On Thursday, April 23, 2026 the Twentynine Palms Tourism Business Improvement District Board (TBID) held their regularly monthly meeting. The light public agenda focused on approving event grant and sponsorship funding for the second half of 2026. Present were Vice Chair Ashton Ramsey and Board Members Maria Madrid, Ben Uyeda, and Liz Shickler. Chair Rakesh Mehta had an excused absence. There were five members of the public in attendance.

Overall, the board approved funding for four grants totaling $52,000 and four sponsorships, for a total of $9,500. Originally grant scores were submitted with incorrect average total scores, which Marketing Director Breanne Dusastre corrected prior to the meeting after it was brought to her attention in a public comment submitted in advance by email.

Broader issues around the grant and sponsorship application process were raised in both board discussion and public comment. These issues have been a common theme at recent TBID meetings and have focused on the clarity of the application and the scoring process and how to ensure it is both consistent and that events being funded meet the board’s goal to bring more overnight visitors to Twentynine Palms.

Brief Board and Director of Marketing updates

Vice Chair Ramsey provided an update on the Levitt AMP music series, which began April 4 and runs through May 2 with free concerts on Saturday evenings at 7 pm in Freedom Plaza. The community rallied together to help win the Levitt grant, which provides funding for ten free concerts a year over three years. Now, Ramsey explained, is the time to make certain the events are a success and well attended. He discussed increasing radio spots and social media posts promoting the concerts and making a more comprehensive promotion plan for the fall concert series.

Hi, new subscribers! Desert Trumpet understands you might not be interested in all of our coverage. That’s why it’s divided into separate newsletters allowing you to opt out of reporting that’s not important to you. For instance, you may want our Education news but not City Hall 29.

Here’s how to opt out: go to your Substack settings, scroll down to “subscriptions,” and select “Edit” for the Desert Trumpet. Simply uncheck the box next to the newsletters you don’t want to receive in your email inbox. You’ll still be able to access all coverage online if you change your mind.

Dusastre acknowledged most of her time had been dedicated to preparing the grants and sponsorships for review. She provided a brief marketing update that the billboard campaign on I-10 will launch on May 10 and that she will attend the Visit CA media reception in Los Angeles on April 30 to connect with journalists and other members of the media. She also echoed Vice Chair Ramsey’s comments about her focus on promoting the Levitt Concert Series and other events through radio and social media advertising.

Public comment focuses on accessibility of TBID meetings and suggestion for board structural improvements

There were two public comments. Susan Peplow provided suggestions for making the TBID meeting more accessible, especially to lodging partners and local business owners, who are often working during the 3:30 - 5 pm Thursday time slot. She also referenced an update to SB707, which requires that all meetings of a legislative body include a way for the public to participate remotely through a two-way audio or visual system. The city will be upgrading its AV system for meetings to meet the July 1, 2026 deadline for compliance, which was discussed at the April 14 City Council meeting.

While this type of recording may not be required by law for the TBID, Peplow suggested it would be beneficial for the TBID. Peplow remarked:

What would be great moving forward is the ability for people to actually stream these sessions and play them back at a later time, because I think we can see 3:30 in the afternoon on a Thursday is pretty tough for a lot of businesses, and it’s particularly lodging partners that are out of the area.

Peplow emphasized that she didn’t want her suggestion to put additional burden on staff time, but simply make sure sessions are available to the public.

Cindy Bernard echoed the need to move the meeting to a later time, but focused on TBID structure, pointing out that the board is the only body in the City that doesn’t have terms of office or rotate chair or vice chair on a yearly basis. The TBID Advisory Board members, who are lodging owners and operators, are appointed by the City Council. While such rotation is not required by law, in Bernard’s estimation, this could impact the TBID’s push for moving to a five-year reauthorization process under the Property and Business Improvement District Law of 1994, instead of their current annual re-authorization schedule.

“No one’s going to give you guys your five-year reauthorization that I know you all want to ask for, unless you deal with some of the structural issues that are out of alignment with every other city body,” Bernard told them. Bernard also explained that the lack of rotation does TBID members a disservice because they don’t have the opportunity to learn the responsibilities of the board chair. She also inquired as to why the producers brainstorm session, which has been added as a future agenda item in December, had dropped off the agenda.

In second round of funding, TBID awards grants to four events

The TBID gives out event grant funding twice a year: The first round for events taking place between January and June, and the second for events between July and December. Grants are intended to support larger, signature events that generate overnight stays and, by extension, increased tourism spending.

Grants and sponsorships are funded by the 1.5% passthrough tax (also known as the Transit Occupancy Tax or TOT) on lodging properties within Twentynine Palms. For this fiscal year, TBID allocated $150,000 to the program, with $120,000 designated for event grants, which range from $3,000 to $20,000 per event. The TBID had previously awarded $20,000 during round 1, leaving $100,000 available for the remainder of the fiscal year. This round, the TBID received 12 grant applications and voted to fund four of them, with a fifth event, the Area 29 Galactic Gathering, tabled until the next meeting since two board members, Shickler and Vice Chair Ramsey, had to recuse themselves due to their connection to the event.

Grants were awarded to:

• Twentynine Palms Book Festival: $20,000 (4-0-1 approved)

• Joshua Tree Half Marathon: $20,000 (full) (3-0-1, Uyeda recused)

• Night Sky Festival: $6,000 (4-0-1, approved)

• Climb Smart: $6,000 (4-0-1, approved)

If producers’ estimations in the applications are correct, together these events will bring over 4,000 out of town visitors to the Morongo Basin.

Grant applications are scored by a five-person review committee, which includes three community members and two TBID board members. They must receive at least 80 points to move forward. The events grants committee is: TBID board members Liz Shickler and Ben Uyeda, and community members and lodging stakeholders Mary Jane Binge and Susan Peplow, and Scott Clinkscales, Community Events Coordinator for the City of Twentynine Palms.

Applications are evaluated on the following criteria:

• Target audience

• Organizer’s prior event experience

• Budget and marketing plans

• Alignment with the TBID destination pillars

The destination pillars are:

• Outdoor recreation

• Arts and culture

• Health and wellness

• Culinary experiences

• Stargazing and astronomy

Throughout the review process, evaluating against these criteria, especially the destination pillars, proved subjective, as scoring varied widely between reviewers. Reviewers also varied widely in their approach to evaluation, with some like Peplow and Clinkscales, leaving detailed remarks, while Uyeda left none at all. This inconsistency can provide a frustrating experience for applicants, especially those who missed the minimum by just a few points. It also raises the question of alignment and if the grants review committee has aligned on a scoring rubric to make clear what a successful, fundable application looks like.

Before the meeting, Cindy Bernard brought inconsistencies in the grant scoring, incorrect score totals, and concerns about the grant process to the board and Dusastre’s attention via email. Dusastre corrected the score totals, which did not impact funding eligibility. In her public comment, Bernard suggested that the granting system is broken and that the TBID rethink the grant process from the ground up and consider excluding board members from the grants committee, because it creates a potential conflict of interest. She offered ideas to improve the process, including:

• Pre-approval for proven event partners, such as the Joshua Tree half-marathon.

• Creation of a mentoring program that nurtures newer event partners.

• A mechanism for working with experienced event producers to put on the types of events that the TBID is looking for.

She explained,

Maybe it would be more productive for these larger figure projects to brainstorm what would be great projects, what are the projects that we need to happen here that could become signature events that would benefit everybody, and really think those through with the various producers in town that have long time production experience and then apply that idea.

In her public comment on the grants process, Susan Peplow acknowledged that her grant scoring was often much lower than her colleagues’ on the committee. She asked that the TBID reconsider quality applications that came within “striking distance” of 80 points, but may have been impacted by her scores.

By now, you should all be aware that I was concerned about my scoring, and it became really evident, specifically in the pillars department, that the scoring that came from my part was significantly lower than other people on the committee.

Peplow apologized for any extra time her communications caused and acknowledged that the TBID board, staff, and subcommittees could grow by acknowledging where they fell short, and also using this as an opportunity to rethink grant guidelines.

Board comments struck the same tone as public comments and focused on the need to rethink the grant process. Echoing what he had said during the board discussion of grant guidelines and process during the March TBID meeting Uyeda remarked,

I heard from quite a few applicants as well as quite a few stakeholders, about the [grant] process. I was hearing dissatisfaction on one side with how long and how much time was put into these applications, and on the other side about how feeling that, how selections and criteria for evaluation was too vague and not specific enough.

Shickler noted that reviewing the applications in one week and scoring them consistently was also a challenge and said it was important to keep the generation of overnight stays and revenue in focus.

Grant scoring, criteria, the types of events that are proposed, and the question of whether to work with experienced producers to create specific signature events, and how to measure the impact of overnight stays have been points of discussion in recent TBID meetings. At the March TBID meeting Shickler and Uyeda planned to meet within a month to come up with recommendations for updates to application guidelines and deadlines for the next funding round, though it was unclear if they have met yet. At the end of the meeting Uyeda proposed a future agenda item to discuss the grant and sponsorship program so that the board can weigh in on his and Shickler’s recommendations for an overhaul. According to Uyeda, “the amount of frustration I heard from all aspects involved with this last round was considerable.”

The board approves four sponsorship applications for $2,375 each

The TBID also approved applications for four event sponsorships out of eleven applications for the second half of 2026. Event sponsorships are for smaller events that contribute to visitor experience and overnight stays, as well as aligning with destination pillars. The TBID allocated $30,000 for sponsorships and awards ranging from $100 to $3,000 per event. The TBID had already awarded $20,500 in sponsorships in the first half of 2026, leaving $9,500 available for the rest of the fiscal year. Earlier in the meeting, Dusastre assured the board that the scoring for the sponsorship review was correct.

To maximize the use of the remaining sponsorship budget, the board voted 3-1-0, with Mehta absent and Shickler recusing, to approve funding of $2,375 each for four applicants. They were:

• Joshua Tree National Park Art Exposition

• Cosmic Connections: Women in Scientific Exploration

• Mil-Tree Presents a Night of Improv Theater

• Hwy 62 Open Studio Art Tours

Uyeda remarked, “It’s great that we got qualified recipients to the point where we used up the program’s budget,” and hoped that each event would continue to grow so all the qualifying applications can be fully funded in following years. Vice Chair Ramsey remarked how even though the TBID was contributing a small amount, which will support advertising and one event during the art tours weekends, relative to their overall budget to the Hwy 62 open studio tours it was, “Something that shows our support and helps them support us.”

In public comment, Bernard clarified some of her earlier points about the grant and sponsorship application and scoring process. She highlighted that:

• There is no wording that specifies funded events must be public and the board should consider whether tax dollars go to supporting private events.

• With many recusals on the board, the board should consider a formal process and rules in case a board or committee member needs to recuse from scoring or voting on an application.

• There is a typo on the grant application form attendance projection form that may have caused confusion, as there was a check box of “>100” or anticipated audience of greater than 100, when the correct notation have been “<100”, implying less than 100.

• The scoring rubric for grants and sponsorships, especially around destination pillars, is subjective.

She commented, “The event concept in alignment with TBID destination pillars is given so much weight in the application and is the most subjective element in the application that sometimes it throws things off.” These comments were not about sponsorship applications, but the process in general, highlighting that it needs to be overhauled and elements that need to be clarified.

City Manager update

The final portion of the meeting was an update by outgoing City Manager Dr. Stone James. He discussed the launching of a groundwater study to help the city understand the urgency of the implementation of a citywide sewer system, working with the Joshua Tree National Park Association to create housing for seasonal employees, and that a package sewage treatment plant that serves 15 businesses in downtown Twentynine Palms will open in about 90 days. More information about the affordable housing initiative is covered in the Desert Trumpet’s recap of the April 14, 2026 City Council meeting.

Dr. James seemed to respond to Bernard’s public comment about the lack of rotation in the TBID board chair. He claimed the lack of rotation was not due to an individual hoarding power, but the workload of other board members. “I’ve spoken with staff about this,” claimed James, “Found out that over time, that [Chair Mehta] has been in that position, he has offered that position to other board members, but due to the workload of the board members, they have respectfully passed.” Dr. James did not provide any specific examples. While legally the TBID board chair is not required to rotate, the question remains, why the TBID board chair seems to be based on an individual’s own decision and there is no formal rotation policy, as is customary and considered best practice for other civic boards.

A date for the May TBID meeting has yet to be announced. The only future agenda item proposed was a review of the grant and sponsorship application process.

The Desert Trumpet is within $100 of meeting our $10,000 paid subscription goal!!! We need your paid subscriptions to publish the coverage you depend on. Basic subscriptions are $50 per year or $5 per month.

Subscribe now

Become a sustaining subscriber by increasing your subscription to $100 or more per year! Want to make a one-time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

This coverage is free - please share!

Share

The Twentynine Palms City Council will hold a regular meeting this upcoming Monday, April 27, at 6 pm, following a closed session at 5:15 pm with the following topic:

Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 – PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT: Title - City Manager.

Given agenda item 9, entitled “Appointment of City Manager and Approval of Related Employment Agreement,” this likely indicates that the Council will appoint its newest City Manager at this meeting. This follows the resignation of the previous City Manager, H. Stone James, which was announced following a special closed session meeting on Thursday, April 9.

Coverage of the previous City Council meeting is available here and here. The 103-page agenda packet is linked here.

PUBLIC COMMENT

You can comment on agenda items and issues important to you at every City Council meeting. Comments on agenda items take place during discussion of that item, while comments on non-agenda items take place near the end of the meeting. The Brown Act prevents Council from commenting on non-agenda items. To comment, pick up a form at the entry desk, fill it out, and hand it to the Clerk, who usually sits just in front of the Council dais on the right.

Here’s the list of Council email addresses to write if you can’t get to the meeting — be sure to email them prior to 2 pm on the date of the meeting so they have time to read your email prior to discussion. You can also copy the clerk at cvillescas@29palms.org and ask that your letter be made part of the public record.

Hi, new subscribers! Desert Trumpet understands you might not be interested in all of our coverage. That’s why it’s divided into separate newsletters allowing you to opt out of reporting that’s not important to you. For instance, you may want our Education news but not City Hall 29.

