[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6893007,"mediaKeyId","2965135-615ad6bec16f8cdcc8b9f7c8be8593cd","parentId",2965135,"title","Palm Springs delays South Palm Canyon bridge decision after heated public comment, approves short-term contract extensions","audioSeconds",2455,"startMs",3558000,"endMs",6013000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2965135-615ad6bec16f8cdcc8b9f7c8be8593cd&start=3558&end=6013","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2965135-615ad6bec16f8cdcc8b9f7c8be8593cd/thumbnail_3558000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6893007/Palm-Springs/Riverside-County/California/Palm-Springs-delays-South-Palm-Canyon-bridge-decision-after-heated-public-comment-approves-short-term-contract-extensions","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6893007-e157d814ade60a19103c5f2608cdc149/orig.mp4?Expires=1771154213&Signature=gTsYA93oWP-ZBq-lgS3EZEc3Gfw58Ru8Uv2qidvXalNlkMtZw3mpsuQJhvkxigjXa18K5ZNVM~ewZxlysj9y645gEcUiziEPt50dZGaQOfIZIp~fLUnmRQRsrZaZmLY7Xzd6iG4QsO06ODPXfKyufxN485ahWncGQu1sDYGpvIMVV01Zf5Ly1zvIMuHsjJMJvKTCEZ7m-qEoK~H2qRay6ag1abCqWMhscGUqw7k4~GCAp2TeD92vXcsEaAtg1ZSUv~TStUh69HmApDkIp9gZHUrQfdmvKBLWRxGLIaS7oUiLhpgGy9m1-BWu0vs2fgaNUuRJ~5~dENDdKwLlJSdXiA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Palm Springs CA","date","2025-04-11T21:32:11.227Z","article","Council members on April 9 postponed a final decision on the proposed South Palm Canyon Drive low-water crossing bridge — the federally funded project meant to convey major storm flows under South Palm Canyon Drive — and asked staff to hold at least one in-person and one virtual community meeting before returning in about 60 days.

The move followed more than an hour of public testimony from residents and conservation groups urging more environmental review and alternatives analysis, and a staff presentation that said the project is already cleared by a 2012 mitigated negative declaration and has a federal Highway Bridge Program commitment of about $4.45 million. City staff and several speakers also said the project addresses a persistent safety risk: in a 100-year storm event the alluvial fan above the crossing can generate flows staff estimated at up to 3,000 cubic feet per second (roughly 1.3 million gallons per minute), which can isolate neighborhoods and impede emergency response.

Council delayed the vote to give neighbors and conservation groups time to review details and to let staff produce additional technical and funding information. At the same meeting the council did authorize two time-sensitive staff actions: (1) a short extension of temporary construction easements that are set to expire this summer and (2) an increase in consultant authorization to allow outreach and technical work while the item is paused.

Why it matters: The project was designed after decades of study and once moved into construction would use federal bridge funds that staff warned could be lost if the city does not start construction-related billing by late 2026. Opponents told council the project’s footprint would damage restored habitat used by peninsular bighorn sheep and other wildlife and argued the city should prepare a new environmental review that accounts for changed circumstances — including conservation purchases and restoration activities in the canyon since 2012.

What council heard and asked
Residents from neighborhoods served by South Palm Canyon Drive repeatedly described past high-water events and warned that multi-day construction would be disruptive; others said flooding has been rare and that the bridge would be unnecessary and harmful to habitat. Representatives of conservation organizations including the Center for Biological Diversity and the local land trust urged the council to reject or delay the project until a new environmental review is completed, saying recent restoration has increased use of the site by peninsular bighorn sheep and other sensitive species.

City Engineer Joel Montalvo summarized the project history: drainage studies dating to the early 2000s, a 2012 environmental clearance (mitigated negative declaration) and prior design work completed in 2016. He said the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) awarded a bridge funding commitment, but that FHWA and Caltrans rules now focus federal funding on structurally deficient bridges rather than low-water crossings; those facts, he said, make the current federal funding unusual and potentially hard to replace if not used. Montalvo estimated total project cost at roughly $9.9–$10 million, with about $1.0–$1.8 million of that attributable to added rock-slope protection and aesthetic measures that are not fully eligible for federal reimbursement. He said the construction schedule in current plans is roughly 50 weeks and that temporary construction easements will need to be extended to preserve the ability to build.

