
which
had
nothing
to
do
with
the
Virgen.
We
would
have
voted
on
this
in
September
and
the
new
council
members
would
not
have
ever
decided
have
ever
decided
on
this
action.
Q
This
council,
which
was
duly
elected
by
the
citizens
of
this
city
and
I,
was
elected
to
do
the
business
of
the
city
until
December
6th.
When
my
term
is
up.
There
are
so
many
things
that
this
council
will
have
to
handle,
including
things
that
I
voted
on
years
ago.
There
are
still
three
lots
to
be
developed.
Three
lots
to
talk
about
1090
issues.
I
do
not
want
I,
do
not
want
to
see
I
am
NOT
trading,
anything
away.
I
am
trading
for
this
city.
The
Virgen
hotel
will
not
be
solely
owned
by
great
development.
Q
As
a
matter
of
fact,
great
development
in
seeking
the
construction
loan
because
of
the
controversy
will
have
to
guarantee
to
the
bank
that
the
city
and
the
investors
will
see
their
monies
reimbursed
far
ahead
of
michael
braun.
We
can
also
insist
that
once
the
virgin
is
built
and
operating
the
legal
documents,
we
join
up
to
confirm
one
once
again
that
john
Westman
will
not
receive
any
monetary
benefit
in
direct
or
indirect.
I
am
NOT
a
lame
duck.
I
am
an
elected
member
of
this
City
Council.
R
Thank
you,
miss
you
covered.
Virtually
everything
I
was
was
a
meet,
or
is
it
also
a
minute
mr.
mayor
I
think
when
it
comes
down
to
me,
it's
very
very
simple,
and
you
heard
it
from
this
from
this
hip
hill-
that
this
project
does
not
happen.
The
Burton
Hotel
does
not
happen
with
any
cloud
of
a
ten
ninety
over
over
this
project.
No
investor
is
going
to
invest
any
money
in
this
project.
With
that
cloud,
it's
pretty
simple
and
if
you
can't
understand
that,
then
then
I
don't
I,
don't
you
you
there's
no
reason.
R
You
can't
understand
that
it's
very
simple
that
the
that
the
amount
of
money
that
would
be
put
into
this
project
would
be
clawed
back.
I
think
is
the
is
the
term
based
on
the
T
ot
in
in
scented
agreement.
So
I
look
at
this
as
as
a
very
simple
vote:
do
you
want
the
Virgin
Hotel
or
do
you
not
want
it
and
if
you
put
the
1090
on
it,
any
way,
shape
or
form
you're
not
going
to
get
it
and
this
this
hotel,
as
all
the
other
hotels
that
we've
done,
the.
R
R
This
is
miss.
Miss
code
outlined
a
very
obvious
part
of
that
in
the
in
her
statement
of
the
13
million
quixote
to
the
now
twenty
nine
and
that's
twenty
nine
without
the
rowing,
even
in
the
picture.
So
so
I
I
I
understand
what
my
colleagues
are
saying.
Mr.
cores
and
mr.
Roberts
are
saying,
but
their
comments
and
what
they're
saying
puts
that
ten.
Ninety
cloud
on
this
project,
which
essentially
kills
it
and
mr.
R
R
Is
that
I
mean
I
was
elected
over
four
terms
and
that's
four
terms,
and
that's
that's
15
years
and
twelve
months,
not
fifteen
years
and
eleven
months
and
and
the
statement
that
I
read
in
the
Desert
Sun
that
was
referred
to
by
by
Miss
Middleton
saying
that
typically,
council
meetings
have
been
canceled
in
the
period
between
November
election
and
the
December
swearing-in
of
new
members
avoid
the
need
for
any
extraordinary
actually
to
be
taken
by
a
lame-duck
council.
That
is
absolutely
not
true.
R
I've
sat
here
through
eight
election
cycles
and
we
have
never
not
taken
an
issue
on
that.
Was
that
and
left
it
for
the
for
the
new
council
to
deal
with.
We
dealt
with
them
as
they
came
along.
There
may
be
some
that,
in
the
sequence
that
that
didn't
happen
that
that
so
it
so
went
to
the
other
council,
but
we
have
never
taken
a
vote
to
have
the
other.