Here’s how to opt out: go to your Substack settings, scroll down to “subscriptions,” and select “Edit” for the Desert Trumpet. Simply uncheck the box next to the newsletters you don’t want to receive in your email inbox. You’ll still be able to access all coverage online if you change your mind.

AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND PROCLAMATIONS

Council will hear a presentation from Reach Out Yucca Valley on 7-OH and Kratom, which are commercially available substances with high rates of abuse and propensity for addiction due to their opioid-like effects.1 Products sold at local smoke shops and liquor stores sometimes contain these substances. Reach Out has presented this community issue to Council in the past, noting their commercial accessibility makes school-aged youth vulnerable to abusing these substances, particularly when local smoke shops and liquor stores fail to properly ID minors when making purchases.

CONSENT CALENDAR

The Consent Calendar consists of items usually approved with a single vote. The public is given a chance to comment on these items prior to the Council motion. Fill out a comment form specifying the item you wish to address and submit it in person, or send an email in advance regarding any of the items on this meeting’s Consent Calendar.

Consent Calendar items for this meeting include approval of the April 9 closed session meeting minutes, approval of a $326,567.05 construction contract for upcoming road repairs, septic system maintenance information, and a Treasurer’s Report for the 3rd quarter of the ‘25-’26 fiscal year.

PUBLIC HEARING- NONE

DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS

7. Preliminary Review of the 2026-27 General Fund Budget Revisions.

Council approved its general fund budget on June 10, 2025. Since then, due to decreases in projected property tax revenue and vehicle license fees, the City Finance Director is requesting revisions to that approved budget.

The 47-page staff report states:

Revenues from Property tax and Property tax in Lieu of Vehicle License Fees (VLF) combined are expected to be $249K lower than originally projected. For instance, in FY 2022- 23, the City’s net taxable assessed values increased by 11.16% from the prior year. In FY 2023-24, the increase from the prior year was 12.01%. The City’s net taxable assessed values for FY 2025-26 are projected to increase by only 4.6% from the prior year.

Possible explanations for this include a slow down in the local housing market and general economic woes that are being seen countywide, not just in Twentynine Palms.

Transient Occupancy Tax, or TOT, revenues were reported higher than this time last year, but due to the volatility and unpredictability of the local tourism market, the City Finance department is remaining conservative in terms of its projected TOT revenue going into 2027, expecting only a $50,000 uptick despite new hotels now fully operating in town, such as Hotel Wren and Reset Hotel. The staff report states:

Staff is anticipating another moderate growth year with Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center (MCAGCC) and Joshua Tree National Park continuing to have attendance growth.

City staff is requesting that Council approve money transfers to cover $40K in construction costs associated with the repaving of the Luckie Park parking lot, and an additional $25K to cover costs associated with a sales tax ballot measure, expected to be voted on by residents in the November 3 election.

In the wake of projected revenue being nearly $250K lower than expected, and to maintain a balanced budget, the staff report says, “adjustments were made, including reducing grants to non-profits from $75K to $50K.”

The staff report concludes by adding that inflation continues to be a constraint on the City budget, along with lowered gas tax revenue.

8. Waiver of Requirement of Traffic Impact Assessment for Administrative Use Permit.

City Council will consider waiving a requirement for a Traffic Impact Assessment for a proposed development project on a half-acre lot located on the southwest corner of Twentynine Palms Outer Highway and Encelia Avenue. City rules require a traffic study whenever a project generates more than 50 car trips per day, and the City Engineer estimates that this development will generate at least that much traffic.

The developer, Nathsons Hospitality Inc., whose principal is Charmaine Nathraj, submitted an Administrative Use Permit (AUP) application through David Rodriguez of CAD Design Plus in October 2025 to waive a traffic study because of its cost, although the fee is not included in the staff report and the City does not determine such costs. The City responded to the AUP application with an itemized request list for the application to be complete, which included the traffic study. Email correspondence between Community Development Director Keith Gardner, Cal Trans District 8 representatives, and developer Veno Nathraj, who is representing Nathsons Hospitality, is included in the staff report.

The City of Twentynine Palms passed its traffic study policy in 2005. Email documents included in the staff report show CalTrans also requests a traffic study for this particular project:

Also included in the staff report’s email correspondence were some testy words from Gardner to Nathraj, a local hotelier and business owner:

Of particular concern to Gardner, as noted in the emails, is whether the City waives this traffic study requirement or not, CalTrans will still require its own traffic study as a condition of approval for the project, meaning the developer will likely still have to pay any associated traffic study costs.

9. Appointment of City Manager and Approval of Related Employment Agreement

No name for a future City Manager is provided with the agenda, but given the resignation of the most recent City Manager and the upcoming closed session on the topic, one can assume the City has a particular candidate in mind. Whether this individual was drawn from a pool of previous City Manager applicants from 2023, following the resignation of Frank Luckino, is unknown.

Noted under this agenda item is that the “Staff Report and related documents will be provided at the beginning of the meeting.”

The Brown Act does not mandate the City to post applications for this open position, though they have done so in the past, nor is there any legal requirement that discussions on City Manager appointments be conducted publicly. However, the discussion of compensation must be public and should be discussed under item 9.

Back in October 2023, when the City had open applications for a new City Manager’s position, and prior to the appointment of the most recent City Manager, Dr. H. Stone James, Desert Trumpet penned an opinion piece entitled, “Who Should We Hire?” which called for an open and transparent government process in choosing a new City Manager.

The City of Twentynine Palms lists the expectations and duties of the City Manager on its website. The goal of the City Manager is to fulfill the following:2

1. Be the City’s chief administrative officer and be responsible to the city council for the proper administration of all affairs of the City.

2. Appoint and, when necessary, suspend or remove officers and employees of the City except as otherwise provided by the city charter or law, and direct and supervise their work.

3. Prepare the budget and submit it to the Council annually, together with a message describing its important features, and be responsible for its administration after adoption.

4. Prepare and submit to the Council as of the end of the fiscal year a complete report on the finances and administrative activities of the City for the preceding year.

5. Keep the Council advised of the City’s financial condition and future needs and make such recommendations as he may deem desirable.

6. Recommend to the governing body a standard pay schedule for each appointed office and position in the city service, including minimum, intermediate, and maximum rates.

7. Recommend to the governing body (from time to time) adoption of such policies as he may deem necessary or expedient for the health, safety, or welfare of the community, or health, safety, or welfare of the community, or for the improvement of the administrative services.

8. Consolidate or combine offices, positions, departments, or units under his jurisdiction with the city council’s approval.

9. Attend all city council meetings unless excused therefrom and participate in the discussion of all matters coming before the Council.

10. Supervise the purchase of materials, supplies, and equipment for which funds are provided in the budget.

11. See that all laws and ordinances are properly enforced. Investigate the activities of the City or any department or division.

12. Investigate all complaints concerning the administration of the government of the City and regarding service maintained by the public utilities in the City, and see that all franchises, permits, and privileges granted by the City are faithfully observed.

13. Devote his entire time to the discharge of his official duties.

14. Perform such other duties as may be required by Council.

The meeting takes place at 6 pm at 6136 Adobe Road. See you there!

The Desert Trumpet is within $100 of meeting our $10,000 paid subscription goal!!! We need your paid subscriptions to publish the coverage you depend on. Basic subscriptions are $50 per year or $5 per month.

Subscribe now

Become a sustaining subscriber by increasing your subscription to $100 or more per year! Want to make a one-time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

This coverage is free - please share!

Share

In Part 1 of our April 14 recap, Council passed a series of 5-0 votes on housing-forward initiatives — joining the San Bernardino Regional Housing Trust Joint Powers Authority (JPA) with $1.75 million in Regional Early Action Planning (REAP) funds on the line, and authorizing lease negotiations with the Joshua Tree National Park Association for workforce housing on a 17-acre city-owned parcel near Theatre 29.

Also approved: a $21,483.92 audio/video upgrade to bring Council chambers into compliance with SB 707 by the July 1 deadline, and continuation of the countywide Measure I transportation sales tax. Council's most contentious discussion was over letterhead policy.

Councilmember April Ramirez's attempt to reopen the E-Group Solar Project discussion died for lack of a second. Her other two future agenda items — on Prop 36 and Code Enforcement and the annexation of two parcels, one being the location of Set Free Ranch — were seconded but lacked clear context.

General Public Comment

The Council meeting was close to two hours long when public comment on non-agenda items started. Upcoming events and concerns about the potential closing of Palm Vista Elementary School, Councilmember accountability and support for the HOPE Center would wake up a fatigued public. Two residents spoke in opposition to Flock cameras, a common topic at recent meetings.

Did a Councilmember attempt retaliation?

We are publishing Heather Huguenor‘s comments at length as they are a particularly well-spoken response to abuses of power, not just at a local level, but nationally. She prefaced her statement by saying “Notes on a City Council meeting, March 23, 2026”:

… people in power always seem to prove they can’t be trusted with power. And it turns out things are no different here in little 29 Palms. What’s worse than people in power winning? People in power losing. You see, it makes them angry, and then they have to find a way to remind themselves and other people of their power.

First, they find someone to blame and lash out. And if that doesn’t go their way, they’ll resort to all kinds of underhanded things, like trying to get that someone fired in a hush, hush behind the scenes kind of way.

It’s predictable like clockwork, almost, how power corrupts, and in the case I just described, a direct violation of the First Amendment, which states that we have the right to publicly express our opinion without censorship, interference, restraint or retaliation. Letterhead or no letterhead, I smelled a clear case of retaliation…

You see, where power always goes wrong is when it assumes that my voice is worth less less than any one of yours. It assumes the one who got the title must know best. I find the one who gets the title is usually just louder and willing to step on a few toes. Because somewhere along the line, polite society decided that’s how it wanted things to work, and from our tiny town to the White House, it certainly explains the circumstances that we all find ourselves in today.

So let me be clear, no one, no matter who, will successfully silence any one of my comrades, and no one will silence me. We keep us safe.

Anyway, can you all believe it’s April already? All power to the people.

The Desert Trumpet has confirmed that Huguenor’s remarks were inspired by an interaction between Councilmember April Ramirez and resident Heather Drake over the Flock camera issue that occurred after the March 23 City Council meeting and then appeared to escalate the next day.1 On the morning of Tuesday, March 24, Ramirez emailed Drake’s employer, Groundwork Arts, with an “urgent” request for a meeting. The email was obtained by the Desert Trumpet through a Public Information Request.

When reached by the Desert Trumpet, Groundwork Arts leadership confirmed that they were contacted by the Councilmember about Drake, but since they were unable to discuss an employee, the conversation shifted to other business.

Did a Councilmember get inside information or is she grandstanding?

Elliot Balsley, who had spoken on the Council letterhead item, returned to the podium with a different example of potential overstep to illustrate his Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) and Brown Act violation concerns:

Over the weekend, I observed some disturbing comments on social media from Councilmember Ramirez regarding the Geneva solar project. These comments conflict with the public record that has been presented at the recent meetings.

She says, “the fact is, I have inside knowledge that the project was already approved before it even went to the city.” That’s a pretty strong statement with no evidence of any kind. And this, this worries me, because if, if you have inside knowledge that you’re not sharing with the council, but you’re using it to make your own decisions, I mean, that’s just that’s not how government should work.

To share information like this in social media is basically just a rumor. If this is real, it needs to be shared publicly and on the record.

Balsley was referring to a lengthy Facebook thread started on April 11 in which Councilmember Ramirez was an active participant. As of Thursday, April 16, there were 313 comments. The Desert Trumpet made screenshots of the conversations in which Ramirez participated2. The statement quoted in Balsley’s public comment is just one of numerous posts made by Ramirez implying knowledge about state approval of the project prior to the Council vote. However there is no legal mechanism for the California Energy Commission to pre-approve a project.

Concerns about Palm Vista’s future

Stacy Smith, Elizabeth Rodrigo and Heather Drake addressed the potential closure of Palm Vista Elementary School on Baseline Road in Twentynine Palms. The Morongo Unified School District Enrollment Committee, formed in January 2026, has been meeting to review declining enrollment throughout the district — down from approximately 10,000 students at its peak to around 7,300 today — and to consider potential school closures. At the committee's April 9 meeting, as reported by the Hi-Desert Star, Superintendent Patricio Vargas presented alternate scenarios, one of which would close Palm Vista, Landers, and Morongo Valley elementary schools with students reassigned to the closest campuses.

Palm Vista Dean of Students Elizabeth Rodrigo urged residents to attend the MUSD Board meeting on April 21 at the new Joshua Tree Elementary School and the next enrollment committee meeting on April 29. Teachers Stacey Smith and Heather Drake both spoke to what Palm Vista means to the community.

Stacey Smith, on what Palm Vista has become:

My first year at Palm Vista, I realized that Morongo Unified School District thought of us as the nothing place. Teachers who couldn’t make it came to our school, kids that couldn’t make it came to our school. And in the last five years, we’ve gone from, in my opinion, the dumping ground to a shining star.

Is the E-Group partnering with the HOPE Project?

Shanese Risper, Community Outreach Director for the HOPE Project, spoke about the organization's Feed the Need program, which she said serves an average of 700-plus families and over 1,500 individuals monthly through weekly food giveaways. She described a current operational challenge — the program's only truck is in the shop, forcing them to rent a replacement at added cost — and said the organization is seeking a refrigerated truck to sustain the program long-term.

Risper closed by publicly thanking E-Group, the developer of the contentious solar project that was recently rejected at City Council. She described them as a "key community partner." She noted their contributions of $4,000 to Feed the Need and $3,600 toward an upcoming Color Run — a total of $7,600. E-Group's attorney had previously cited the identical donations as evidence of community benefit at the March Planning Commission meeting — raising questions about the relationship between the contributions and the HOPE Project’s and the Sanctuary Church’s public advocacy on E-Group's behalf.

Risper did not disclose her role as ordained Evangelist at the Sanctuary Church, whose nonprofit arm CLEP operates the HOPE Project.

Announcements: 29 Palms Art Gallery, the Basin Bike Path Initiative, Action 29 events

Mark Spangenberg announced that the 29 Palms Art Gallery is celebrating its 70th anniversary with a reception on May 2, 5–8 pm. There is an admission fee. Refreshments, dancing, and artwork will be on offer.

