Translate

Showing posts with label Ted Weill. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ted Weill. Show all posts

27 October 2016

A fresh take on the Rancho Mirage referenda of April 2016

I recently posted a notice about the Whitewater Bike Trail on the Rancho Mirage News page, and I received a comment from the moderator there, Charlie Barrett. I've known Charlie through his online posts for a while, and I don't expect him to take any progressive opinions in the near future.

His comment read, "Rancho Mirage voters have turned down [Coachella Valley Association of Government] CVAG's plans to bring the CV Link through Rancho Mirage. City Council was considering even rescinding the offer the city made to CVAG whereby the CV Link would come through Rancho Mirage via Ramon Road, which CVAG flatly rejected months ago. So ..it clearly appears that CVAG is not willing to even discuss anything else but what it dictates and wants, while RM city officials offered to discuss the Ramon Road proposal."

I recognized his comment distills the exchanges between Rancho Mirage and the CVAG executive committee, likely in the interest of writing a cogent but short reply. The distillation only slightly misrepresents how the 18-month-long back-and-forth went in finding any route that could be agreeable to the City Council, CVAG, and the ultimate users of CV Link.

With Charlie's comment in mind, I went back to the referenda that the City Council had brought to the citizens in April 2016. Four issues were on the ballot:
  • Measure 1, binding: Shall the City of Rancho Mirage require that any future amendment or repeal of Ordinance No. 1099, which currently prohibits Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (not including golf carts) on or adjacent to certain designated streets including Highway 111, Bob Hope Drive; Country Club Drive; Da Vall Drive; Dinah Shore Drive; Frank Sinatra Drive; Gerald Ford Drive; Magnesia Falls Drive; Monterey Avenue; Plumley Road, and others, be subject to prior voter approval?
  • Measure 2, advisory: Do you approve of the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (CVAG) spending One Hundred Million Dollars ($100,000,000) or more to construct the CV Link, plus, according to the March 2015 Master Plan, an additional $1.6 million annually to operate and maintain the CV Link pathway, which CVAG proposes to extend through Rancho Mirage business and residential districts?
  • Measure 3, advisory: If CV Link were to be constructed, would you approve the City Council committing Rancho Mirage to pay for CV Link's annual operations and maintenance expenses, which on April 6, 2015, CVAG projected Rancho Mirage's share to be between $110,300 and $251,800 per annum as of the 9th year of operations, and continuing to increase annually at the rate of inflation? 
  • Measure 4, advisory: Because in 2002 County voters approved Measure A, which is a ½ cent increase in our sales tax to be used to repair dilapidated and crumbling roads and highways in the Coachella Valley, should CVAG be allowed to divert up to $20 million dollars ($20,000,000) from this Measure A fund, to pay for the construction of the Neighborhood Electric Vehicles portion of the CV Link?

In actions separate from the referenda, Rancho Mirage city council did in fact rescind all routes offered through the city. The council specifically stated that Highway 111, Gerald Ford, Bob Hope, Frank Sinatra, Butler-Abrams Trail, and—later, as a punitive step against CVAG—Ramon Road could not be used for CV Link routing. —Strangely, the city commission never excepted a CV Link route along Dinah Shore Drive!— Some day the residents may get fed up with the walkers, runners, cyclists, and electric vehicles using their existing streets instead of a dedicated corridor through the town.

However and contrary to popular opinion, the Rancho Mirage ballot measures were poorly written, and they could be interpreted to encourage building CV Link, albeit with confusing restrictions. (Blame then-mayor Dana Hobart and city attorney Steve Quintanilla for this.) As the April ballot issues were written, the city had the following restrictions on CV Link:

  • Measure 1 (approved by 75%): No electric vehicles are allowed on Ramon, Dinah Shore, Gerald Ford, Frank Sinatra, Country Club, Highway 111, Plumley, Da Vall, Bob Hope, Magnesia Falls, or Monterey. However, electric vehicles are allowed on any other streets—and on any other routing of CV Link through the city.
    Further, any changes to this list must be agreed to in a city election.
  • Measure 2 (79% of the vote): This "advisory referendum" likely has no force on actions by the Coachella Valley Association of  Governments, in which Rancho Mirage has one voting member of 11. However, by this advisory, CVAG is allowed to spend less than $100 million for construction of CV Link and less than $1.6 million annually for maintenance.
    As CV Link is to be built as a joint effort of Riverside County and the ten cities of CVAG, interpretation of this advisory Measure 2 is, indeed, cloudy. Perhaps the closest approximation would be that construction and maintenance in Rancho Mirage would be limited to $10 million ($100/10 million) and $160 thousand ($1.6/10 million), respectively.
  • Measure 3 (78% of the vote): This "advisory referendum" likely has no force, although it may guide the city council in enacting local ordinances. However, this advisory allows Rancho Mirage to maintain CV Link with annual amount either less than $110,300 or more than $251,800 each year. Combined with Measure 2, the maintenance funds apparently would be limited to less than $110K.
  • Measure 4 (81% of the vote): This "advisory referendum" prohibits using $20 million from Measure A funds for building the part of CV Link that serves NEVs (electric vehicles). Because of the restrictive language, it appears that other funding sources would be allowed, and apparently using Measure A funds for the non-NEV routing would also be allowed.
So much for the legal acumen of the former mayor, the city attorney, and the current city council.