Council members pressed staff on the age of the environmental document (2012), the degree to which restored habitat and new wildlife observations should trigger additional review under CEQA, the specifics of federal funding and whether Caltrans would provide additional money if bid prices exceed estimates. City legal counsel highlighted the CEQA standard: a prior environmental document must be revisited if there are substantial changes to the project or new information that was not known at the time of the original clearance (CEQA Guidelines §15162 was cited by speakers). Staff said the 2012 mitigated negative declaration had been the baseline but acknowledged commenters’ concerns and that council could direct a new review.

Formal actions taken (at the meeting)
- Postponed decision on item 3B (South Palm Canyon low-water crossing bridge replacement) for about 60 days and directed staff to hold neighborhood outreach (at least one in‑person and one virtual meeting) and to report back on funding status and environmental-review questions. Motion made and seconded; outcome: postponed for 60 days. (Moved by Mayor Pro Tem; seconded by Mayor Bernstein.)
- Approved time-sensitive extensions and consultant funding tied to the project’s temporary construction easements (item 1K): council approved staff’s request to extend the easements and increased the professional-services authorization to provide funds for outreach/technical work while the item is paused; staff and council settled on an incremental increase (final approved authorization amount noted in staff summary: approximately $125,000 for the contract amendment). Motion carried.

Directions to staff and next steps
Staff was directed to: (a) schedule and advertise at least one in‑person and one virtual neighborhood meeting focused on residents directly affected by the crossing and any trail/recreation closures; (b) document any new biological observations and hydrologic/geomorphic changes since 2012 and report whether CEQA Guidelines §15162 is triggered; (c) update the council on funding scenarios and contingencies if bids exceed the current federal grant; and (d) extend or re-negotiate the temporary construction easements that will expire in mid-summer to preserve the ability to bid if council ultimately approves the project. The council asked staff to return in roughly 60 days with technical, fiscal and outreach summaries.

Clarifying details from the record
- Federal Highway Bridge Program commitment: approximately $4.45 million (FHWA grant). (Source: Joel Montalvo, City Engineer.)
- City drainage fund collected for this area (Ordinance 1681 fee receipts): roughly $2.0 million available. (Source: Joel Montalvo.)
- Current staff estimate of total project cost: $9.9–$10.0 million; additional rock/landscape protection not eligible for FHWA funds estimated at $1.0–$1.8 million. (Source: staff presentation.)
- Estimated construction duration in current plans: circa 50 weeks. (Source: staff presentation.)
- Deadline risk: staff said the FHWA/Caltrans commitment includes milestones; lack of project start or billing by 2026 would jeopardize reimbursement and could result in funds being withdrawn. (Source: staff remarks.)
- CEQA baseline: staff relied on a 2012 mitigated negative declaration; outside counsel and commenters cited CEQA Guidelines §15162 as the legal standard for determining whether new information requires further environmental review. (Source: Lisa Belenke, Center for Biological Diversity; city attorney.)

Community relevance
Geographies: South Palm Canyon Drive; Bogart Trail; Oswalt Canyon; adjacent neighborhoods (Andreas Palms / Bogart Trail area). Funding sources discussed: FHWA Highway Bridge Program, city drainage fees (Ordinance 1681); potential Measure A/other local sources to fill gaps. Impact groups: residents of the affected neighborhoods (approx. 700 homes cited during public comment); recreationists using nearby trails; endangered peninsular bighorn sheep and other wildlife documented by local restoration groups.

Sources and provenance
- Topic introduction (public comment): Mark Hollingsworth, resident, opening public comment opposing the bridge near Oswalt Canyon; excerpt from transcript block starting 1177.455: \"My name is Mark Hollingsworth ... oppose the proposed bridge on South Palm Canyon near Oswalt Canyon.\" (block_id: \"transcript_1177\", local_start:0, local_end:241, evidence_excerpt: \"My name is Mark Hollingsworth... oppose the proposed bridge on South Palm Canyon near Oswalt Canyon.\")
- Topic finish (council action to postpone): Excerpt from transcript block starting 11860.77 where Council agreed to postpone 3B for 60 days and require community meetings; (block_id: \"transcript_11860\", local_start:0, local_end:220, evidence_excerpt: \"So I would suggest ... we table it ... continue the item to 60 days with community meetings ...\")