Eric Linnert (Yucca Valley) introduced the Basin Bike Path initiative, a long-term effort to connect the Morongo Basin with a multi-use path from Yucca Valley to 29 Palms, potentially looping through the National Park. He cited the Coachella Valley’s 40-mile CV Link as a model, noted the city’s channel-wide trail work as an encouraging parallel effort, and invited city staff to connect.

LeeAnn Clarke reported on several recent Action 29 Palms and 29 Palms Ministerial Association events including the signing of the restored “large lizard” by Chuck Caplinger. Clarke closed by thanking City Manager Stone James for his service to the community, noting “we understand you’re going to be moving on in a couple of months.”

City Manager Stone James resigned last Thursday, but is remaining for another 60 days to assist with a transition to a new City Manager, once hired.

The Desert Trumpet is within $150 of meeting our $10,000 paid subscription goal!!! We need your paid subscriptions to publish the coverage you depend on. Basic subscriptions are $50 per year or $5 per month.

Subscribe now

Become a sustaining subscriber by increasing your subscription to $100 or more per year! Want to make a one-time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

Thanks for reading! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share

As promised on z107.7 and in social media, Councilmember April Ramirez made a bid to reopen the E-Group Solar Project discussion at Twentynine Palms City Council as one of several Future Agenda Item requests:

The last one would be E-Group has advised the City it has revised its project to meet AB 205 criteria, and, based on that, a desire exists to discuss this matter further.

30 seconds of silence was broken when Mayor Daniel Mintz confirmed the obvious…”No second…All right, we’re into the public comment section.”

One might assume that was the height of the April 14 meeting’s drama. It wasn’t. General Public Comment would contain its own reckoning.

While the 2-1/2 hour public meeting certainly demanded caffeine intake at times, the laying of groundwork for progress in housing provided those attending with hope for the future.

Relevant links:

• The meeting agenda

• Our agenda preview, for additional info on all items

• Video of the meeting

Editor’s note: General Public Comment on non-agenda items will be covered in Part 2 of our recap, which will be released on Sunday morning, April 19.

A Series of 5-0 Votes

The Consent Calendar with the warrant register, deferred compensation plan consolidation, Luckie Park playground equipment repair and the downtown septic contract was approved 5-0 as was every item on the meeting agenda.

Council Chambers gets an AV upgrade

In October 2025, Senate Bill 707 was signed into law updating the Ralph M. Brown Act, requiring local legislative bodies to provide the public with the ability to attend all open meetings via two-way audio/video by July 1, 2026. Staff has determined that the current AV system is not capable of meeting the new requirements. Staff identified a single vendor — Rat Sound Systems — at a cost of $21,483.92 for the primary equipment only; additional purchases from standard vendors will be needed to complete the full upgrade. The July 1 compliance deadline is firm. As IT Director Elijah Marshall pointed out, "We have spent less in 19 years than we're going to spend on this single upgrade combined."

In public comment, frequent meeting attendee Susan Peplow commended the upgrade:

We have arms within our government here that are not getting much representation, specifically the PAAC (Public Arts Advisory Committee) and the TBID (Tourism Business Improvement District). Having recorded [and] live [sessions] available for people who have children, [are] working, have mobility issues — where they're unable to attend some of these meetings — gives them an opportunity to be part of the process. Better yet would be is if they could actually speak real time with public comment, but at a minimum, have that camera on for all arms of our government, would be my recommendation for staff policy.

Our research indicates that SB 707 will make clear the requirement that the City livestream agenda items marked as “workshops” or “study sessions” during which cameras are often off. Whether the bill applies to “advisory bodies,” as Peplow hopes, is less clear. The two-way public access mandate applies to eligible legislative bodies, but does it flow to “subsidiary bodies” such as the PAAC and TBID? This will likely need to be sorted out by the City Attorney.

Council supports the continuation of Measure I

Measure I is the half-cent county transportation sales tax approved by San Bernardino County voters in 1989, currently set to expire in 2040. The San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) is proposing to extend it beyond 2040 at the same rate, generating an estimated $7.5 billion over its first 30 years. Seventeen of the county's 24 cities had already approved the plan before the April 14 meeting; Twentynine Palms was among the remaining seven. SBCTA representative Otis Greer presented the item remotely prior to the unanimous vote.

Two housing related initiatives also pass without opposition

In the first housing initiative, City Manager Dr. Stone James announced that Twentynine Palms has been selected, along with Ontario, as one of two pilot cities under the new San Bernardino Regional Housing Trust Joint Powers Authority (JPA). $1.75 million in Regional Early Action Planning (REAP) funds are available to seed an affordable housing project. A formal Council vote was needed by April 15 or the funds would go to a different city. The funds must be allocated to a viable project by December 2026 and fully expended within five years.

During public comment, in response to a series of questions from Filo Totasi,1 City Manager Stone James, spoke on why small cities can’t do this alone:

It’s not Keith spending 5% of his time, me spending 5% of my time to try to do this. Our region, our county now has a voice.

Mayor Mintz, on the deadline pressure to identify a housing project:

We have to have the project ready to go in seven months, by the end of December. We saw what happened next door2 here — we gave those guys, took almost five years, and they finally just couldn’t get enough funds. So that’s a pretty tall order.

Speaking in favor during public comment were Scott Curry, Mary Jane Binge, Carlos Blandon and ex-Planning Commissioner Bill Easter. Our prior coverage on this topic can be found under “Housing” in our Article Index.

The second housing proposal stirred the room and was met with applause. Joshua Tree National Park Association (JTNPA) Executive Director Jacqueline Guevara sought approval for lease negotiations for a city-owned 17-acre parcel that would be used for workforce housing for Park seasonal employees. The parcel includes the planned Mojaveland artist-designed miniature golf course and is adjacent to Theatre 29.3

Affordable housing near the park has long been out of reach for seasonal NPS employees; as the park struggles to recruit and retain staff, access to stable housing close to the park entrance could make a meaningful difference. Speaking on the staffing crisis Guevara said:

Every season the park faces a critical staffing challenge. Qualified, passionate candidates often decline positions or leave early because they cannot find affordable housing nearby. Seasonal hires have been forced to piece together temporary arrangements that sometimes fall through, leading to mid-season departures.

JTNPA has already received a $75,000 planning grant from the National Park Foundation; securing a land lease would make them eligible for a $2 million construction grant — at no cost to the city.

Public comment was in favor with Brian Benton from Copper Mountain College speaking toward a potential partnership:

I’m training the next generation of construction workers in this community, and the opportunity that the parks Association has offered to the college in my program to participate with something with the weight of the USC School of Architecture and the National Parks association is really, really exciting.

Carlos Blandon also approved, calling it a “progressive development.” Any lease agreement will come back to Council for final approval.

Council’s most contentious discussion item? Letterhead.

The City has no policy governing when individual councilmembers can use City letterhead — which currently lists all five council members, implying full Council endorsement of the letter's content. This item was prompted by a need for staff guidance, and four possible directions ranging from permissive individual use to a full prohibition were presented for consideration.

Councilmembers Ramirez and McArthur Wright presented opposing views. Ramirez disclosed that she recently submitted a letter of recommendation for a youth group award and the submission was docked 11 points because her letter wasn’t on city letterhead — she couldn’t get three council members on short notice to authorize official letterhead use without a Brown Act issue.

Wright, on his reluctance to allow individual letterhead:

In 2018 when I was the mayor, I had a mayor’s prayer breakfast, and I basically got crucified because we advertised with the city’s logo.4 I don’t think we should have individual letterheads. If it’s a letter coming from any member of the Council, it should be in agreement with at least three of us.

Scott, Mintz and Bilderain were more open to individual letterheads with clear disclaimers or other solutions.

Elliot Balsley spoke in public comment urging a very restrictive policy (letterhead use only for items approved by the whole Council), citing FPPC violation risks and potential Brown Act issues.

A consensus gave Staff direction to:

• Produce City letterhead with city logo but only the individual councilmember’s name and district (no full roster of names),

• Councilmembers should include a standard disclaimer stating the letter does not represent the views of the full Council or the City,

• And to ensure California Public Records Act (CPRA) compliance, letters are to be processed through City staff to maintain a public record.

Future agenda items raise questions

While Councilmember Ramirez was unsuccessful in getting the solar project back on the agenda, she did get seconds on two other items, both of which lacked clear context.

Code Enforcement and Compliance with Prop 36 and find a pathway to meeting the new guidance issued by Governor Gavin Newsom. Next item is going to be to have a discussion about the annexation of parcels 063405124 and 063405109 also known as Set Free Ranch.

Prop 36 is a state criminal statute that increases penalties for drug and theft offenses, allows repeat shoplifters to be charged with felonies, creates "treatment-mandated felonies," and expands fentanyl-related penalties. Prop 36 is implemented at the county level — through district attorneys, sheriffs, probation, the courts, and county behavioral health agencies. Cities have no direct enforcement role.

At the Wednesday evening PAAC meeting, the Desert Trumpet informally asked Community Development Director Keith Gardner and Code Enforcement Officer Vanessa Cabrera what the relationship between Code Enforcement and Prop 36 might be. Neither could identify a clear connection between the two.

How or why the City might annex the two parcels mentioned, both owned by the Dietz Family Trust and one of which is the address for Set Free Ranch at 1555 La Buena Tierra, was similarly hazy. Both are west of the city limits and Lake Bandini, and they aren’t connected to each other.

In summer 2023, Set Free had been attempting to position itself as a rehabilitation center, which was supported by then City Manager Frank Luckino and Mayor McArthur Wright.5 Wright was also the 2nd on Ramirez’s motion.

However, then as now, the language used by Set Free on their website contradicts a rehab focus or expertise:

Phase 1 spans a 60-day blackout period, during which participants focus on maintaining sobriety and cultivating a deeper relationship with Jesus Christ. This phase includes mandatory, meticulously scheduled group classes centered on direct biblical teachings. Upon completing the initial 60 days, participants have the choice to either continue with subsequent phases of the program or return home to their families.6

The only clue comes from a statement Councilmember Ramirez made at the January 13, 2026 City Council meeting while suggesting that there was no need for a Housing and Homeless subcommittee:

I realized that all of us, in our own different capacities and with our own different strengths, do work and focus on housing and homeless. For example, when Councilmember Bilderain and I went to California League of Cities, we both attended different housing education sessions. He and I have worked before with the DA law enforcement figuring out prop 36 and the legislative aspect of homelessness.

Set Free openly describe themselves as accepting “referrals from one or many agencies in the inland empire — social service, parole, and probation.” 7

Is it possible the two Future Agenda Items Councilmember Ramirez proposed are related?

City Manager’s Report

Outgoing City Manager Stone James covered three items in his update:

• A sales tax survey mailer has gone out to approximately 5,000–5,500 registered voters, with paper forms available at City Hall and an online version accessible via url and QR code; James urged as many residents as possible to complete the survey.

• The free Levitt AMP concert series at Freedom Plaza continues on April 18, April 25, and May 2, with gates opening at 6 p.m. and live music from 7–9 p.m.

• Finally, James reported that the April 4 community cleanup drew 220 participants, and reminded residents that their Burrtec contract includes four free bulky item pickups per year — call Burrtec at ‭1 (760) 365-2015‬ to enquire or schedule via this online form.

After the conclusion of Public Comment at 8:30pm, covered in Part Two of this recap, City Council then continued their late evening by adjourning to a closed session on Public Employment - City Manager.

Watch for Part 2 of our recap, covering Public Comment on Sunday morning

The Desert Trumpet is within $150 of meeting our $10,000 paid subscription goal!!! We need your paid subscriptions to publish the coverage you depend on. Basic subscriptions are $50 per year or $5 per month.

Subscribe now

Become a sustaining subscriber by increasing your subscription to $100 or more per year! Want to make a one-time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

Thanks for reading! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share

After last week’s unexpected announcement that City Manager Stone James is resigning, it’s not surprising that this week’s meeting concludes with a closed session to discuss City Manager employment. James has agreed to stay on for 60 days making appointment of a replacement in lieu of a temporary solution more likely.

However, Council will need to wade through a 13 item, 312 page agenda prior to beginning the closed session. Among the items up for discussion are a regional housing trust, Joshua Tree National Park workforce housing, an A/V upgrade and extension of the regional transportation tax.

Based on this list we’d normally advise strong coffee instead of popcorn, but as z107.7 reported on Friday and we clarified on Saturday, Councilmember April Ramirez intends to request reconsideration of the E-Group Solar vote as a future agenda item toward the end of the meeting. And in an extensive Facebook thread, Ramirez has also promised to “go public with everything” in response to Desert Trumpet’s article.1 In the past Ramirez has used Council Comments to make extended statements on non-agenda items. Will Mayor Daniel Mintz be as generous with time as Steven Bilderain when he held the gavel?

The meeting begins at 6 pm at City Hall, 6136 Adobe Road. Proceedings may be viewed on demand or live streamed at www.29palms.org by clicking the “Meeting Agendas” link.

PUBLIC COMMENT

You can comment on agenda items and issues important to you at every City Council meeting. Comments on agenda items take place during discussion of that item, while comments on non-agenda items take place near the end of the meeting. The Brown Act prevents Council from commenting on non-agenda items. To comment, pick up a form at the entry desk, fill it out, and hand it to the Clerk, who usually sits just in front of the Council dais on the right.

Here’s the list of Council email addresses to write if you can’t get to the meeting — be sure to email them prior to 2 pm on the date of the meeting so they have time to read your email prior to discussion. You can also copy the clerk at cvillescas@29palms.org and ask that your letter be made part of the public record.

AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND PROCLAMATIONS

Council will open with a presentation to the Twentynine Palms High School Tennis Team and the Rotary Club for their participation in the City’s Cash for Trash recycling program. Two proclamations follow: one recognizing April 2026 as Child Abuse Prevention Awareness Month and a second recognizing April 2026 as Sexual Assault Awareness Month.