09 September 2016

Ted Weill

Council Statements Regarding CV Link

In citing text from the meeting minutes, others' comment is not often included, and no ellipses are provided.

7 May 2015

The City Council met in regular session.
  • "12. Consideration of Prohibition of the Route of CV Link Over Any Portion of Highway 111 or Bob Hope Drive, in the City of Rancho Mirage
  • "City Manager Randal Bynder stated that the City of Rancho Mirage, led by Mayor Hobart and Councilmember Kite ( CV Link Subcommittee), with the support of key staff members including Finance Director Isaiah Hagerman and Public Works Director Bruce Harry, have raised significant questions regarding the operation and maintenance ( 0&M) scheme of the CV Link project. Mr. Bynder added that the 0&M issue was addressed in detail in Mayor Hobart' s memo to the CVAG Executive Committee on April 27, 2015. The questions of long- term 0&M and how it will be funded and who will pay for it are ongoing and have not been resolved as far as the City of Rancho Mirage is concerned. Mr. Bynder noted that, if not for the important objections raised by Mayor Pro Tem Ted Weill at his CVAG Transportation Subcommittee on May 4, 2015, the Master Plan and the maintenance scheme may have been approved and potentially forced upon the City. Mr. Bynder further commented that 0&M is one important issue that must be resolved as part of the CV Link; however, the other issue is the physical location of the CV Link. 
  • Public Comment
  • "Mayor Hobart quoted CVAG` s projected 0&M expense of 1. 6 million dollars in the first year of full operation. He noted that the recommended method of funding 0&M was presented at a CVAG Transportation Committee meeting chaired by Mayor Pro Tem Weill, for final approval without it ever having been discussed except on March 30th when the Executive Director of CVAG met with the Rancho Mirage CV Link Subcommittee. Mayor Hobart stated that using the CVAG proposed formula, the City of Rancho Mirage Finance Director calculated that in year nine, Rancho Mirage would pay $ 313, 000 of TOT revenue. Further, it would fall upon five Coachella Valley cities - La Quinta, Indian Wells, Palm Desert, Rancho Mirage and Palm Springs - to pay the majority of the 0&M expense into the future.
  • "Mayor Pro Tem Weill commented that during the CVAG meetings he has attended, tranquil terms such as " path" and " trail" are frequently used; however, what is being proposed is not peaceful but a concrete, 30 foot wide street to accommodate electric vehicles, golf carts, runners, joggers, bikers, etc. He noted that this is secondary to how the CV Link would be paid for and pledged that the City Council cannot, and will not, obligate Rancho Mirage residents to a cost that is unknown now and into the future.
  • "MOVED/ SECONDED BY HOBART/ KITE TO PROHIBIT THE ROUTE OF THE CV LINK TO EXTEND OVER ANY PORTION OF HIGHWAY 111 OR BOB HOPE DRIVE WITHIN THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE. MOTION CARRIED 5/ 0."

COMMMENTARY

4 June 2015

The City Council met in regular session.
  • "Mayor Hobart provided an update regarding the Coachella Valley Association of Governments (" CVAG") Executive Committee meeting held on June 1, 2015.
  • "Mayor Hobart stated that he will continue to provide CV Link updates to the City Council and assured residents that Rancho Mirage will not sign -off on any route or funding proposals that are not acceptable to the City.
  • "Mayor Pro Tem Weill added that the CVAG Executive Committee voted in favor by a 6/ 4 vote to have a collective meeting of city council members, city managers and finance directors to receive input from each city about this issue. He also noted that of the two individuals at the CVAG meeting who represented other similar trails in California, neither project allowed electric vehicles on their trails."

COMMMENTARY

3 September 2015

The City Council met in regular session.
  • "8. CV Link Update.
  • "Mayor Pro Tem Weill commented that it would be  inappropriate to start construction at this point. This appears to be an attempt to demonstration that the project is far along and, therefore, should move forward. 
  • "Mayor Hobart stated that the  position of Rancho Mirage remains that nothing should be built until the final 0&M cost for the next 100 years is known. 
  • "Public Comment - None."