speakers:[{\"name\":\"Joel Montalvo\",\"role_title\":\"City Engineer\",\"affiliation_type\":\"government\",\"affiliation_name\":\"City of Palm Springs\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"01:22:14\",\"transcript_line_range\":[7834,7902]}},{\"name\":\"Mark Hollingsworth\",\"role_title\":\"Resident\",\"affiliation_type\":\"citizen\",\"affiliation_name\":\"Andreas Palms/Bogart Trail\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"00:19:37\",\"transcript_line_range\":[1177,1196]}},{\"name\":\"Jackie Speer\",\"role_title\":\"Resident (letter read)\",\"affiliation_type\":\"citizen\",\"affiliation_name\":\"Andreas Palms/Bogart Trail\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"00:20:35\",\"transcript_line_range\":[1235,1270]}},{\"name\":\"Zainab Graves\",\"role_title\":\"Representative\",\"affiliation_type\":\"nonprofit\",\"affiliation_name\":\"Center for Biological Diversity\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"00:38:57\",\"transcript_line_range\":[2337,2374]}},{\"name\":\"Lisa Belenke\",\"role_title\":\"Attorney\",\"affiliation_type\":\"nonprofit\",\"affiliation_name\":\"Center for Biological Diversity\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"00:48:10\",\"transcript_line_range\":[2896,2955]}},{\"name\":\"Karen Miller\",\"role_title\":\"Resident\",\"affiliation_type\":\"citizen\",\"affiliation_name\":\"Andreas Palms\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"00:34:59\",\"transcript_line_range\":[2099,2122]}},{\"name\":\"Bill Bliss\",\"role_title\":\"Resident\",\"affiliation_type\":\"citizen\",\"affiliation_name\":\"Bogart Trail area\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"00:37:17\",\"transcript_line_range\":[2237,2258]}},{\"name\":\"Sherry Diamond\",\"role_title\":\"Resident\",\"affiliation_type\":\"citizen\",\"affiliation_name\":\"Ozwood Land Trust supporter\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"00:43:10\",\"transcript_line_range\":[2552,2562]}},{\"name\":\"Ed Doobie\",\"role_title\":\"Resident\",\"affiliation_type\":\"citizen\",\"affiliation_name\":\"Canyon Estates HOA\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"00:45:38\",\"transcript_line_range\":[2738,2760]}},{\"name\":\"Steven Tonnell\",\"role_title\":\"Resident/Hiker\",\"affiliation_type\":\"citizen\",\"affiliation_name\":\"South Canyon resident\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"00:31:07\",\"transcript_line_range\":[1867,1888]}},{\"name\":\"Jeff Ballinger\",\"role_title\":\"City Attorney\",\"affiliation_type\":\"government\",\"affiliation_name\":\"City of Palm Springs\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"00:18:21\",\"transcript_line_range\":[1101,1111]}},{\"name\":\"Mayor Bernstein\",\"role_title\":\"Mayor\",\"affiliation_type\":\"government\",\"affiliation_name\":\"City of Palm Springs\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"00:00:00\",\"transcript_line_range\":[793,833]}},{\"name\":\"Councilmember David Reddy\",\"role_title\":\"Councilmember\",\"affiliation_type\":\"government\",\"affiliation_name\":\"City of Palm Springs\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"00:13:00\",\"transcript_line_range\":[3671,3707]}},{\"name\":\"Councilmember Grace Garner\",\"role_title\":\"Councilmember\",\"affiliation_type\":\"government\",\"affiliation_name\":\"City of Palm Springs\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"00:13:27\",\"transcript_line_range\":[4419,4445]}}],\"authorities\":[{\"type\":\"regulation\",\"name\":\"CEQA - Mitigated Negative Declaration (2012)\",\"citation\":\"City of Palm Springs staff referenced MND approved 2012; CEQA Guidelines §15162 referenced\",\"referenced_by\":[\"3B staff report\",\"public comment\",\"legal counsel\"]},{\"type\":\"grant\",\"name\":\"Federal Highway Administration - Highway Bridge Program (FHWA)\",\"citation\":\"FHWA bridge funds committed ~$4,450,000\",\"referenced_by\":[\"3B staff report\"]},{\"type\":\"ordinance\",\"name\":\"Palm Springs Ordinance No. 1681 (2006)\",\"citation\":\"Ordinance establishing drainage fee for redevelopment area\",\"referenced_by\":[\"3B staff report\"]}],\"actions\":[{\"kind\":\"other\",\"identifiers\":{\"agenda_item_id\":\"3B\"},\"motion\":\"Postpone consideration of Item 3B (South Palm Canyon Drive low-water crossing bridge replacement) for approximately 60 days and require at least one in-person and one virtual community meeting focused on impacted neighborhoods; staff to return with updated environmental-review analysis and funding status.\",\"mover\":\"Mayor Pro Tem\",\"second\":\"Mayor Bernstein\",\"vote_record\":[],\"tally\":{},\"legal_threshold\":{\"met\":null,\"notes\":\"No roll-call tally supplied in transcript for the postponement; council consensus recorded.\"},\"effective_dates\":{},\"outcome\":\"postponed\",\"notes\":\"Direction to staff to extend temporary construction easements as needed; return with CEQA analysis, funding details, and community outreach report.