CONSENT CALENDAR

The Consent Calendar consists of items usually approved with a single vote. The public is given a chance to make public comment on these items prior to the Council motion. Fill out a comment form specifying the item you wish to address and submit it in person, or send an email in advance regarding any of the items on this meeting’s Consent Calendar.

One of the items is the warrant register, which totals $1,366,653.80. The ongoing $8,400 monthly payment to Clifford Moss LLC — the consultant overseeing Probolsky Research’s sales tax survey work — continues to appear, as do Rutan and Tucker legal fees of $128,580.59 for the period.

Other consent calendar items include the consolidation of the City’s three employee deferred compensation plans into a single plan with Empower, expected to save approximately $30,000 annually in record-keeping costs; and $50,000 from the Capital Projects Fund for safety-critical playground equipment replacement at Luckie Park and Knott’s Sky Park, where January 2026 inspections found cracked slides, corroded panels, and components that no longer meet safety standards.

8. Downtown Septic System Management Contract Renewal.

The City’s contract with San Bernardino County Service Area 70 (CSA 70) to operate and maintain the Project Phoenix septic wastewater system — serving Freedom Plaza 14-15 downtown businesses2 — expired March 31, 2026, and must be renewed. The proposed new contract runs five years through FY 2031 at a total cost of $409,233.63. A contract of this size and duration deserves more than a single-vote approval. The staff report also notes that while the downtown businesses pay wastewater rates, the majority of this cost has been and will continue to be paid by the General Fund — meaning all taxpayers subsidize the system. The amount paid by the businesses was not specified in the staff report. The package treatment facility that will eventually replace the two existing septic tanks is expected to be operational by the fourth quarter of 2026.

DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS

9. Council Chambers Audio and Video Upgrade for SB707.

In October 2025, Senate Bill 707 was signed into law updating the Ralph M. Brown Act and requiring local legislative bodies to provide the public with the ability to attend all open meetings via two-way audio/video by July 1, 2026. Staff has determined that the current AV system is not capable of meeting the new requirements.

Following an assessment by Geertech, an audio/visual consulting firm funded by equipment manufacturers (at no cost to the City), staff identified a single vendor — Rat Sound Systems — that meets all requirements at a cost of $21,483.92. Staff notes this covers the primary equipment only, and additional purchases from standard vendors will be needed to complete the full upgrade.

Interestingly, the act also includes provisions addressing internet failures that may disrupt meeting transmission:

In the event of such a disruption, the body must recess its open session and engage in a good faith attempt to restore service. The session must stay in recess for at least an hour or until the disruption has been addressed and remedied whichever is earlier.

The July 1, 2026 compliance deadline is firm. If you’ve ever wanted to give public comment at a Council meeting remotely via video, this is the item that makes it possible.

10. Consideration of Resolution No. 8760 Approving the Measure I Continuation Expenditure Plan.

Measure I, the half-cent transportation sales tax approved by San Bernardino County voters in 1989 is currently set to expire in 2040. The San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) is proposing to place a continuation of Measure I on the November 3, 2026 ballot — extending it beyond 2040 at the same half-cent rate. Over its first 30 years, the continuation is estimated to generate approximately $7.5 billion, all dedicated to transportation improvements within the county.

The funds are distributed to different areas based on population with percentages dictating the spending. For Twentynine Palms, revenues would be allocated 70% for Local Mobility (street rehabilitation, pothole repair, sidewalks, bicycle facilities, grade separations), 20% for Regional Mobility, and 10% for Operations. To receive Local Mobility funds, jurisdictions must adopt an annually updated Five-Year Plan, and five percent must initially be reserved for active transportation projects.

The plan requires approval by the County Board of Supervisors and a majority of cities representing a majority of the incorporated population. As of March 26, 17 of San Bernardino County’s 24 cities had already approved the plan. Twentynine Palms is among the remaining seven cities scheduled to act by April 14. Staff recommends that the Council approve the Measure I Continuation Expenditure Plan developed by the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority.

11. Consideration of Joint Powers Agreement Participation in the San Bernardino Regional Housing Trust.

A Joint Powers Authority (JPA) is a legal entity that California cities and counties can form together to accomplish things that are difficult to do alone. By pooling resources, sharing administrative costs, and acting as a unified body, member agencies can access larger grants, attract more developer interest, and carry more weight with state and federal funders than any single small city could on its own. JPAs are common in California and are used for everything from regional transit systems to insurance pools to, increasingly, housing.

The San Bernardino Regional Housing Trust (SBRHT) is a new JPA being formed by San Bernardino County and member cities specifically to address the region’s affordable housing crisis. The goal is to raise and leverage state, federal, and private funds to support affordable housing production, preservation, and rehabilitation across the county. The JPA’s governing board will include one locally elected representative from each member agency, along with at least two housing policy experts. Annual participation costs are estimated at $10,000 to $30,000 in year one, settling to $25,000 to $40,000 per year at full capacity. 19 jurisdictions, including Yucca Valley, have joined and another five have the JPA on the docket in April.

It’s important to understand what the Trust can and can’t do on its own. It’s a gap funder — providing roughly 15-20% of a project’s total development cost alongside larger funding sources. New affordable housing in San Bernardino County is projected to cost approximately $596,000 per unit to build. The Trust is intended to be a lever to make projects financially viable and competitive for state and federal funding.

Twentynine Palms has been selected, along with Ontario, as one of two pilot project cities under the Housing Trust, with $1.75 million in REAP (Regional Early Action Planning) funds awarded to SBCOG by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). The $1.75 million is seed money to help attract the larger capital stack a real project requires. The funds must be allocated to a viable project in the City by December 2026 and then fully expended within five years.

Tuesday's vote is the public-facing decision point of a process that has been underway since 2021. The City's own engagement goes back to December 2022, when it submitted a letter of interest to SBCOG. What's new is that the REAP funding has created a hard deadline — a formal Council vote is needed by April 15 or the funds will go to a different City.

In voting yes, Council would be doing two things at once: joining the JPA and implicitly confirming to SBCOG that the City can meet the December REAP deadline, thus allowing SBCOG to recommend Twentynine Palms for the funding at the May 13 Board meeting.

12. JTNPA Workforce Housing on City-owned 17-Acre Site.

In a city that has seen more than its share of contentious development proposals — from the Ofland resort to the E-Group solar farm — this one stands out as something the community can agree on. Council is being asked to authorize staff to work with the Joshua Tree National Park Association (JTNPA) on a land lease for the purpose of developing workforce housing for National Park staff. The parcel is located near Theatre 29, west of Adobe Road, north of Foothill, and south of Sullivan.

The federal staffing crisis at Joshua Tree National Park provides important context for why the City would want to partner with the park and ensure housing stability for seasonal staff. Since the early days of the second Trump administration in February 2025, the NPS has lost approximately 24% of its permanent workforce nationally through layoffs, buyouts, and resignations — including six probationary rangers at Joshua Tree in the initial round of cuts. A third voluntary departure window opened in April 2026, with an April 12 application deadline. According to Resistance Rangers — a network of current and former NPS staff tracking and speaking out against the cuts — the agency has already lost 20 to 30% of its workforce, with further reductions anticipated. Park-specific tracking found that at Joshua Tree, 16 of 17 supervisory positions were eliminated, leaving just one person to handle seasonal hiring. Affordable housing near the park has long been out of reach for seasonal NPS employees, who tend to be on the lower end of the federal pay scale. As the park struggles to recruit and retain staff in an era of budget cuts and buyouts, access to stable, affordable housing close to the park entrance could make a meaningful difference.

That context makes the JTNPA proposal all the more timely. City Manager James met with JTNPA Executive Director Jacqueline Guevara, Director Christine Grimes, and project manager Ken Beck on January 26, 2026, and the 17-acre City-owned site — adjacent to Theatre 29 and close to the future Mojaveland miniature golf course and Palms N Paws animal shelter — was identified as a potential home for what JTNPA describes as a transformative, community-centered multi-use project.

JTNPA’s project proposal describes a development that is mission-driven, and economically supportive, integrating housing, education, volunteer support, and community gathering spaces. The housing component is central: 12 Single Resident Occupancy (SRO) units dedicated to National Park rangers and park staff. The stated benefits to the City include providing attainable housing, reducing pressure on the local housing stock, and freeing up existing rental units for other community members.

JTNPA was awarded a $75,000 planning grant from the National Park Service Foundation in 2025 specifically to design this project. Should they secure a suitable piece of land, they would become eligible to apply for a $2 million construction grant — funding the development at no cost to the City. The City acquired the parcel in April 2000, originally intending it as a future park; construction funding fell through and it has remained undeveloped ever since.

Council is being asked only to authorize the initial lease negotiations, with any final agreement returning to Council for approval.

13. Councilmembers’ Use of City Letterhead

As the staff report makes clear, the City doesn’t provide individualized letterhead for Council members — and has no policy governing when they can use the full City letterhead on their own. When a Council member wants to write a letter of support for a grant application, recommend someone for a recognition award, or weigh in on a State initiative, they have no official stationery to do it on unless they use the full City letterhead, which lists all five Council members, implying full Council buy in for the letter’s content.

The staff report outlines four possible policy directions:

• allowing letterhead use when the letter wouldn’t financially or legally obligate the City

• the Council member makes clear they’re writing as an individual rather than on behalf of the full Council

• creating new individual Council member letterhead that doesn’t list the other members

• or prohibiting individual use of City letterhead entirely unless the full Council has approved the action

The staff report focuses specifically on physical City letterhead — letters, not emails — and makes no mention of email correspondence. Whether Council chooses to broaden the discussion to cover digital communications would be up to them.

An email sent to the City last week claims the California Energy Commission has cleared the path for AB 205 approval. The underlying correspondence tells a more limited story — and raises questions about an undisclosed relationship between the project’s sole council supporter, a church she attends and the developer.1

On March 31, one week after the Twentynine Palms City Council voted 3-1-1 to reject the E-Group PS solar project on March 23, Robert Smith, the developer’s attorney, sent an email to City Manager Stone James declaring that the California Energy Commission (CEC) had confirmed that a reconfigured project was eligible to proceed through the state approval process under AB 205 — bypassing the council’s vote entirely.

Smith’s email, which was also sent to the Desert Trumpet, claimed E-Group had already begun the CEC process by requesting a required pre-application meeting. The Desert Trumpet contacted the CEC to verify that claim. As of April 2, the CEC said no contact had been made. Contact was apparently first made on or around April 3 — after the Desert Trumpet’s inquiry. Given that discrepancy, the Desert Trumpet then decided to hold off on reporting until we were notified by the CEC that an application had actually been filed by E-Group.

On Friday, April 10, Z107.7 reported on a March 27 letter from CEC attorney Jared Babula to E-Group’s attorney Robert Smith, characterizing it as the state asserting its own jurisdiction over the project. The Babula correspondence was originally an attachment to Robert Smith’s March 31 email, which was not mentioned in the Z107.7 reporting. Councilmember April Ramirez—the sole vote in favor of the project—cited the Babula letter in an interview with Z107.7 saying she intends to bring the matter back at the April 14 council meeting.

Our reporting raises questions about an undisclosed relationship between Ramirez and a Twentynine Palms church organization that received more than $7,600 from E-Group before the vote.

The Email to the City

The March 31 email was sent by Robert Smith of K&L Gates LLP and cc’d to City Attorney Patrick Muñoz. In it, Smith announced that E-Group had already requested a pre-application meeting with the CEC, describing it as a required step before filing a formal application. He wrote that the project had been modified to generate 50 MW AC — the threshold required for CEC jurisdiction under AB 205 — and that “the CEC has confirmed that the project would meet the 50 MW requirement to be considered for approval under AB 205.”

Smith attributed the council’s rejection to “misinformation provided to City Council” — a characterization that appears directed at the residents and public commenters who overwhelmingly opposed the project at the March 23 meeting, where 26 speakers argued against it and five spoke in favor.

What the CEC Actually Said

The communication Smith cited as CEC confirmation is a March 27 letter from Jared Babula, an attorney in the CEC’s Chief Counsel’s Office, to Smith himself. The Desert Trumpet has reviewed that letter in full.

In it, Babula confirmed that a photovoltaic facility with an AC output of over 50 MW would meet the statutory definition under Public Resources Code section 25545(b)(1) and would be subject to CEC jurisdiction — provided the developer “properly filed an application with the CEC as set forth in the CEC’s regulations.” Babula directed Smith to the CEC’s Opt-In certification program for further information.2

Babula’s response was a conditional answer to a narrow question. Smith had sent the CEC a revised technical specifications sheet and site plan, asking only whether the modified project, on paper, met the statutory definition. Babula confirmed it did — but made no determination about whether the project would actually receive CEC certification, whether the application would be deemed complete, or whether the CEC would ultimately approve it.

The modified project, according to E-Group’s own technical summary, is designed to produce exactly 50.10 MW AC — a margin of one-tenth of one megawatt above the threshold. The same document shows the project’s output dropping below 50 MW at sustained ambient temperatures above 50 degrees Celsius, or 122 degrees Fahrenheit, due to inverter derating in extreme heat.

Smith’s email also states the revised project involved “no modification of the site plan.” This is supported by the site plan attached to the Smith-Babula correspondence, which is dated May 2023. But it also indicates that the project rejected by City Council remains unchanged.

The Pre-Application Claim Is Speculative

Smith’s March 31 email to James stated that E-Group had “already started that process through requesting a pre-application meeting with the CEC, which is required prior to submission of the application.”

In other words, at the time Smith wrote to the City on March 31 claiming the process had already begun, the CEC had received no outreach from E-Group. Contact was not made until at least April 3 — three days after Smith’s email, and the day after the Desert Trumpet began asking the CEC directly.

The Project Has a Long Road Ahead at the CEC

CEC jurisdiction and CEC approval are not the same thing. Meeting the definition that triggers the state process is the beginning of a lengthy review, not the end of one. Even setting aside the pre-application timeline, the path through the CEC is far from automatic. As CEQA consultant Nicole Criste noted at the March 23 council meeting, the CEC can only serve as a responsible agency under CEQA if the City certifies the Environmental Impact Report first. If the City declines to act on the EIR, the CEC’s role as a responsible agency is constrained.