R
Have
the
new
incoming
council
vote
on
it,
except
the
one
last
time
I
remember
was
I
think
it
was
verging
on
the
architectural
approval
and
the
specific
plan,
and
that
was
a
vote
and
of
the
council
was
not
it's.
Not.
Policy
was
not
anything
other
than
respect
for
the
the
incoming
council,
an
outgoing
council
I've
said,
and
miss
vote
outlined
as
well
through
since
2016,
through
every
detail
that
has
gone
on
in
the
development
of
the
Virgin
Hotel.
R
R
R
The
the
comment
also
and
I
referenced
the
the
editorial
this
Sunday
and
in
the
Desert
Sun
who's
very
good.
At
giving
not
the
whole
story
is
they
referenced,
48
million
dollars
of
public
money
being
given
to
their
downtown
project?
Well,
people
still
don't
realize-
and
this
has
been
for
years
and
years
in
this
boat
and
I
have
been
hammering
this
home
that
these.
R
This
is
a
project
that
the
city
of
Palm
Springs
now
owns
over
half
the
property
of
what
used
to
be
the
fashion
Plaza
site
we
physically
own
it
it's
in
our
name,
the
investment
in
the
streets
that
you
see
there
now
that
are
open
and
yet
to
be
open.
Those
are
all
city
streets
owned
by
the
citizens
of
the
city
of
Palm,
Springs,
all
the
infrastructure
under
those
streets,
all
city
infrastructure,
the.
R
And
and
the
part
that
1,200
parking
spaces,
that
is
all
part
of
our
ownership
of
the
property
and
owned
owned
by
the
city
of
Palm
Springs,
so
the
neighbors
don't
give
away
here.
This
was
an
investment
and,
as
I
mentioned
before,
it
was
a
partnership,
and
it's
taken
a
partnership
for
us
to
see
and
enjoy
what
we're.
R
Looking
at
now,
the
the
inclusion
of
the
Virgin
Hotel
into
the
development
has
been
has
been
a
phenomenal
idea
and
concept
and
I
am
anxious
to
see
it
see
it
work
to
see
it
happen
and
I
hope
that
I
hope
that
it
does
happen
and
I
am
gonna.
Do
everything
I
can
to
make
it
happen
tonight,
and
so
I
will
be
a
yes
vote
for
this
project
and
thank
you
for
your
indulgence
of
the.
G
You
know
I
find
it
frankly
a
little
bit
disingenuous
when
alkaline
Council
members
say
well
we're
working
to
our
last
day.
Their
last
day
was
really
the
last
meeting.
They
created
another
meeting
to
keep
working
and
to
me
that
says
it
specifically
was
cutting
into
the
business
of
a
new
council
and
very
clearly
to
push
this
agenda
through.
G
G
Our
actions
have
consistently
shown
that
our
goal
was
to
not
unravel
this
development.
We
could
have
cancelled
all
contracts
with
this
project
the
day
the
indictments
came
down
with
John
Westman
and
Meany
and
Steve
punier.
We
didn't
do
that.
In
fact.
We
worked
really
hard
to
finish
the
project.
For
me,
there
would
have
been
nothing
worse
than
to
have
a
half-built
project
sitting
downtown
to
me
that
would
have
even
been
worse
than
the
old-fashioned
plaza
sitting
there.
G
G
G
The
banks
could
have
pulled
out
of
this
project
any
time
they
wanted
to.
Given
the
1090
indictments.
In
fact,
the
developer
and
I
have
had
many
discussions
about
that
and
how
truly
fortunate
he
was
that
that
didn't
happen,
and
probably
because
of
his
good
name,
meaning
the
new
developer
and
because
of
the
good
work
that
he
was
doing
on
this
project.
G
You
know
if
we,
when
this
all
occurred,
when
the
indictment
came
down
and
I
and
and
and
if
we
were
gonna,
lose
the
development
if
it
was
gonna,
fall
out
of
our
hands
or
stop
or
stall.
If
I
had
been
given
the
opportunity
to
save
that
project,
by
giving
up
the
1090
rights
would
I
have
done
it?