\",\"amendments\":[],\"programs\":[],\"dependencies\":[\"item_1K_temporary_construction_easements\",\"federal_grant_timing\"]},{\"kind\":\"other\",\"identifiers\":{\"agenda_item_id\":\"1K\"},\"motion\":\"Authorize extension of temporary construction easements for the South Palm Canyon Drive project and amend the professional services agreement to add funding to support community outreach and technical analysis while item 3B is paused (final amendment level reflected as approx. $125,000).\",\"mover\":null,\"second\":null,\"vote_record\":[],\"tally\":{},\"legal_threshold\":{\"met\":null,\"notes\":\"Motion carried; specific roll-call not recorded in transcript excerpt.\"},\"effective_dates\":{},\"outcome\":\"approved\",\"notes\":\"Council approved extension and additional consultant authorization to support outreach and follow-up technical work while 3B is postponed.\",\"amendments\":[\"increase PSA by ~ $100,000 (final rounded approval ~ $125,000)\"],\"programs\":[],\"dependencies\":[],\"implementation\":{}}],\"discussion_decision\":{\"discussion_points\":[\"Project history and prior environmental clearance (2012 MND)\",\"Federal Highway Bridge Program funding and timelines for reimbursement\",\"Wildlife and habitat impacts, especially peninsular bighorn sheep and restored vegetation\",\"Technical feasibility of alternatives presented in 2019/2020 and why some were found infeasible\",\"Construction duration and temporary impacts to trails and access\",\"Community concern about noise, dust, and duration of construction\"],\"directions\":[\"Hold at least one in-person and one virtual community meeting focused on affected neighborhoods\",\"Extend temporary construction easements and authorize consultant funds for outreach and technical analysis\",\"Return to council in roughly 60 days with updated CEQA analysis and funding options (including whether Caltrans can increase reimbursement if bids exceed estimates)\"],\"decisions\":[\"Postpone final project approval for ~60 days and authorize staff to extend easements and hire consultants for outreach and evaluation\"]},\"clarifying_details\":[{\"category\":\"federal_grant\",\"detail\":\"FHWA Highway Bridge Program commitment\",\"value\":4450000,\"units\":\"USD\",\"approximate\":true,\"source_speaker\":\"Joel Montalvo\"},{\"category\":\"city_funds\",\"detail\":\"drainage project fee receipts available for this project\",\"value\":2000000,\"units\":\"USD\",\"approximate\":true,\"source_speaker\":\"Joel Montalvo\"},{\"category\":\"project_estimate\",\"detail\":\"current staff estimate for construction, includes rock-slope protection\",\"value\":10000000,\"units\":\"USD\",\"approximate\":true,\"source_speaker\":\"Joel Montalvo\"},{\"category\":\"rock_protection_addition\",\"detail\":\"added rock/landscape work not fully eligible for federal reimbursement\",\"value\":\"1,000,000 - 1,800,000\",\"units\":\"USD\",\"approximate\":true,\"source_speaker\":\"Joel Montalvo\"},{\"category\":\"construction_duration\",\"detail\":\"planned construction schedule under current documents\",\"value\":50,\"units\":\"weeks\",\"approximate\":true,\"source_speaker\":\"Joel Montalvo\"},{\"category\":\"grant_deadline\",\"detail\":\"Caltrans/FHWA milestones require activity or billing by late 2026 to avoid loss of reimbursement\",\"value\":\"Dec 2026\",\"units\":\"date\",\"approximate\":false,\"source_speaker\":\"Joel Montalvo\"}],\"proper_names\":[{\"name\":\"Palm Springs\",\"type\":\"location\"},{\"name\":\"South Palm Canyon Drive\",\"type\":\"location\"},{\"name\":\"Bogart Trail\",\"type\":\"location\"},{\"name\":\"Oswalt Canyon\",\"type\":\"location\"},{\"name\":\"Ozwood Land Trust\",\"type\":\"organization\"},{\"name\":\"Federal Highway Administration\",\"type\":\"agency\"},{\"name\":\"Caltrans\",\"type\":\"agency\"}],\"community_relevance\":{\"geographies\":[\"South Palm Canyon Drive\",\"Bogart Trail\",\"Oswalt Canyon\",\"Andreas Palms neighborhood\"],\"funding_sources\":[\"Federal Highway Bridge Program (FHWA)\",\"City drainage fee fund (Ordinance 1681)\",\"Potential Measure A/local funds\"],\"impact_groups\":[\"Residents of affected neighborhoods (~700 homes cited)\",\"Emergency responders\",\"Hikers and trail users\",\"Endangered peninsular bighorn sheep and other wildlife\"]},\"meeting_context\":{\"engagement_level\":{\"speakers_count\":30,\"duration_minutes\":120,\"items_count\":2},\"implementation_risk\":\"high\",\"history\":[{\"date\":\"2012-01-01\",\"note\":\"Mitigated negative declaration approved (2012)\"},{\"date\":\"2016-01-01\",\"note\":\"Design 100% complete; ready to construct\"},{\"date\":\"2017-02-14\",\"note\":\"Litigation delayed project\"}]},\"searchable_tags\":[\"south-palm-canyon\",\"low-water-crossing\",\"bridge\",\"CEQA\",\"FHWA\",\"Oswalt-Canyon\"],\"provenance\":{\"transcript_segments\":[{\"block_id\":\"transcript_1177\",\"local_start\":0,\"local_end\":241,\"evidence_excerpt\":\"My name is Mark Hollingsworth. I live at 3189 Cody Court. I'm here to plead with you to go against the bridge that is being built on the or planned to be built on South Palm Canyon.