Planning Commissioner Jim Krushat raised the broader point at the same meeting:

The California Energy Commission has greater resources and more time — 271 days. We got 107. And I don’t think it’s automatic to assume that the California Energy Commission would approve the project. We have a high density of solar fields in the area and that would go into consideration.

Ramirez Plans to Bring It Back to Council — and Disputes the Public Record

The Smith email to James is not the only development in the days following the council vote. In the Z107.7 interview Councilmember April Ramirez — the sole vote in favor of the project — said she intends to raise the CEC letter at the April 14 council meeting and push for reconsideration:

I fully intend to bring this up at the next council meeting along with the hundreds of letters from constituents that I have received asking for us to reconsider this. That day that they voted no, there were more people that wrote in in favor of it, almost twice as many as the people that were against it, and they still voted no.

The public record at the March 23 meeting tells a different story. 26 residents spoke in person against the project; five spoke in favor. Mayor Daniel Mintz reported that he had received numerous emails in opposition. Ramirez cited two petitions — one with 45 signatures and one with 20 to 30 — submitted in support of the project. The March 23 meeting drew a standing-room-only crowd that was, by all accounts, predominantly opposed.

Ramirez also told Z107.7 that the Brown Act requires Councilmembers to weigh written communications the same as in-person testimony. While the Brown Act does require that written public comments be accepted and considered, it does not establish that an informal petition of 45 unverified3 signatures carries equivalent weight to 26 in-person speakers in a quasi-judicial land use proceeding.

Ramirez further argued that the council’s “no” vote would discourage future developers: “What it really does, ultimately, it signals to any other developer or solar project or anything that wants to come here, ‘Don’t even waste your time with the city, just go straight to the state.’” That argument tracks closely with the legal pressure E-Group has wielded since 2023, when the AB 205 threat first emerged as leverage to push the City toward approval.

What is not acknowledged in the Z107.7 article or by Ramirez is that the Council vote did not appear to be based on whether or not the solar project would proceed to the state or on most of the offered public comment. Instead, Mayor Daniel Mintz, accompanied by Councilmember McArthur Wright, had unique perspectives. Mintz was concerned about the devaluations of adjacent residential parcels while Wright queried:

Would you build a house there and live next to a solar farm? Because that’s basically what you’re asking. If we rezone that to Residential-1, and then we build residential homes on that lot, that’s what we’re asking families to do.

After some evasion, Smith eventually admitted, “I sort of like the house I’ve got, so I’m probably just going to stay with my current house.”

Lack of Disclosure Raises Questions

Councilmember Ramirez’s continued public advocacy for the project comes without disclosure of a relationship between E-Group and an organization connected to her church4.

Sanctuary Church is a Pentecostal/Apostolic congregation in Twentynine Palms led by Bishop Perry Ford. Its official 501(c)(3) nonprofit arm is the Community Learning and Equipping Project, Inc. — known as CLEP — whose officers are all Sanctuary Church pastors. The City’s own staff report on the E-Group project described CLEP as the “non-profit arm of Sanctuary Church.” CLEP serves as the fiscal sponsor of the Hope Project, a food distribution program that is the public-facing community program of the church.

According to documentation presented by E-Group at the March 3, 2026, Planning Commission meeting, E-Group PS made more than $7,600 in donations to the Hope Project — $4,000 in direct contributions and $3,600 to help sponsor a color run.
E-Group listed these donations on a presentation slide as “public benefits already provided to the community.” That presentation came twenty days before the council vote. Bishop Perry Ford, a leader of Sanctuary Church, had spoken in favor of the project at the February 17 Planning Commission meeting — the first public hearing on the project — two weeks before the donations were publicly disclosed.

The Desert Trumpet has reviewed video footage from Sanctuary Church services on March 29 and April 1 that show Councilmember Ramirez in attendance.

Ramirez cast the only “yes” vote at the March 23 council meeting without disclosing any connection to Sanctuary Church, CLEP, or the Hope Project. Whether Ramirez’s relationship to Sanctuary Church and its nonprofit arm created a legal obligation to disclose or recuse under California’s conflict of interest rules or the Political Reform Act is a question the Desert Trumpet is not in a position to answer.

What the documented record shows is that a developer seeking a favorable vote made financial contributions to an organization connected to a Councilmember’s church, that those contributions were presented publicly as evidence of community benefit a few weeks before the March 23 Council meeting, and that the Councilmember cast the only vote in the developer’s favor without any public acknowledgment of the relationship. That record will be in the room when Ramirez takes her seat at the April 14 council meeting and moves to bring the project back.

Councilmember Ramirez declined to comment, stating in an email she has been legally advised not to speak to the Desert Trumpet. The next Twentynine Palms City Council meeting is Tuesday, April 14, at 6 pm.

Twentynine Palms City Manager Dr. Stone James has submitted his resignation, the city announced Thursday, April 9, 2026. During a special closed session meeting held at 11:30 am, the Twentynine Palms City Council voted unanimously to accept his departure, with Council Member Wright making the motion and Mayor Pro Tem Scott providing the second. The vote was 5-0. The Desert Trumpet covered the agenda, which was released Wednesday, here.

Dr. James, who has served as City Manager since March 2024, cited family considerations as the major reason for his decision. He will be transitioning to a private sector opportunity in the Coachella Valley. Under the terms of his resignation, Dr. James will remain in his role for 60 days to ensure a smooth and orderly transition of leadership.

In a press release distributed by the City, Mayor Daniel Mintz expressed gratitude for the outgoing City Manager’s service to the community.

On behalf of the City Council, I want to thank Dr. James for his leadership and dedication to the Twentynine Palms community. We wish him and his family all the best in this next chapter.

The City’s press release noted that during his roughly two years at the helm, Dr. James oversaw a number of significant milestones for the city. The press release goes on to highlight that among his accomplishments was the creation and implementation of Twentynine Palms’ first long-range strategic plan — a roadmap designed to shape the city’s growth and priorities for years to come. The City also said that he worked to strengthen the city’s fiscal health, improve organizational transparency and responsiveness, and raise customer service standards across City departments.

More recently, however, he was not successful in ensuring the Council’s approval of the E-Group PS solar project amid conflict between Planning Commission and City Council members.

Dr. James also focused on the City’s response to major storm events during his tenure, coordinating resources and municipal services during several flash floods that took place.

“This has been the most rewarding time of my career,” Dr. James said in a statement released Thursday. James had previously served as Economic Development Director of Cathedral City. Twentynine Palms was his first stint as a City Manager. “It has been an honor to serve the City Council, staff, and the Twentynine Palms community. I am proud of what we have accomplished together and confident in the City’s future.”

The City Council is expected to consider next steps for interim leadership and the recruitment of a permanent City Manager in the coming weeks. The Mayor also noted that a closed session is scheduled for the Tuesday, April 14 Council meeting to review pending litigation.

Dr. James’ departure marks a chapter in Twentynine Palms that has seen a push for large development projects that promise growth but which bring many challenges for the community. As Twentynine Palms looks ahead, the search for new leadership will be closely watched by residents, business owners, and community stakeholders.

The Desert Trumpet will continue to follow this story as the City Council moves forward with its search for the next City Manager.

The Desert Trumpet is within $300 of meeting our $10,000 paid subscription goal!!! We need your paid subscriptions to publish the coverage you depend on. Basic subscriptions are $50 per year or $5 per month.

Subscribe now

Become a sustaining subscriber by increasing your subscription to $100 or more per year! Want to make a one-time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

Thanks for reading! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share

Twentynine Palms City Council has called a Special Meeting for Thursday, April 9, 2026 at 11:30 a.m. at City Hall, 6136 Adobe Road. The entire agenda consists of a single closed session item on City Manager employment — no open session business, no consent calendar, no action items.

Public comment at closed sessions such as this are a great opportunity to catch the ear of Council on non-agenda items. This is also Twentynine Palms residents’ chance to sing the praises of City Manager Stone James or argue against contract renewal.

The notice went out Wednesday morning, April 8, at 8:30 a.m. — 27 hours before the meeting. Under California’s Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code § 54956), special meetings require a minimum of 24 hours’ notice posted publicly and delivered to Council members and any media outlets that have requested notification in writing.

The City met that bar, but only just. For context, regular City Council meetings require agendas posted 72 hours in advance. Special meetings carry the shortened 24-hour window by design — they exist for urgent matters that can’t wait for the regular schedule. Whether the City Manager’s employment situation qualifies as that kind of urgency is a question the public has no way to evaluate.

PUBLIC COMMENT

You can comment on agenda items and issues important to you at every City Council meeting. Comments on agenda items take place during discussion of that item, while comments on non-agenda items take place near the end of the meeting. The Brown Act prevents Council from commenting on non-agenda items. To comment, just pick up a form at the entry desk, fill it out, and hand it to the Clerk, who usually sits just in front of the Council bench toward the right.

Here’s the list of Council email addresses to write if you can’t get to the meeting — be sure to email any comment ASAP due to the short timeline. You can also copy the clerk at cvillescas@29palms.org and ask that your letter be made part of the public record.

CLOSED SESSION

1. Closed Session pursuant to Government Code Section 54957 — PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT: Title - City Manager.

Government Code Section 54957 permits a legislative body to meet in closed session to consider the appointment, employment, performance evaluation, discipline, or dismissal of a public employee. The agenda discloses nothing beyond the title of the position — standard for closed session personnel items, and also standard in that it tells the public nothing at all about why the meeting was called on such short notice.

City Manager H. Stone James was approved by a 4-0-1 Council vote on March 26, 2024, but didn’t begin work until April 29, 2024. He came to Twentynine Palms from Cathedral City, where he had served as Economic Development Director for seven years. His original base salary was $176,425.60.

The new City Manager’s first contract renewal was anything but routine. Beginning in March 2025, Council took up his employment agreement across a series of closed sessions that stretched through spring and into early summer — with the item pulled from the May 13, 2025, open meeting agenda before finally returning on May 27, 2025, when the amended contract was approved.

The amendment gave James a 2.5% raise retroactive to March 26, 2025 — the anniversary of the Council vote, not of his actual first day on the job — bringing his base pay to $180,836.24, with a further 2.5% cost-of-living adjustment in July raising the total to $185,357.15. The renewal also introduced a new provision allowing James to cash in unused administrative leave, a benefit his predecessor Frank Luckino explicitly did not have. At the time, the staff report justified the raise by noting James’s salary was the lowest among city managers in San Bernardino County — while omitting that he is also a first-time city manager.

What is discussed in closed session remains confidential. Any action taken, however, must be reported publicly when Council reconvenes in open session — unfortunately a rarity in Twentynine Palms.

The Desert Trumpet is within $300 of meeting our $10,000 paid subscription goal!!! We need your paid subscriptions to publish the coverage you depend on. Basic subscriptions are $50 per year or $5 per month.

Subscribe now

Become a sustaining subscriber by increasing your subscription to $100 or more per year! Want to make a one-time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

Thanks for reading! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share

Clocking in at just over three and a half hours, the turnout at Monday’s City Council meeting sent a message to industrial solar farm developers E-Group PS—take a hike. With all seats full and an overflow audience that was standing room only, it was abundantly clear that the evening’s discussion topic of building a 184-acre solar farm on the northwest end of town was a pressing issue for many.

Our agenda preview of the meeting is available here; video footage of the meeting can be found here.

For Awards and Presentations, Council commended Planning Assistant Diane Olsen on her retirement and heard a positive grant update from Reach Out Morongo Basin Director Robin Schlosser. They also approved the Consent Calendar and closed out construction for a veterans housing project on Elm Avenue. Then, Council took on the agenda item that was on everybody’s minds—the E-Group PS solar project. Councilmember Steven Bilderain recused himself from this topic due to the project’s proximity to his residence.

Solar Project by the Numbers

The E-Group PS project—also sometimes known as the Harmony Acres Solar Project 1—consists of a 184-acre industrial-solar facility on two parcels that total 477 acres north of Two Mile Road and west of the northernly extension of Noels Knoll Road. Passage of the development entailed rezoning part of the property from residential to a new land use category— Renewable Energy—and rezoning the rest to accommodate higher density housing.2

Community Development Director Keith Gardner introduced the project and said that based on very rough estimates and assumptions calculated by the City’s finance and legal team, the City could expect $8,296,098 in benefits package and sales tax revenue3 over the 30-year lifetime of the project. Currently, large-scale solar projects are not subject to property tax in the state of California.

Our previous coverage of the solar project is linked here.

The Developer’s Case

E-Group representative Robert Smith, an attorney with K&L Gates LLP, opened with the project’s main selling point: the proposed community benefits package, which allotted $105,000 to the City annually during construction, and up to $150,000 annually once the project was fully operational, with an operating contingency of 30 years.

Smith’s presentation stated that the City could expect a potential $2,475,000 in property tax revenue from the project. This figure was listed despite SB 710, which was just renewed in the 2025-2026 state legislative session and exempts large-scale solar projects from having to pay property taxes until 2031.

California has renewed this exemption repeatedly over its 25-year history, suggesting a pattern of extension, making it unlikely the property tax exemption on solar projects will actually sunset in 2031.

Regarding sales tax revenue, Smith argued that within five years of operation, E-Group would become the single largest individual taxpayer in the city. Smith proposed:

We’ve also recommended to staff and certainly this is a question that we need to discuss with the City Attorney, but we’ve said we’d be comfortable to include a provision in the Development Agreement that says that the developer will use its commercially reasonable efforts to maximize the sales tax revenue for the city.

This despite the Development Agreement already having been penned out and ready for a Council vote that night.

The AB 205 Caveat

The elephant in the room was AB 205, signed into state law in 2022, which gives the California Energy Commission (CEC) the potential authority to issue permits for solar photovoltaic facilities with a generating capacity of at least 50 megawatts, overriding local approval process.

As confirmed in a letter by CEC Program Manager Eric Knight, the current project proposed by E-Group does not meet the required specifications to qualify for AB 205. To meet that AB 205 requirement, Smith claimed all E-Group would have to do is add more inverters to the solar rows. The comment carried far more nuance, however, than a simple fix. Smith elaborated:

We don’t need to expand the acreage. We don’t need to change anything about the project beyond that. We do not need to expand the project footprint. All that would require a revision to four pages of the EIR in front of you tonight. We could probably do it in a couple hours. Again, we don’t want to go to the CEC, but could we prepare a project that would be submitted for CEC approval that meets it? My answer is easily. And again, this is not a site limited project. We have 484 acres under lease. So for whatever reason, if the CEC wanted us to expand or required us to expand to greater acreage, we have more land under lease to do so.