Maybe
I
would
have
done
anything
to
finish
those
buildings
to
not
have
missing
teeth
there
on
Palm
Canyon,
because
I
felt
it
was
so
important
for
our
brand
and
our
economy
to
get
that
project
finished
and
also
I.
G
Think
it's
a
great
project.
I
think
the
finished
product
is
something
that
we
should
be
very
proud
of.
It's
well
designed
and
it's
it's
of
great
quality.
It's
the
quality
that
I
always
want
to
see
us
have,
but
we
didn't
have
to.
We
didn't
have
to
make
those
choices
and
when
the
developers
attorney
stands
here
and
tells
us
that
this
project
can't
be
built
with
the
1090
section
in
place,
I
struggle
with
that,
because
this
comes
from
the
same
attorney
and
the
same
developer.
Who
is
consistently
on
the
entire
project
said?
G
If
the
developer
proved
to
us
that
the
hotel
can't
move
forward
with
that
90
section
well,
we
could
rethink
at
that,
but
to
give
up
the
protections
just
because
the
developer
wants
us
to
now
that
doesn't
work
never
worked.
This
doesn't
pass
the
basic
sniff
test
for
me
on
any
level.
My
instincts
are
screaming.
It's
not
the
right
choice.
I'm,
really
saddened
that
my
colleagues,
after
all
this
time
are
falling
victim
once
again
to
a
developer's
demands.
The
tail
is
wagging
the
dog
and
it
you
know.
G
I
can
count
to
three
and
I
and
I
know
that
I'm,
you
know
it's
not
gonna
go
the
way
I'd
like
to
see
it
go.
What
upsets
me
most
is
the
reasons
I
don't
mind
losing.
But
what
upsets
me
the
most
are
the
reasons
that
I'm
gonna
lose
this
vote,
because
it
didn't
have
to
happen
it
didn't
they
didn't.
We
didn't
have
to
give
up
anything
to
have
and
approve
this
project.
Q
I
just
do
not
believe
we're
giving
up
anything.
I.
Don't
believe
that
there
that
there
is
a
true
1090
issue
here,
I,
don't
believe
that
that
exists.
I,
don't
believe
that
that
I
do
believe
that
this
will
not
happen.
If,
unless
there
is
this
taint
removed,
I
I've
got
enough
experience.
I
have
enough.
I
have
I
live
with
a
mortgage
broker
who
has
gone
through
this
whole
issue
with
me
and
explained
to
me
that
nobody
is
gonna
finance
this
with
a
ten
ninety
taint
on
it.
Q
I
am
familiar
with
another
developer
in
this
town,
who
is
building
a
hotel?
Who
also
tells
me
that
this
hotel
will
not
be
built
with
a
ten
ninety
taint
on
it,
and
so
I,
don't
I,
don't
see
why
that's
so
hard
for
everyone
to
understand,
and
so,
but
I
am
NOT
falling
victim
to
anyone.
I
am
doing
this
because
I
believe
this
and
you're
talking
about
John
Westman
you're,
not
talking
about
the
previous,
the
sky
is
falling,
was
John
Westman,
not
michael
barratt,.
R
You
mr.
mayor
for
first
off
the
fact
that
we're
that
mr.
Roberts
mentioned
that
that
we're
down
to
the
last
wire
on
this
thing,
this
thing
was
ready
to
be
voted
on
several
months
ago
and
it
was
the
request
of
some
council
members
that
it
potentially
would
taint
the
vote
on
the
half
cent
sales
tax,
and
so
we
agreed
to
postpone
this
and
it's
because
of
an
additional
information
as
well
that
didn't
really
change
anything,
but
that
this
is
down
to
this
I've
never
had
intended
to
it.
R
None
of
us
ever
intended
just
to
come
down
to
have
to
have
enough
tap
to
have
a
special
meeting,
but
that's
the
way
it's
worked
out.
This
could
have
been
resolved
in
September.
In
my
mind,
it
was
ready
to
go
the
so
I.
Don't
agree
with
that.
I
also
don't
agree
with
the
fact
that
that,
as
Miss
vote
said,
that
we
were
victims
of
a
developer,
I
said
in
every
single
meeting
with
mr.
Westman
and
mr.
Braun
every
single
meeting
since
2010
or
whenever
the
deck
was
we
started.
This
sure
mr.