COMMMENTARY

15 October 2015

The City Council met in regular session.
  • "12. Consideration of Resolutions, Ordinance and Ballot Measures to Protect the City of Rancho Mirage's Local Control of its Streets and Traffic and to Allow Rancho Mirage Residents to Voice their Opinions on Substantive Issues Pertaining to CVAG's Proposed CV Link Project and it's Cost to the Taxpayers.
  1. "A. Adopt Resolution No. 2015- 107, that: ( a) prohibits neighborhood electric vehicles in certain areas and on certain streets within the jurisdiction of the City of Rancho Mirage; ( b) prohibits a Neighborhood Electric Vehicle Plan from including any area within the iurisdiction of the City of Rancho Mirage unless the area is approved first by an ordinance of the City of Rancho Mirage; and ( c) prohibits any portion of CV Link or similar pathway from including any area within the jurisdiction of the City of Rancho Mirage:
  2. "B. Introduce Ordinance No. 1099, 1st Reading, that: ( a) prohibits neighborhood electric vehicles in certain areas and on certain streets within the iurisdiction of the City of Rancho Mirage: ( b) prohibits a Neiqhborhood Electric Vehicle Plan from including any area within the
  3. iurisdiction of the City of Rancho Mirage unless the area is approved first by an ordinance of the City of Rancho Mirage; and ( c) prohibits any portion of CV Link or similar pathway from including any area within the jurisdiction of the City of Rancho Mirage:
  4. "C. Adopt Resolution No. 2015- 108, that calls and notices the holding of an advisory election on the same date of the City's General Municipal Election, set for April 12, 2016, for the purpose of submitting to the City's qualified voters five advisory measures concerning the proposed CV Link proiect, which is a paved pathway proposed by the Coachella Valley Association of Governments ( CVAG) that will be approximately 50 miles long, accommodate pedestrians, bicycles and neighborhood vehicles that can travel up to 25 miles per hour;
  5. "D. Adopt Resolution No. 2015- 109, placing a measure on the ballot of the City's General Municipal Election asking the voters: " Shall the voters of Rancho Mirage require that any amendment or repeal of Ordinance No. 1099 that prohibits Neighborhood Electric Vehicles ( NEVs) in certain areas and on certain streets within the iurisdiction of the City of Rancho Mirage require prior voter approval?"; and
  6. "E. Designate the Mayor or his designee or designees on the Rancho Mirage City Council to prepare the Arguments in " Favor" of Measure 6 and the Arguments " Against Approval" of Advisory Measures 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, on behalf of the Rancho Mirage City Council.
  • "Mayor Hobart noted slight language modifications made to the proposed ordinance and resolutions following agenda distribution.
  • "Mayor Hobart suggested revising the list of prohibited streets included in Items A and B by striking Ramon Road and adding Magnesia Falls Drive and Joshua Road.
  • "A discussion ensued regarding the use of Ramon Road.
  • "MOVED/SECONDED BY HOBART/WEILL TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2015- 107, PROHIBITING LOW -SPEED VEHICLES AND NEIGHBORHOOD ELECTRIC VEHICLES IN CERTAIN AREAS AND ON CERTAIN STREETS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE, AND REVISING THE LIST OF PROHIBITED STREETS BY STRIKING RAMON ROAD AND ADDING MAGNESIA FALLS DRIVE AND JOSHUA ROAD. MOTION CARRIED 5/0.
  • "MOVED/SECONDED BY HOBART/WEILL TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NO. 1099, 1ST READING, PROHIBITING LOW -SPEED VEHICLES AND NEIGHBORHOOD ELECTRIC VEHICLES IN CERTAIN AREAS AND ON CERTAIN STREETS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE, AND REVISING THE LIST OF PROHIBITED STREETS BY STRIKING RAMON ROAD AND ADDING MAGNESIA FALLS DRIVE AND JOSHUA ROAD. MOTION CARRIED 5/ 0.
  • "MOVED/SECONDED BY HOBART/SMOTRICH TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2015- 108, CALLING AND NOTICING THE HOLDING OF AN ADVISORY ELECTION ON THE SAME DATE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING THE VOTERS OF RANCHO MIRAGE TO VOICE THEIR OPINIONS ON CERTAIN SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES PERTAINING TO CV LINK, INCLUDING STATED LANGUAGE MODIFICATIONS AND THE ADDITION OF BUTLER ABRAMS TRAIL TO ADVISORY MEASURE 5. MOTION CARRIED 5/ 0.
  • "MOVED/SECONDED BY HOBART/TOWNSEND TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2015-109, PLACING A MEASURE ON THE BALLOT OF THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION ASKING THE VOTERS: " SHALL THE VOTERS OF RANCHO MIRAGE REQUIRE THAT ANY AMENDMENT OR REPEAL OF ORDINANCE NO. 1099 THAT PROHIBITS NEIGHBORHOOD ELECTRIC VEHICLES (NEVs) IN CERTAIN AREAS AND ON CERTAIN STREETS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO MIRAGE REQUIRE PRIOR VOTER APPROVAL?" MOTION CARRIED 5/ 0.
  • "MOVED/SECONDED BY HOBART/SMOTRICH TO DESIGNATE THE MAYOR OR HIS DESIGNEE OR DESIGNEES ON THE RANCHO MIRAGE CITY COUNCIL TO PREPARE THE ARGUMENTS IN " FAVOR" OF MEASURE 6 AND THE ARGUMENTS " AGAINST APPROVAL" OF ADVISORY MEASURES 1, 2, 3, 4 AND 5, ON BEHALF OF THE RANCHO MIRAGE CITY COUNCIL. MOTION CARRIED 5/ 0."

COMMMENTARY