Smith’s claim was speculative as only 241 acres was proposed for rezoning to “Renewable Energy” with the balance being used to satisfy SB 330, due to the loss of residentially zoned land.

Regarding potential exposure to valley fever and dust mitigation concerns, Smith said developers have offered to provide HEPA filters to all residents within 1.5 miles east of the project site for the entire duration of construction to reduce dust impacts. However, as Aidan Marshall, who spoke on behalf of Citizens for Responsible Industry, later pointed out during public comment, this offer was also not included in the Conditions of Approval nor the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and therefore, the City’s legal enforceability was tenuous at best.

On the efficacy of HEPA filters in reducing valley fever exposure, Marshall stated:

Our expert toxicologists submitted numerous reports demonstrating that these do very little to address the spread of these small lightweight spores that would be affecting both workers and residents.

Another public commenter, Gina Kohn, further reiterated the risks of valley fever:

A family member of mine who lived about a quarter of a mile from a 600-plus acre development site in Rancho Mirage contracted valley fever last year and passed away a week ago from this debilitating illness. I share this not for sympathy but because it underscores the seriousness of the risk we are discussing.

Council Questions for the Developer: No Guarantee of Local Jobs

Mayor Pro Tem Octavious Scott asked:

What mechanism are you using to guarantee that you’ll use locals for the construction jobs? I understand there’s 200 jobs. How are we going to guarantee that some of those jobs come into Twentynine Palms?

An argument those in favor of the project had made was that it would bring much-needed construction jobs and employment to the residents of Twentynine Palms. However, this argument was quickly shut down by Smith, when he mentioned E-Group was already negotiating with an out-of-area union. Smith said:

Currently in the development agreement there is no language that requires them to be located here, and we are in negotiations with a union that has at least wanted us to sign a project labor agreement. They’re represented by counsel here tonight. And so if those negotiations were successful, that may implicate how many people here are local.

Councilmember McArthur Wright expressed concerns with the residential zoning that would surround the solar farm development.

I need more clarification on this because you want it rezoned for single family [residential] just to meet a quota, but would you build a house there?

“We’re not residential housing developers.” rebutted Smith.

Wright pressed the issue:

No, I’m talking about you individually. Would you build a house there and live next to a solar farm? Because that’s basically what you’re asking. If we rezone that to Residential-1, and then we build residential homes on that lot, that’s what we’re asking families to do.”

Smith, “That’s correct. It’s already residentially zoned though, so we’d be increasing the…potential allowable density for that area. But that’s again already a residentially zoned area.”

“Yeah, but you didn’t answer the question,” said Wright.

Smith chimed, “Whether I would personally build a house there? I sort of like the house I’ve got, so I’m probably just going to stay with my current house.”

“Is that house in 29?” Wright continued.

“No,” said Smith.

Councilmember April Ramirez, who was the sole vote in favor of the project by the end of the proceedings, established through a series of yes/no questions that Smith is an attorney who specializes in high-impact legal fights against local and state agencies regarding land use. She cited three U.S. Supreme Court cases decided over 30 years ago: Nolan v. California Coastal Commission (1987), Dolan v. City of Tigard (1994), and Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal Council (1992) that rule that government regulations (such as the City’s ban on industrial-scale solar facilities) can constitute an unconstitutional "taking" of private property requiring compensation.

By showing on the record that Smith is an attorney who specializes in fighting local and state agencies on land use, and then naming those three specific cases, Ramirez was signaling that if the project was rejected, the City could get sued by E Group—and lose.

Public Comment: Majority In Clear Opposition

Unlike the turnout for the Ofland Resort development vote in July 2025, where some of the community and many members of the City’s former leadership advocated for approval, the opposition to the proposed E-Group solar project was far more palpable.

26 public commenters spoke against the project and five were in favor.

Mayor Daniel Mintz reported a number of emails had been submitted to Councilmembers in opposition to the project and also mentioned an informal petition had been submitted to him just moments before the meeting that had collected more than 40 signatures in favor of the project.

Public comment opened with resident Mary Kay Sherry, who reminded Council of the 2012 ordinance that Council passed that had banned industrial-scale solar projects. Sherry displayed a large photo of two desert tortoises that live on the property.

Exemplifying how political opinions can shift over time, Sherry read a letter that was submitted to council by George Mulopulos in 2012 in support of the City-wide industrial scale solar ban. Mulopulos is the principal of Proactive Properties LLC, which is currently leasing the property to E-Group. Part of the 2012 letter, signed by Mulopulos, states:

… It does not seem wise for the city to assist in creating a 3rd area of Industrial zoning, in a residential area, when the city already has ample, unused, industrial zoned land.

Resident Cindy Bernard, editor of Desert Trumpet, said that the developer has been obfuscating the number of successful solar projects they operate and encouraged the City to trust the California Energy Commission:

Let’s see what the state will do. We have to trust that the CEC is going to protect us, because I think they will.

Herb Mark, resident since 1964, addressed the issue of revenue:

I ask that you guys stop looking at E-Solar as a cash cow to solve your problems. Your flat revenue projection or whatever it may be– they’re not a cash cow — it’s pennies on the dollar. You guys are trying to trade pristine desert for dollars. Don’t do it.

Resident Stephanie Ballard spoke on the endangered desert tortoise:

I live in 29 Palms, three miles from this proposed solar project. The reason I’m here right now is to advocate for those with whom we share this land — and that is the desert tortoises. Already endangered, their fate is threatened by developments like this proposal. This location is tortoise habitat, and many do live there. Some also die there, as I recently witnessed. I was driving up Lear Avenue one morning and I saw the remains of this unfortunate creature.

Ballard struck a chord as she displayed an image of a desert tortoise that had been killed by a vehicle on Lear Avenue, just west of the proposed project site.

Speaking in favor of the project were Evan Cuellar, of Indian Cove, and George Mulopulos, Kayla Neeley, resident Dane Austin, and Johnnie Ray Ward Jr., former MUSD School Board candidate.

Ward spoke on the reliable revenue the project entailed for the City:

The loud voices we usually hear are not the majority. It’s the loud minority. Nine-to-five, two-to-three job working families, children they have to go home to — they don’t have time to write letters or attend meetings. We see the burned down buildings, the shacks, the eyesores.

Joseph Candelaria, born and raised in Twentynine Palms, was opposed to the project, saying he does not wish for his children to grow up next to solar farms or data centers, and called the community benefits package of $105,000 small money, equating it to half of the City Manager’s salary. Candelaria, with added humor, closed:

Because I did work 40 hours this week, and I’m still here.

Hannah Romsberg, who has previously monitored construction projects, called developers untrustworthy and asked why the City would consider doing business with someone who keeps lying to them. Romsberg expressed concerns with the amount of mass grading required for the project, calling the land unsuitable for a solar project:

This is going to present an issue to our most vulnerable neighbors — our elderly neighbors, including retired veterans, children, people with upper respiratory issues. So it’s not just the valley fever, it’s the dust in general because of this mass grading.

Reiterating the concern of dust was Erin Flanagan, who read a letter penned by ecologist Pat Flanagan:

Once excavated, the soil fluffs by 15 to 50%. So the 264,000 cubic yards become 400,000 cubic yards. Unfortunately, this redistributed dirt, no longer nourishing soil, would not support growth of the promised stabilizing plants, no matter how much they water and stomp on it.

Two Planning Commissioners, Jim Krushat and Alexander Garcia, also spoke out against the proposed project. Krushat raised the point of abundant solar projects in the surrounding area:

The California Energy Commission has greater resources and more time — 271 days. We got 107. And I don't think it's automatic to assume that the California Energy Commission would approve the project. We have a high density of solar fields in the area and that would go into consideration.

Commissioner Garcia said:

We work for you guys. We don’t work for corporations. And this is Twentynine Palms. We’ve been here our whole lives.

40-year Joshua Tree resident David Fick, spoke on behalf of the Morongo Basin Conservation Association, who helped advise on a $19 million shaded solar parking structure at Copper Mountain College as well solar parking installations at more than 15 Morongo Basin Unified Schools, encouraged Council to deny the project:

Call their bluff — because they’ll probably implode. Their project will not be feasible to go forward. They need 40 to 50 acre-feet of water minimum in all the soil moving and compaction. Just keep the ban, keep the integrity.

Phillip Smart, 12-year resident, drove the point home.

I never thought I’d use the phrase “not in my backyard,” but how about “not in our backyard?” I don’t get why these people would choose a community that has an ordinance against their project when there’s whole freaking Southern California available to them. And $105,000 a year — what’s the budget for paper towels for the city? You can spend $105,000 pretty fast on anything. I drove out to that place. It’s a pristine hillside — creosote, the whole bit. Just what we love about this. Why does it have to be in our little community? I don’t get it.

Further Council Discussion and the Final Vote

Assistant City Attorney Jennifer Farrell and the City CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) Consultant, Nicole Criste of Terra Nova Planning & Research, were present to answer Council questions.

Regarding AB 205, Mayor Mintz inquired with staff on the EIR being changed to add new inverters and the public process. Criste confirmed that the EIR could be recirculated if there were significant changes made, which would be determined by the City.

Developer representative Smith said the EIR would go through the CEC, which Criste rebutted, implying the City has more influence over the state approval process than developers:

Under CEQA, the CEC is a responsible agency only if the City certifies the EIR first. If the City does not act on the EIR, then the CEC has no opportunity to be a responsible agency, and I just want to make that clear.

Mayor Mintz pushed back on the developer’s claims that the City has a ban on all solar, citing the numerous solar installations that can be found at the City’s public schools. He spoke about his justification for voting in favor of the City’s industrial solar ban back in 2012, saying he could not support this project.

I've struggled with this because when I asked Mr. Gardner to show me all the lots around it, basically they'll be useless because no one's going to want to build a house living in the city next to a bunch of solar panels.

Councilmember Scott asked Assistant City Attorney Farrell if approving the project meant the City was rescinding this ban, which Farrell confirmed it would not. Scott expressed his wish to uphold the City General Plan.

Councilmember Ramirez used the passage of AB 205 as justification for her project support then raised an issue that was seemingly targeted at a specific speaker from the public:

AB 205 is what the people wanted. That is what the people voted for for the state of California. Number one. Number two, Dr. Mulopulos, your property is your property and you are free to do what you want with it. It is your constitutional right. I have some people here telling me that I need to not sell out and “Where’s my integrity?” and I have a really hard time weighing that when those same people talking about integrity can find themselves on Megan’s Law website.

As mentioned by Mayor Pro Tem Scott in a social media post following the Council vote, State Senator Shannon Grove, who represented Twentynine Palms at the time, voted against AB 205— meaning the people of 29 Palms, as represented at the state level, voted against it.

Ultimately, the motion to deny the solar project was posed by Wright, and seconded by Scott; motion to deny passed 3-1-1 with Ramirez as the sole dissenting vote.

The next City Council meeting will take place Tuesday, April 14, at 6 pm.

Desert Trumpet has sufficient funds to operate through June. We need your paid subscriptions to publish the coverage you depend on.

Subscribe now

Upgrade your subscription from free to paid today for just $50 per year or $5 per month. Want to make a one-time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

Thanks for reading! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share

On Thursday, March 19, the Twentynine Palms Tourism Business Improvement District (TBID) board held its second meeting of the calendar year. The public meeting followed a closed session for a performance review of TBID marketing director Breanna Dusastre. The light public meeting agenda included a short update from Dusatre and a board discussion of the goals for TBID events grants and sponsorships, including a desire to bring stronger requirements for the generation of overnight stays into the application submission and evaluation process. All five TBID advisory board members were present: Chair Rakesh Mehta, Vice-Chair Ashton Ramsey, Maria Madrid, Ben Uyeda, and Liz Shickler, the first monthly meeting where there has been full board member attendance since the October 16, 2025, meeting.

The meeting began with a report back from TBID board members about events they had attended. Board member Shickler highlighted her attendance at the Holistic Health Fair on February 15th and the Route 66 car show at Roy’s in Amboy on March 7. She also discussed the event producer workshop that the TBID hosted on March 13. Ten participants joined, including local business representatives, event producers, and nonprofits. The workshop included an overview and review of eligibility and requirements for the sponsorship and event grant program, insights from the review committee, and the partnership structure with TBID and the city of Twentynine Palms. Dusastre elaborated during her update, remarking,

[It was] a great opportunity to talk through where funding comes from, why we are going to continuously drive the questions and the messaging about staying overnight with us in the city, application deadlines, requirements, what that partnership structure looks like with the TBID agreement.

Dusastre agreed it was “beneficial” for those who attended.

Director of Marketing update: A strong first quarter for overnight visitors

Dusaste provided a brief marketing update, which included record revenue for the first quarter of the fiscal year (October through December, 2025), upcoming events, and website and social media.

In the first quarter of the fiscal year the TBID reported:

• $102,440 in collections of the 1.5% lodging-pass through tax, a 6% year–over-year increase.

• 13% increase in hotel and RV park stays, but a 3% decrease in vacation rental stays.

• The 8th consecutive year of Q1 growth.

In her report and analysis last summer, Dusastre had cautioned that there could be a drop in overnight visitors and revenue due to economic uncertainty, but first quarter numbers are strong. However, as economic and political conditions continue to be strained, it will be important to continue to monitor overnight stays and revenue they generate as 2026 goes on.

Dusastre also reported on upcoming events supported by TBID grants and sponsorship, website traffic, digital advertising efforts, media placements and the rollout of the new website portal. In summary:

• Media highlights include an upcoming segment featuring on Twentynine Palms on Sun Country airlines YouTube and inflight entertainment that be released later this spring and a republishing of the republish of the Travel and Leisure destination guide, originally published in November 2025

• Paid social media campaigns include advertising to raise awareness about the April 1 grant and sponsorship application deadline for events taking place July 1 to December 31.

