Cathedral City staff outline department structure, budget shifts and CityDetect pilot for proactive code enforcement

At a Cathedral City Council meeting, the Director of Community and Economic Development (name not specified) presented an overview of the department’s organization, staffing changes and budget recommendations, and introduced a proposed pilot to use CityDetect cameras on code compliance vehicles to identify potential violations.

The presentation covered the four divisions under the department—economic development, planning, building, and code compliance—staffing levels and recent operational changes, including a recommendation not to renew the city’s current contracted services with the local Chamber of Commerce and a proposed reallocation of those funds into in‑house programs and targeted contracts.

Why it matters: staff said the changes aim to make permitting and enforcement more predictable and responsive to both the development community and residents, and to target limited resources more efficiently. Council members asked for more detail on several items and directed staff to return with contract documents and a more detailed implementation plan for the CityDetect pilot and related purchases.

Economic development: staff said the economic development team currently totals 1.5 full‑time equivalent positions (an economic development manager and a shared analyst) and that, while small, the team leverages regional partners and contractors. The presentation recommended not extending the city’s current contract with the local Chamber of Commerce beyond the coming year; staff said the chamber contract included roughly $30,000 for business support and engagement services, $12,000 for marketing and $25,100 for events (including the State of the City). Staff proposed moving the State of the City event budget into the communications/special events budget and using a mix of staff, targeted contracts and regional partnerships (for example, Visit Greater Palm Springs and Coachella Valley organizations) for outreach and business support.

Planning and building: the planning division outlined continued work on a development code update and an updated historic preservation survey (staff budgeted $100,000 for a survey in FY25–26 and $400,832 in total one‑time technical costs related to the code update and historic work). Staff said they have implemented a concurrent review process to reduce turnaround times and are preparing preapproved ADU plans to align with the next California building code cycle expected on 2026‑01‑01. On building operations, staff proposed reducing professional and technical services spending from $360,000 to $180,000 by converting a vacant permit technician position into a full‑time building inspector, which staff said would yield a net cost savings while bringing more inspections in‑house. “There is a cost savings to the city to convert a vacant permit tech position ... to a building inspector,” the Director said.

Code compliance and CityDetect pilot: Justin Gardner, the code compliance manager (identified in the presentation), reported workload figures including about 850 open cases in December 2024, an average caseload of about 40 cases per officer, and two current vacancies in the division. Staff proposed two budget changes: formalizing abatement services as a tracked budget line (to allow the city to act more quickly on derelict properties and then pursue liens for cost recovery) and funding a CityDetect pilot. Staff described CityDetect as a vehicle‑mounted camera and AI service that scans visible conditions from public rights of way and flags potential issues (graffiti, illegal dumping, parked vehicles on landscape, overgrown yards, etc.). A CityDetect vendor representative explained the tool’s intent: “What it's essentially doing for us is making my officers more efficient.”

Staff said the recommended CityDetect deployment in the proposed budget would include SentiDetect cameras on two code compliance vehicles. Staff emphasized that automated photos and scores would be human‑reviewed before any enforcement action, and that the system is intended to prioritize and generate leads for education and voluntary compliance rather than to automatically issue citations. Council members asked about deployment frequency, privacy and potential targeting of neighborhoods; staff said vehicles would be used across the city and the code compliance manager would oversee how the data is applied and which areas receive follow up.

Other items and next steps: staff said they will return to council with a more detailed contract and implementation plan before final procurement. Staff also noted a future, deeper agenda item on cannabis odor control and enforcement scheduled April 23. Council members asked staff to provide more precise permit turnaround figures and to bring contracts (including any intended Chamber or CVEP/CVAP arrangements) back to council for review. A written public comment from David Koslow asking the council to place an item on an upcoming agenda about anticipated revenue shortfalls and fiscal obligations was submitted for the record.

The presentation closed with council members expressing general support for the effort to modernize permitting and to increase proactive code work while requesting additional detail, explicit contract terms and return briefings before any binding procurement or contract awards.