\",\"reason_code\":\"topicintro\"},{\"block_id\":\"transcript_11860\",\"local_start\":0,\"local_end\":220,\"evidence_excerpt\":\"So I would suggest that we do this for 60 days and have community meetings. ... The motion to postpone item 3B for 60 days and return with community outreach and updated environmental/funding information.\",\"reason_code\":\"topicfinish\"}]},\"salience\":{\"overall\":0.87,\"overall_justification\":\"Large public turnout, multiple environmental and public-safety stakes, federal grant at risk\",\"impact_scope\":\"local\",\"impact_scope_justification\":\"Project affects a specific Palm Springs neighborhood and city infrastructure\",\"attention_level\":\"high\",\"attention_level_justification\":\"Council postponed a major federally-funded infrastructure project after extensive public comment\",\"novelty\":0.45,\"novelty_justification\":\"Project was long-running but new conservation/restoration evidence has emerged\",\"timeliness_urgency\":0.80,\"timeliness_urgency_justification\":\"Deadlines tied to federal funding and expiring easements create time pressure\",\"legal_significance\":0.70,\"legal_significance_justification\":\"CEQA compliance questions and potential loss of federal funds\",\"budgetary_significance\":0.65,\"budgetary_significance_justification\":\"Potential multi-million-dollar local match if federal dollars are lost\",\"public_safety_risk\":0.77,\"public_safety_risk_justification\":\"Flooding can isolate hundreds of homes and impede emergency response\",\"environmental_impact\":0.72,\"environmental_impact_justification\":\"Project footprint affects restored low-elevation alluvial fan habitat used by sensitive species\",\"affected_population_estimate\":1500,\"affected_population_estimate_justification\":\"Council and speakers cited approx. 700 homes (~1,500 residents) served by the road\",\"affected_population_confidence\":0.60,\"budget_total_usd\":10000000,\"budget_total_usd_justification\":\"Staff estimate of project construction costs\",\"decision_deadline\":\"2026-12-31\",\"decision_deadline_justification\":\"Caltrans/FHWA milestone noted by staff\",\"policy_stage\":\"committee\",\"policy_stage_justification\":\"Engineering and planning work complete; council paused for further review\",\"follow_up_priority\":1,\"follow_up_priority_justification\":\"High urgency to protect federal funding and respond to community concerns\",\"fact_check_risk\":0.20,\"fact_check_risk_justification\":\"Most factual claims are documented in staff reports, though some names/ spellings in public comment vary\",\"uncertainty\":0.65,\"uncertainty_justification\":\"Cost estimate and federal funding continuity depend on bids and Caltrans action\",\"source_diversity\":0.80,\"source_diversity_justification\":\"Speakers included multiple residents, conservation organizations, staff and legal counsel\",\"stakeholder_balance\":0.60,\"stakeholder_balance_justification\":\"Both public safety advocates and conservation groups are strongly represented\"}},{","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City Council Meeting | April 9th, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","City council postponed voting on the South Palm Canyon Drive low-water crossing bridge project for 60 days after hours of public comment and council questions about environmental review, wildlife impacts and funding. Council approved temporary construction-easement extensions and added consultant funds to allow staff to pursue community outreach in","taxTitle","Palm Springs, Riverside County, California","taxId",55405,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6892994,"Palm Springs holds public hearing on comprehensive fee update; council asks staff for revenue breakdowns and more community review",754,16620000,17374000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2965135-615ad6bec16f8cdcc8b9f7c8be8593cd&start=16620&end=17374","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2965135-615ad6bec16f8cdcc8b9f7c8be8593cd/thumbnail_16620000.jpg","/articles/6892994/Palm-Springs/Riverside-County/California/Palm-Springs-holds-public-hearing-on-comprehensive-fee-update-council-asks-staff-for-revenue-breakdowns-and-more-community-review","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6892994-25902da22cd825031dd94511f228e270/orig.mp4?Expires=1771154213&Signature=khHQJZWPtvV2bi8pap0RIHnGyYpIB2ow~EZ1lMR6IwB66F-P8LZ4PNq6V6tRI2nH0xK5mUKA56m4Q87442mMzyWc-UVyHRdf23UfYmtWyQxAJIX~WT~o3RT26g2oTc5KBJnntUnwtYTQhsYzNn2sDOtQUZgllQ8cBSJJ39b9kKu47XFsWCVjBMxVK7dhvzq5tCNHgDg7NCkHSo4fHz65usPc2b8e4KVvjTeworTUD54yzOC3FbJSjFvgrsATQLlBMnA7oPgqfq1rmF4Ad38tfA6igMC92MONyZm4y2IbXlMRnioLpVimjWGTKDtLS-nrx-WjJFRdGj3QWDVgnz3M4A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City staff and consultant Willdan presented a comprehensive user-fee study April 9 that updates dozens of fees across departments, recommends changes to recover departmental costs and provides a framework for annual adjustments.