• The new website portal, which will enable local businesses and event producers to add and edit their own listings, is proving more complicated to implement than anticipated. Dusastre noted that she will be working with stakeholders individually at the visitor center on Saturdays to train them how to use the portal.

Dusastre also attended the California Outlook Forum, which is a gathering of other California tourism organizations, and highlighted the celebration of the ten years of the Mojave Trails National Monument and 100 years of Route 66 at the Visitor’s Center.

Public comment: Better connection with the Base and stronger communication with lodging partners

The public comment session was light, with only two public comments.

Carla Kayajanian, the Community Analyst for Government and External Affairs from the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, introduced herself and explained she wanted to start attending the TBID meetings to serve as a liaison with the base. Kayajanian also publishes a community newsletter that highlights local events for senior enlisted leaders, who distribute it to service members and their families, inviting the TBID to send her events to highlight and to open the door to possible future collaboration.

In her public comment, Susan Peplow encouraged the TBID board to take Kayajanian up on her offer and to strengthen the connection with the Base and the families who come to visit. She also remarked that the list of upcoming events had not been distributed to lodging partners, noting,

That is the first I’ve seen that list, and I sit on [the events] subcommittee … Why are we only in this meeting seeing a list of events that are happening this coming weekend to lodging partners. How are lodging partners expected to share this information, tell their guests, encourage new guests to come in?

Peplow also questioned whether the TBID is receiving a return on investment from event organizers in terms of advertising and holding them responsible for generating overnight bookings.

Discussion of Sponsorship and Event Grant Program

The discussion of the meeting’s main agenda item centered on the need to revise the application process to emphasize overnight stays, as well as how to hold grantees accountable to documenting those stays, and initiatives to increase multi-day, midweek, and recurring events.

Uyeda summed up the issue, stating,

The events [application and review process] needs to be simpler and more focused on a specific goal that we then hold people accountable to … I think that we should be seeing on the first page of every application, is how many people are going to come, how many room nights is it do they projected to result in? And how are they going to track it?

The board member’s discussion included:

• The need to focus applications on room nights they will generate and how to track them.

• How to ensure events generate return on investment, not just on money but the time it takes to administer the program.

• The continued importance of events to help raise awareness and generate visits to Twentynine Palms.

• The importance of cultivating weekend-long, mid-week, events series, and off-season, and “shoulder events” on days like Wednesdays and Thursdays to create demand beyond weekends.

• The continued need for fresh event ideas and to bring in larger events, which also highlights the need for larger event venues.

• Whether the event sponsorships and grants are designed to subsidize events that need help getting started or draw established, profit-making events, such as the Vacation Races half-marathon, to Twentynine Palms.

In public comment Peplow suggested that the TBID could consider different strategies for allocating funds for events that specifically meet the TBID’s needs, suggesting the board could cherry pick what they want to see by “picking a [destination] pillar which everyone is for and pay someone to put on this event.” The 2025-2026 plan that the TBID discussed and approved last summer explains that TBID funding aims to help “seed” new events that appeal to their identified target audiences and attract new visitors. If the TBID were to shift to “curating” and programming events directly with their budget, this would be a shift in mission and focus for the organization, and unclear if this is possible the way funds are currently allocated.

The board did not definitively answer or make a motion of any of the questions about fund allocation or application guidelines. Rather, the events subcommittee will meet to discuss further and make recommendations.

While the board’s discussions focus on accountability for grantees and impact on overnight stays, currently the TBID has no consistent way to track which events bring visitors to Twentynine Palms. In their meetings they have not discussed, nor explored investing in, a tracking system shared between lodging partners, such as a QR code linked to a digital visitor survey or a booking code event organizers can share with event participants. As Dusastre regularly attends events with other tourism board colleagues, this could also be an opportunity to learn from other cities about how they track these types of metrics.

At the end of the meeting Madrid announced she was stepping down from the events subcommittee for personal reasons, and Uyeda volunteered to take her place. The events committee now consists of Shickler and Uyeda. They plan to meet in the next month to come up with recommendations for updates to application guidelines and whether the application deadline for fall and winter events should be moved up from October 1 to September 1.

No future agenda items were proposed. While Mehta mentioned that fall was also when re-certification for the TBID would be taking place, so far no agenda items have been proposed to discuss the re-certification process. Last year, TBID was re-certified for one year under the Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989, but they intend to move to a five-year recertification process under the Property and Business Improvement District Law of 1994, which will require an investment in internal processes, organization, and stakeholder engagement.

A future meeting date has not yet been announced.

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

Subscribe now—it’s free!

Subscribe now

Please consider supporting our efforts and help us reach our $10,000 goal! Upgrade your subscription from free to paid today for just $50 per year or $5 per month.

Want to make a one-time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Thanks for reading! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share

This upcoming Monday, March 23rd, the Twentynine Palms City Council will hold a meeting on the E-Group Solar Project (aka Geneva Solar Farm project) slated for Harmony Acres. As of the agenda publication date of March 19, 2026, City staff recommends that Council approve the project.

The agenda, clocking in at 1,008 pages, and a history of previous City meetings on the topic, show that the project is deemed to be highly controversial.

Approving the project requires the Council to vote on and approve eight items, which include several resolutions and new ordinances:

• Item 1 (Resolution): The City would update its General Plan to reclassify some of the two parcels proposed for the solar project from low-density rural residential (minimum 5-acre lots) to single-family residential with smaller minimum lot sizes (1-acre minimum).

• Item 2 (Resolution): The City would update its General Plan to create a new “Renewable Energy” land use category and reclassify some of the land that was previously designated for low-density rural homes (minimum 5-acre lots) as Renewable Energy land.

• Item 3 (Ordinance): The City would rezone land from low-density residential (minimum 5-acre lots) to Renewable Energy.

• Item 4 (Ordinance): The City would rezone land from low-density rural residential (minimum 5-acre lots) to single-family residential (minimum 1-acre lots).

• Item 5 (Ordinance): The City would add two new chapters to its Development Code establishing new rules and standards related to solar energy development.1

• Item 6 (Resolution): The City would approve a permit allowing a 184-acre commercial solar energy facility to be built.

• Item 7 (Ordinance): The City would approve a formal development agreement with the solar project applicant covering the 184-acre commercial solar facility.

• Item 8 (Resolution): The City would certify the Environmental Impact Report for the solar project and formally declare that the project’s benefits outweigh its identified environmental harms.

These items revise the City’s General Plan and convert residentially zoned land into a new land use category designation—Renewable Energy. The ordinances also subdivide parcels from five acres to one acre to accommodate requirements in SB 330 to offset zoning changes to ensure adequate land for housing. Project passage would mean a reversal of a previous industrial solar farm ban that Council approved back in 2013, signaling a citywide policy shift with much broader development implications.

At the time, Councilmembers Jay Corbin, Jim Harris, Cora Hesier, Joel Klink, and Daniel Mintz, the current mayor, approved the industrial solar ban 5-0.

Though the meeting is regularly scheduled, it is being held on a Monday at 6 pm rather than the typical meeting time of Tuesday. Commenters will have only two minutes to discuss this topic due to the likelihood that Monday’s proceedings will exceed typical meeting times.

One other agenda item involves the project closeout of the affordable Veterans housing project on Elm Avenue.

The meeting will take place at 6136 Adobe Road. Attendees are encouraged to anticipate a long meeting.2

The project's proposed location is north of Two Mile Road, west of the northernly extension of Noels Knoll Road, and east of Canyon Road.

We will spare details of the meeting minutiae and delve right into the primary discussion topic with arguments from those in favor and those against.

Notable individuals or entities in favor of the project:

• Planning Commissioner Max Walker

• Planning Commissioner Leslie Paahana

• George Mulopulos, part-time resident and principal of Proactive Properties LLC, who is leasing the land intended for solar plant development to E-Group PS

• Sanctuary Church/Hope Center 29, a local religious nonprofit and community food bank that was the recent recipient of a community donation of $4,000 for food distribution and $3,600 sponsorship for a color run to be held by the Hope Center.3

Arguments in favor of the solar project - presented as stated without independent verification.

• The project and community benefits package, if economically viable, would boost annual City revenue by 7 to 10% when compared to existing sales tax revenue.

  

• Construction will bring in much-needed temporary jobs to the area

• A community benefits package will bring in over $100,000 of city revenue annually with upward of $5 million depending on long-term project viability (for 30 years):

  The Solar Project would generate approximately $5,445,000 in projected General Fund revenue for the City over the anticipated 35-year life of the project, in addition to sales tax and property tax revenue.4

• Failure to approve the project opens the city to potential litigation from the developer through the State of California via Assembly Bill 205, a renewable energy bill with approval authority regulated by the California Energy Commission.

• The project’s adjacency to the Carodean Substation makes the land suitable for solar connection tie-ins, and, according to Mulopulos, no residential developers have expressed interest in building homes on the land since it has been acquired.

• Donations to the Hope Center and a community benefits contingency requiring the developer to pay $15,000 toward the formation of a Boys & Girls Club within city limits show the developer’s willingness to work with community partners. Per the staff report:

  It should be noted that an additional $15,000 is committed to youth organization(s) to help establish a location in Twentynine Palms.5

Notable individuals and entities against the project:

• Planning Commissioner and long-time local Jim Krushat

• Planning Commissioner and long-time local Alexander Garcia

• Heidi Grunt, long-time local and part owner of the historic 29 Palms Inn

• Pat Flanagan, ecologist and biological advisor for native historical site, the 29 Palms Oasis of Mara

• Suzanne Lyons, science educator and adjacent property owner

• Peter Lang, adjacent property owner

• Ash Maharaj, real estate agent, owner of the Harmony Motel and former board member of the Twentynine Palms Tourism Business Improvement District (TBID); her opinion piece for the Desert Trumpet is here.

Arguments against the solar project - presented as stated without independent verification:

• The project does not qualify for AB 205, which has been twice confirmed by the California Energy Commission (CEC), as it fails to meet the required AC wattage criteria by over 20%. Just six days before the City Council vote is to take place, a March 17 email from the CEC to Community Development Director Keith Gardner shows that any arguments from developer representatives contending project qualifications under AB 205 are essentially moot. The CEC letter, and all correspondence City Staff has received since the March 3 split vote at the Planning Commission, are located on pages 889 through 902 of the 1008-page agenda packet.

  To qualify for AB 205 and reach the 50 MW AC generating capacity required under AB 205, the project would require an additional 52 inverters and increased environmental scrutiny in the form of additional CEQA review. Essentially, an entire redesign of the project would be required with additional upfront costs likely to be in the millions of dollars. The applicant’s response to the DEIR and City Staff Report both fail to acknowledge this.6

  As acknowledged by Planning Commissioner Jim Krushat, the primary City argument in favor is that if Council does not approve this project, developers will go through the state, with the City losing local control of the project development. The above email from the CEC implies that the City staff either failed to properly research the project’s qualifications for AB 205 before forwarding this to Planning Commission and Council, or that the City staff and City legal representatives had been misled by developer representatives on AB 205 requirements and upfront costs associated with additional inverter requirements.

• The project lacks a buyer: no Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) exists so potential project revenue is speculative at best. Though the project would be tied into Southern California Edison’s Carodean substation, this does not entail a formal PPA between Edison and the developer.

• No local hiring contract exists within the Development Agreement, so the argument that the project will create local jobs is not guaranteed.

• The land is leased, meaning if the owner terminates the lease, the project is null.

• The Community Benefits package negotiated by City Council’s Budgets and Audits subcommittee (which consists of Councilmembers Steven Bilderain and April Ramirez), is potentially negligible, given long-term health and environmental concerns, administrative and legal costs likely to arise from the project, and speculative figures for potential sales tax revenue, given that the project lacks a buyer to purchase energy generated.

• Once graded the land is permanently damaged, native vegetation such as creosote cannot be replanted and, once completed the project is only returned to it’s “undeveloped state.”

• The grading will result in considerable blowing dust creating a health hazard.

Other Project Implications and Concerns

In a February Planning Commission meeting on the project, Commissioner Jim Krushat commented on the community benefits package, saying, “The juice isn’t worth the squeeze.”

$15,000 upfront toward the formation of a Boys & Girls Club means the City would have to find funding elsewhere to cover other significant club formation (and building or renovation) costs, with Boys & Girls Club directors typically earning upward of $62,000 per year, and fails to include other potential overhead and employee costs.

Destruction of undisturbed and undeveloped desert soil will have long-term health and environmental implications, including permanent destruction of endangered desert tortoise habitat, dust storms due to mass grading required by the project, and potential exposure of residents to Valley Fever, a fungus caused by disturbed desert soil that causes severe upper respiratory side effects.

To mitigate this, the developer has offered to provide HEPA filters to residents downwind and eastward of the project within 1.5 miles, but this is not formally guaranteed in the project’s Conditions of Approval.

Desert Trumpet posted video footage of two desert tortoises seen on the parcel in October, 2023, linked here.

In the agenda packet, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife also raised concerns on the project’s mass grading, and questioned why the draft Environmental Impact Report had not considered low-impact grading that was environmentally appropriate for the solar panel sizes being used. Per the CDFW:

As proposed, the current project does not fully meet the DEIR’s stated Project objectives and requires extensive grading of approximately 140 acres of land with approximately 264,000 cubic yards of cut and fill.

The DEIR does not identify an alternative that includes a terrain following solar panel arrangement that would allow for greater ability for the solar facility to utilize the existing terrain, thereby reducing both the grading necessary to fulfill the remaining Project objectives and associated impacts to hydrology and biological resources.

Traditional construction methods for solar fields require extensive grading to uniformly level the construction site. Terrain-following solar arrangements better conform with existing terrain, often reduce project grading costs, minimize habitat disturbance, facilitate habitat recovery, minimize changes in hydrology, and potentially reduce erosion issues.

The DEIR should include and analyze a Project alternative incorporating terrain-following construction methods that meet Project objectives while minimizing Project related impacts.7

Longterm Policy Implications & A Changing City Identity

If the Council approves this project on Monday, it would give the solar project developer vested rights, meaning the City forfeits any further jurisdiction over the project’s development agreement moving forward. In other words, if new information arises between now and construction, or thereafter, the City cannot change the development agreement, and they cannot amend the development agreement. Essentially, this would be a permanent policy implication, with no room for retroactive action.