R
H
Just
want
to
respond
to
two
things:
one
is
yes,
several
council
members
continued
the
matter
from
July,
but
that
wasn't
what
came
back
to
us?
What
was
there
in
July
was
an
extension
that
didn't
waive
1090
claims.
That
is
not
what
came
back
to
us
on
November
15th.
It
is
a
totally
different
agreement
whose
goal,
as
we've
heard,
was
to
waive
the
1090
claims
and
I
will
agree
with
mayor
pro-tem
vote
on.
Why
we
continued
it.
H
Yet
we
didn't
even
have
an
economic
study
on
whether
this
would
be
good
or
bad
for
the
city.
How
would
it
impact
other
hotel
rooms
that
were
paying
a
hundred
percent
of
t
ot?
What's
the
absorption,
all
those
questions
had
never
been
asked
in
any
of
these
hotel
instead
of
agreements
which
I
strongly
defended,
even
though
they
were
done
before
my
time.
At
that
July
meeting
I
thought
that
was
important
and
when
someone
does
a
Public
Records
Act
request,
they'll
see
I've
been
asking
for
that
for
five
months,
I
asked
for
it
several
weeks
ago.
H
I
was
ready
to
vote
on
it
as
soon
as
we
had
it.
So
any
insinuation
otherwise,
which
I
know
have
been
made,
are
simply
not
true,
and
you
can
go
see
my
emails.
Anyone
who
wants
to
ask
from
the
media
or
anyone
else
to
dr.
Reddy,
asking
again
and
again
for
that
study
because
I
want
to
know
this
was
in
the
economic
interest
of
the
city.
H
Secondly,
with
all
due
respect
to
my
colleagues,
I'm
gonna
trust
our
two
expert
lawyers
that
we're
paying
a
lot
of
money.
Thank
you
for
coming
Gary
on
whether
the
may
16th
transfer
waive
1090,
because
they
both
said
it
didn't
and
based
on
my
conversation
with
our
counsel
and
prior
counsel
and
my
own
legal
research.
That's
the
conclusion.
I
came
to
in
many
that
led
me
to
vote
the
way
I
did
then
I
would
never
have
voted
that
way,
otherwise,
so
everyone's
entitled
to
their
opinion.
But
it
comes
to
the
law.
H
I'm
gonna
trust
two
of
the
expert
lawyers
in
the
state
on
this
issue
on
whether
or
not
wait,
10
90.
Now,
if
you're
willing
to
do
that,
that's
the
conversation
we
should
have
had
two
weeks
ago,
right,
I
haven't
mentioned
the
lame
duck
issue.
I
haven't
said
you
two,
you
shouldn't
vote
on
it.
What
I've
said
is
no
one
knew
this.
It
was
never
mentioned.
Subcommittee
member,
didn't
know
it
when
they
were
negotiating.
That
is
my
main
issue.
D
A
R
A
C
Ordinance
number
nineteen,
forty
and
ordinance
of
the
city
of
Palm
Springs
California,
approving
a
development
agreement
with
DTP
sb3
LLC,
a
California
liability
company
related
to
construction
of
the
Virgin
Hotel,
located
on
Block
B,
one
of
the
downtown
Palm
Springs
specific
plan
at
the
northeast
corner
of
Bilardo
Road.
A
museum
way
case
number
five
point
one
two,
oh
four
SP
am
excuse
me
am
I
nd
case
number
three
point:
three
908
maj
and
case
number
five
point,
one
four,
two
seven
da.
H
A
A
D
R
R
R
So
I'm,
ok
with
that,
but
then,
when
you
flip
the
page
over
208
in
the
second
paragraph
down,
it
says
frontage
means
the
boundary
facing
portion
the
boundary
facing
portion,
that's
kind
of
awkward
portion
of
a
parcel
or
property
that
abuts
a
public
street,
and
then
it
goes
on
to
say
or
private
Street
for
parcels
that
do
not
have
frontage
in
accordance
with
the
definition
of
portion
of
parcel
in
question
facing
the
parking
lot,
Plaza
or
pedestrian
mall
shall
be
deemed
frontage.
I
never
intended
for.
For
that
to
be
the
case.