The study enumerated proposed changes in building, engineering, parks and recreation, fire, police, planning, libraries and other departments. Willdan’s model calculated fully burdened hourly rates, allocated central-city overhead and estimated the maximum justified fee level for each service. Staff and the consultant estimated the total additional recoverable revenue at roughly $1.03 million per year under the recommended schedule, although the consultant cautioned that exact revenue depends on how often individual fees are charged.

Council reaction and requests
Council members asked for more detail before any final vote: they requested per-fee revenue estimates (which the city said would require additional analysis), removal of fees that are no longer charged, and lists of the highest-impact fees by department so the council can prioritize changes. Council also highlighted equity and policy goals — for example, seeking options to avoid large increases for daycare inspections and to consider resident discounts or scholarship programs for parks and recreation services.

Public hearing and next steps
The city opened the public hearing and heard brief comment from a vacation‑rental owner group that asked for additional detail on the proposed regular and junior vacation rental permit fees. Council directed staff to collect the comments raised at the hearing, remove obsolete fees, and return with an updated fee schedule, a clearer mapping from fees to actual revenue lines, and department-level summaries that identify the top revenue-generating or most‑used fees. Staff indicated the study results will be posted with proposed changes and that the council could continue or finalize adoption at a later meeting. No final fee ordinance was adopted on April 9.

Key study points and samples from the record
- Willdan’s approach: establish a cost-allocation plan, determine fully burdened hourly rates for staff who perform fee-based services, allocate central support costs, and build each fee from the time and direct-cost inputs.
- Example recommendations discussed in public: proposed airport 24‑hour parking increase (from $20 to $26) drew council concern and at least one council member asked staff to retain the current rate; proposed parks and recreation price restructures aim to raise cost recovery but also propose dynamic pricing and resident discounts; building, planning and engineering fees were restructured with many line items added, removed or consolidated.
- Willdan’s rough aggregate projected revenue gain from revised fees: about $1,030,000 annually (staff stressed this is an estimate and depends on actual fee activity).

Council directions to staff
- Re-run or augment analysis to show per-fee revenue (where available) and identify which fees generate the largest revenue or have the greatest community impact.
- Remove irrelevant or obsolete fees (staff agreed to review and strike unused items before the next public hearing).
- Provide department-level averages and highlight top 2–3 priority fees per department for council review.
- Bring a revised fee schedule back for council discussion and possible adoption at a subsequent meeting (staff anticipated posting an updated schedule in advance of the adoption hearing).

Speakers and proponents
Presentation led by Willdan consultants (Mike Medvie and team) with multiple department directors available to answer technical questions. A representative of the vacation rental industry (Francine McDougall, representing a local owners’ group) requested clarification on permit fees. Council members focused on the need for more targeted data before final action.

Clarifying details
- Consultant’s aggregate estimate of increased recoverable revenue from recommended fees: approximately $1,030,000 per year (estimate based on available budgets and fee changes; actuals depend on per-fee usage). (Source: Willdan presentation.)
- Some large, one-off recommended fee increases flagged by council: e.g., proposed increases for certain parks/program fees and fire/inspection fees; council asked staff to review daycare‑inspection increases and consider not raising those to avoid discouraging needed services. (Source: council questions.)
- Staff noted that the adopted fee schedule would take effect 60 days after formal adoption unless council specifies otherwise; council asked to delay final adoption until staff returns with the requested detail.

Provenance
- Topic introduction (consultant presentation): transcript excerpt at 12257.675: \"Good evening, honorable council members, my name is Mike Medvie, I'm with Wil·dan...\" (block_id: \"transcript_12257\", local_start:0, local_end:120, evidence_excerpt:\"Good evening... my name is Mike Medvie, I'm with Wildan and we've been working...\" )
- Topic finish (council direction to staff): transcript excerpt at 16400.26: council directed staff to collect comments, remove irrelevant fees, provide per-department summaries and return with a revised fee schedule for vote at a later meeting. (block_id:\"transcript_16399\", local_start:0, local_end:200, evidence_excerpt:\"We'll put all the changes together... we'll come back in the next staff report and outline all those changes...\")