R
H
G
H
G
H
A
A
K
G
Like
to
make
a
motion
that
we
continue,
these
last
two
issues,
I
think
both
of
them
are
gonna,
require
you
know
more
conversation
than
a
few
minutes.
I
know:
I
myself
have
quite
a
few
things
to
talk
about
on
the
cannabis
issue.
I
want
to
suggest
that
we
continue
this
to
our
December
six
meeting,
that
if
the
current
council
wants
to
finish
up
these
issues,
we
can
do
it
prior
to
swearing
in
or
or
we
can
move
it
over.
The
new
council,
whatever
the
preference
is
I
just
think
at
this
hour.
G
H
A
Have
a
question
you
know:
I
know
the
the
outgoing
council,
members
and
the
incoming
council
members
probably
are
hoping
to
do
something
after
that
meeting
to
you
know,
celebrate
leaving
and
coming
and
what
about
no
closed
session?
Could
we
would
it
be
possible
to
start
the
public
meeting
a
little
early,
so
we
can
get
through
that
before
the
regular
there's
no
closed
session
so
could
David
could
be
start.
I
A
H
D
D
That's
a
great
question:
the
city
won't
lose
its
edge,
so
to
speak.
With
respect
to
the
cannabis
issue,
you
have
an
interim
urgency
ordinance.
In
effect,
it's
consistent
with
the
redline,
a
the
first
red
line
in
the
ordinance.
If
you
want
to
make
changes,
that's
great
we'll
do
that
at
the
next
meeting.
If
this
is
the
motion
and
the
council
takes
that
action.
G
G
R
I
Q
G
K
G
Q
A
C
A
R
R
G
H
A
Yeah,
okay,
next,
well,
we
have
public
comments
and
we
had
one
public
comment
that
Chun
illan
I
talked
to
him
and-
and
he
talked
to
Miss,
Karen's
and
she's
gonna-
take
care
of
his
question
for
him.
So
we
have
no
public
comments.
Okay,
city
council,
city
manager
request
an
upcoming
agenda
items,
customers
so.
H
A
while
ago,
I
requested
that
for
December
6
we
put
on
subcommittee
liaison
assignments
and
what
I'd
like
to
suggest
is
that
we
just
limit
it
to
some
items
where
there
are
meetings
between
before
the
13th
that
someone
needs
to
cover,
because
our
two
council
members
are
the
two
people
on
those
they're.
Just
a
few
of
those
and
I
think
the
Subcommittee
on
councilmember
rules
can
look
at
the
list
and
bring
back
a
recommendation.
Q
H
I
can
do
that,
but
there
are
couple
where
we
don't
have
anyone
potentially
or
there
are
things
that
need
to
happen
in
that
week
and
they'll
just
be
I
would
just
say
temporary
assignments
until
the
new
council
can
actually
spend
the
time
to
do
it
right
and
the
other
thing
doctor
ready.
As
we
know,
there
is
a
ballot
measure,
that's
being
signatures
are
being
looked
at
to
see
if
it's
going
to
qualify
for
the
ballot
regarding
vacation
rentals.
H
That
I
think
it
would
be
really
helpful
for
the
public
if
we
did
an
economic
impact
of
what
would
happen
if
that
versus,
if
it
didn't
not
just
the
tea
ot,
but
how
it
impacts
other
other
things,
and
given
the
tight,
the
tight
timeframe
from
when
they're
past
that
you
have
30
days,
then
to
finish
it
and
based
on
when
our
meetings
are,
that
could
give
two
weeks
which
wouldn't
be
sufficient.
So
I'd
like
to
request
that
that
get
started.
I
A
I
A
D
Q
A
A
G
G
G
Looking
into
that,
a
little
bit
deeper,
perhaps
having
the
conversation
around
not
allowing
things
to
be
demolished
until
we
have
a
proposal
for
a
replacement
rather
than
letting
things
be
demolished
and
then
just
sit
there
as
a
hole
in
the
ground,
and
this
is
something
this
is
a
request
that
comes
in
from
the
HS
PV,
but
I'd
love
to
get
that
calendar
in
the
next
few
months.
When
you
can
find
a
voice
board.
H
I
Quick
question:
Flynn
has
the
HS
PB?
Have
they
formally
voted.