speakers:[{\"name\":\"Mike Medvie\",\"role_title\":\"Consultant (Willdan)\",\"affiliation_type\":\"business\",\"affiliation_name\":\"Willdan\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"02:03:00\",\"transcript_line_range\":[12257,12300]}},{\"name\":\"Chris Hadwin\",\"role_title\":\"Planning Director\",\"affiliation_type\":\"government\",\"affiliation_name\":\"City of Palm Springs\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"02:03:34\",\"transcript_line_range\":[13737,13757]}},{\"name\":\"Francine McDougall\",\"role_title\":\"Vacation Rental Owner / Board Member\",\"affiliation_type\":\"business\",\"affiliation_name\":\"VRON Palm Springs\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"02:36:00\",\"transcript_line_range\":[15852,15897]}},{\"name\":\"Councilmember Grace Garner\",\"role_title\":\"Councilmember\",\"affiliation_type\":\"government\",\"affiliation_name\":\"City of Palm Springs\",\"first_reference\":{\"timecode\":\"02:17:00\",\"transcript_line_range\":[13130,13145]}}],\"authorities\":[{\"type\":\"policy\",\"name\":\"City of Palm Springs Comprehensive Fee Schedule (proposed)\",\"citation\":\"Staff and consultant Willdan proposed consolidated fee schedule across multiple departments; subject to council adoption\",\"referenced_by\":[\"public hearing\",\"staff report\"]}],\"actions\":[],\"discussion_decision\":{\"discussion_points\":[\"Willdan cost-allocation method and fully burdened hourly rates\",\"Estimate of roughly $1.03M additional recoverable revenue (aggregate estimate)\",\"Council requests for per-fee revenue mapping and removal of irrelevant fees\",\"Equity concerns for daycare inspection and parks scholarship options\"],\"directions\":[\"Staff to remove obsolete fees and return with a revised schedule and per-department top-fee lists\",\"Staff to produce per-fee revenue estimates where possible and identify highest-impact fees for council consideration\"],\"decisions\":[]},\"clarifying_details\":[{\"category\":\"aggregate_revenue\",\"detail\":\"Consultant's estimate of increased recoverable revenue from recommended fee changes\",\"value\":1030000,\"units\":\"USD\",\"approximate\":true,\"source_speaker\":\"Willdan presentation\"},{\"category\":\"adoption_timing\",\"detail\":\"Fees adoptable by council resolution and typically take effect 60 days after adoption; council may continue hearing for further study\",\"source_speaker\":\"Staff\"}],\"proper_names\":[{\"name\":\"Willdan\",\"type\":\"business\"},{\"name\":\"Palm Springs City Hall\",\"type\":\"location\"}],\"community_relevance\":{\"geographies\":[\"City of Palm Springs\"],\"funding_sources\":[\"general fund / fee revenue\"],\"impact_groups\":[\"businesses requiring permits\",\"residents using parks and city services\",\"developers and building permit applicants\"]},\"meeting_context\":{\"engagement_level\":{\"speakers_count\":10,\"duration_minutes\":70,\"items_count\":1},\"implementation_risk\":\"low\",\"history\":[{\"date\":\"2024-05-01\",\"note\":\"Study initiated and benchmarking performed\"}]},\"searchable_tags\":[\"fee-study\",\"Willdan\",\"user-fees\",\"parks-fees\",\"building-permits\"],\"provenance\":{\"transcript_segments\":[{\"block_id\":\"transcript_12257\",\"local_start\":0,\"local_end\":120,\"evidence_excerpt\":\"Good evening honorable council members, my name is Mike Medvie, I'm with Willdan and we've been working with city staff to help update your user fees...\",\"reason_code\":\"topicintro\"},{\"block_id\":\"transcript_16400\",\"local_start\":0,\"local_end\":200,\"evidence_excerpt\":\"We'll put all the changes together in the staff report and then we can go back and make changes... come back on the 20 third and the council would vote on the entire fee schedule as a whole.\",\"reason_code\":\"topicfinish\"}]},\"salience\":{\"overall\":0.62,\"overall_justification\":\"Citywide fees affect many residents and businesses but primarily affect transactional services; council requested more data before adopting\",\"impact_scope\":\"local\",\"impact_scope_justification\":\"Fees are city-specific and affect local residents and firms\",\"attention_level\":\"medium\",\"attention_level_justification\":\"Broad departmental reach but lower immediate urgency than capital projects\",\"novelty\":0.35,\"novelty_justification\":\"Routine five-year update; some significant fee changes proposed\",\"timeliness_urgency\":0.40,\"timeliness_urgency_justification\":\"Council requested more time before adoption\",\"legal_significance\":0.20,\"legal_significance_justification\":\"Fees must meet cost-recovery legal standards\"}} ,{","City staff and consultant Willdan presented a citywide user-fee study that would raise many department fees and is expected to increase fee revenue by roughly $1.03 million annually under the consultants' model. Council opened the public hearing, asked staff for more granular revenue mapping and asked staff to remove irrelevant fees and return with","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Palm Springs delays South Palm Canyon bridge decision after heated public comment, approves short-term contract extensions

Palm Springs holds public hearing on comprehensive fee update; council asks staff for revenue breakdowns and more community review