Further, establishment of a Renewable Energy land use designation now opens the City to further renewable energy projects going forward, which would make Council denial of such projects much more difficult. This opens the door to further potential solar projects, industrial scale wind farms, and other forms of renewable energy projects.

In 2013, residents and City Council members—which included now-Mayor Daniel Mintz—were in consensus that industrial-scale solar projects were not aligned with the City’s General Plan and small-town identity. Hence, a citywide ban on industrial scale solar developments. This shift, just 13 years later, signals a change in tone with far broader implications, that cannot be reversed once approved.

Are you in support of the solar field or against? Make your comments known. Here’s the list of Council email addresses to write if you can’t get to the meeting — be sure to email them prior to 2 pm on Monday, March 23 so they have time to read your email prior to discussion. You can also copy the clerk at cvillescas@29palms.org and ask that your letter be made part of the public record.

The meeting takes place at 6 pm— see you there.

* Author’s note: Correction made Monday, March 23, 2026 to fix error in title of Suzanne Lyons, science educator.

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

Please consider supporting our efforts, and help us reach our $10,000 goal! Upgrade your subscription from free to paid today for just $50 per year or $5 per month.

Subscribe now

Want to make a one-time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Thanks for reading! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share

On Saturday, February 21, 2026, just four days after the Planning Commission decided to continue their discussion of the E-Group Solar Project to March 3, City Councilmember April Ramirez emailed all five Planning Commissioners and cc’d the City Attorney, City Manager, City Clerk and the Executive Assistant to the City Manager. The subject line read: “Professional Expectations & Clarification of Planning Commission Roles.”

In the email, although Ramirez thanks the Commissioners for their service, she goes on to imply that they don’t understand their roles:

I am writing to provide constructive clarification regarding professional expectations and statutory boundaries of the Commission’s authority. I’m clarifying this to ensure consistency, reduce risk to the City, and strengthen the integrity of our public process.

She then goes on to cite case law and outline what the Commission should and should not discuss, expressing her disappointment:

I will be candid: I was disappointed by the level of preparation and professionalism demonstrated during the recent meeting. However, I believe this can and should be a learning opportunity for all of us. Public service requires diligence, discipline, and adherence to role boundaries.

What could possibly prompt a new City Councilmember, just 13 months into their first term, without any prior service on a City Commission or Committee, to school five experienced Planning Commissioners in this manner?1

As we reported in our February 17 Planning Commission recap Part 1 and Part 2, Commissioners had a contentious conversation regarding the E-Group Solar Farm, with a particular focus on whether the community benefits package was adequate compensation for the permanent leveling of 244 acres of pristine desert that the construction would entail. Commissioner Jim Krushat summarized the concerns, “The juice just ain’t worth the squeeze” while Commissioner Max Walker questioned whether discussion of the benefits package came under the purview of the Commission. Oddly, no one caught that E-Group and Community Development Director Keith Gardner appeared to mislead Commissioners by failing to make clear that the package was considered in a pre-meeting workshop and no vote had taken place.

Staff who were recommending approval of the project were surprised when the Commissioners choose to continue the meeting to March 3. As revealed in an agenda released Thursday, February 26, they reacted by attempting to pull the issue from the Commission entirely and take it straight to Council without a Commission vote. Planning Commissioners rejected that recommendation and sent the E-Group Solar Project to City Council with a split vote of two against, two for, and one neutral. The project will be presented at City Council on Monday, March 23 at 6 pm.

We acquired Ramirez’s letter via a public information request, and we reproduce it here in full and as a download because we believe in the importance of an independent Planning Commission. The email arrived when Commissioners were mid-way through quasi-judicial deliberations.2 We are refraining from further comment — while we question the validity of some of her assertions, we feel our readers should judge for themselves. Note: we have redacted the Councilmember’s personal phone number.

022126 Email From Councilmember Ramirez To Planning Commission Redacted

755KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

We reached out to members of the Planning Commission, Mayor Daniel Mintz, City Manager Stone James, Community Development Director Keith Gardner and City Attorney Patrick Muñoz. No one replied.

We also emailed Councilmember Ramirez to ask if she stood by the email or had any comment:

Ramirez’s signature line includes this phrase, “Accountability only feels like an attack when we are not ready to acknowledge how our actions (or lack thereof) have negatively impacted other people.” The phrase is an unattributed, slightly modified version of a January 2019 quote by Tamara Renaye, a Canadian motivational speaker and author, which reads “Accountability feels like an attack when you're not ready to acknowledge how your behavior harms others.” The phrase has been widely circulated on social media, often without attribution.

Spring has arrived but winter isn’t far behind. Be secure in the knowledge that local accountability journalism will be here when you need it and become a paid subscriber to the Desert Trumpet for $5 per month or $50 per year!

Subscribe now

Want to make a one-time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

Commissioners and Staff seemed relieved that this Tuesday’s meeting finished at just under the 30-minute mark after the last Planning Commission meeting ran nearly 90 contentious minutes. It covered a single substantive item: whether the City should formalize its unwritten policy on assigning street addresses to undeveloped parcels. All five Commissioners were present. Community Development Director Keith Gardner and Twentynine Palms Water District General Manager Matt Shragge also attended. There were no public hearings.

For reference:

• The City’s agenda

• Our agenda preview

• Video of the meeting

PUBLIC COMMENTS AND CONSENT CALENDAR

There were no general public comments, and the Consent Calendar passed without discussion by the public or the Commissioners, thus accepting the Housing Element Annual Progress Report and the General Plan Status Report and forwarding them to the City Council for final approval.

DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS

Street Address Assignment for Vacant Parcels

Community Development Director Keith Gardner acknowledged that Twentynine Palms has no written policy governing at what point it will assign a street address to a vacant parcel.

We found out that this internal policy we’ve had is about not issuing the address on a basic parcel was quite informal. It was not written down anywhere. You couldn’t find any ordinances or board policies or language or policies anywhere.

The current practice — or nonpractice — holds that the City will issue an address only after a building permit application has been submitted for a primary residence or commercial structure. But because that standard has never been codified, Gardner said he fields requests on a case-by-case basis. He said he is looking to remove the matter from his personal discretion and replace it with a policy the public can actually read.

Gardner told the Commission he had reviewed how other jurisdictions handle address assignment. The cities of Palm Springs and Riverside use identical application forms that explicitly tie address issuance to a building permit. Los Angeles County does the same. Yucca Valley, San Bernardino County, and the Town of Yucca Mesa either have no formal written policy or have an informal practice similar to Twentynine Palms’.

You Need a Street Address to Connect to City Water

Gardner invited Matt Shragge, General Manager of the Twentynine Palms Water District, to explain why this matters beyond City paperwork.

The Twentynine Palms Water District, which serves an 87-square-mile service area extending well beyond City limits, will not install a water meter on a property without a City-assigned address. That policy was put in place deliberately as a result of the illegal marijuana cultivation that swept through the Morongo Basin beginning around 2021. It is unclear how many marijuana grow farms sprang up in Twentynine Palms and neighboring Wonder Valley, but these areas were among the most heavily targeted by the San Bernardino Sheriff’s Department Operation Hammer Strike, which reported that 1,000 greenhouses were eradicated throughout the County.

Shragge said:

Since the Hammer Strike with the County Sheriff’s Department, we’ve been really getting on making sure there was address and permits already in place to install.

Shragge described a stop-gap the Water District has used when property owners press the issue and threaten legal action: a cultivation letter. If an applicant signs a document stating that marijuana will not be cultivated on the property, the District may, in certain circumstances, install a water meter even without a City address.

I’m just saying the City could have a way out to help you with this policy, by saying there is an underlying way to get a water meter, but you will have to sign a cultivation letter saying no marijuana can be on site.

Shragge noted that a standard 5/8-inch water meter currently costs approximately $7,000. If road-boring or asphalt replacement is required, that figure can reach $13,000. Any confirmed marijuana cultivation on the property would result in the meter being pulled immediately — at the owner’s expense — and full reinstallation costs would apply if access were ever restored.

Commissioners worked through a tangle of overlapping questions: What are the legitimate reasons someone might need an address on a vacant parcel? Should those exceptions be listed individually? Or should the policy simply say decline to provide a street address, with an appeal pathway for unusual cases?

Vice Chair Jim Krushat surfaced a concrete example from his own experience. He said that several years ago, the Water District issued an address for a five-acre commercially zoned parcel he owns inside City limits, without a building permit. Gardner acknowledged the situation and said the District and City would look into how that address came to be assigned.

Chair Max Walker suggested a simple path forward: formalize the existing status quo, make clear that a building permit application is required, and direct anyone seeking a water meter by another route to contact the Water District directly about the cultivation letter option. Anyone disagreeing with a denial could then appeal.

Chair Cure and Commissioner Krushat both supported including an appeal process in whatever policy is adopted, so that applicants with legitimate but unusual circumstances — a property owner wanting to landscape a commercial corner, for example — have somewhere to go.

Real estate broker Scott Currey, the meeting’s only public commenter, reinforced that point:

Maybe keep it open like it is now, to where, if I wanted to landscape a commercial corner to make it a little prettier until it gets developed five or ten years from now, maybe keep that option open.

Gardner confirmed the policy would be administrative, not an ordinance — meaning it could be revisited by the Commission if unforeseen situations arise. He said he also intends to keep a running log of exceptions and appeals, so the City has data to inform any future revisions.

No vote was taken. The discussion will inform a formal administrative policy that Gardner’s office will draft.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR’S REPORT

Gardner noted that a city building to the north is undergoing renovation.

Gardner also indicated that the April 7 Planning Commission meeting will be canceled. The next scheduled meeting will be April 21.

Note that the E-Group Solar Project lands at City Council on Monday, March 23. The meeting starts at 6pm.

Please consider supporting our efforts, and help us reach our $10,000 goal! Upgrade your subscription from free to paid today for just $50 per year or $5 per month.

Subscribe now

Want to make a one-time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

Thanks for reading! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share

The Twentynine Palms Planning Commission meets Tuesday, March 17, at 5 pm at City Hall to take up two items: the city's annual housing progress report and a proposed policy on assigning addresses to undeveloped properties. These may seem routine after the tension of the last meeting held on March 3, but it is not without consequence.

The housing report tells a discouraging story. With fewer than four years left to meet state targets, only a fraction of the homes required to be built by the state of California have materialized, and low-income residents have been left out entirely. The addressing item may sound routine, but it has real consequences for vacant lot owners.

This will be the first meeting chaired by Max Walker, with Jim Krushat as Vice Chair. Commission Chair Walker held this role as recently as 2024, when he succeeded Jim Krushat in the lead spot on the dais.

The 94-page agenda packet is linked here. This will likely be a quick meeting—no need to pack a snack.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

After Planning Commission announcements, attendees can comment on items not on the agenda. Public comments on agenda items will be requested when the item is discussed. Fill out a green comment sheet for public or agenda item comments and hand it to the staff, usually sitting at the desk at the front of the room on the right side. Residents have three minutes to make comments.

You may also email comments to Planning Commission members and Community Development Director Keith Gardner and request that comments be read at the meeting.

CONSENT CALENDAR

1 Housing Element and General Plan Status Annual Reports

Ordinarily, the Consent Calendar consists of meeting minutes and procedural issues that need to be a matter of public record but don’t require discussion. Whether or not the Planning Commission pulls this item for further consideration, these reports include information that’s important for residents of Twentynine Palms to know about. (The Staff Report is linked here.)

A little background: Every eight years, the state of California tells each city how many new homes it needs to plan for broken down by income level. The goal is to make sure cities aren’t just building housing for wealthy residents while ignoring everyone else. This requirement is called the Regional Housing Needs Assessment, or RHNA.

The City of Twentynine Palms 2022-2029 Housing Element, prepared under former Community Development Director Travis Clark and City Manager Frank Luckino, set a goal of developing 1,105 housing units by 2029. Six separate drafts were submitted before State approval in February 2023.1

Housing is divided into categories — housing for people with very low incomes, low incomes, moderate incomes, and above moderate incomes. The City is expected to make progress across all of those categories, not just one.

State law requires cities to file an annual housing report tracking progress toward their housing goals. Once approved by City Council, this report goes to the State Office of Planning Research and the California Department of Housing and Community Development.

So how is Twentynine Palms doing? Not well. With the 2029 deadline less than four years away, the city still needs 889 more homes to meet its goal. The good news is that last year, 57 building permits were issued — but only 5 homes were actually built. And every one of those 57 permits was for moderate-income housing. Not a single permit went toward housing for low, very low, or extremely low-income residents.

The city’s struggles with this aren’t new. State housing officials had already flagged Twentynine Palms for falling behind on its planning obligations early in this cycle, before construction even began.

• Since 2021 no very low income housing has been permitted or built

• In 2023, 27 units were added

• Out of 43 residential build permits at the City, only 24 units were constructed2

At the current pace, the math is stark: five homes built per year won’t get the city anywhere close to 1,047 by 2029. And with no affordable housing in the pipeline, the residents who need help the most aren’t being planned for at all.

Our 2024 coverage of the RHNA housing goal notes that “the top planning priority for the City of Twentynine Palms is listed as affordable housing. However no affordable housing projects are listed on the engineering spreadsheet of current projects (page 102) and little progress has been made in the last year except in the area of self build housing.”

A 90–100 unit affordable housing project on the City-owned parcel west of City Hall was under contract with Milestone Housing LLC from 2022 to 2024, and the City committed $1 million to the project. It went through conceptual design, had a site plan proposed, but never broke ground. As the Desert Trumpet reported here, the developer's conditions of approval expired in October 2024 with nothing built. It is unclear if the City is pursuing a new developer and also not evident—after a search through the City’s budget reports—where the $1 million allocated to the project has been transferred.

It isn’t required for the City’s housing goals to be discussed in a public forum. But it matters. This report gets sent to City Council and then forwarded to the state as a measure of the city’s progress. Ensuring affordable housing was once a priority for Twentynine Palms. Now it seems like an afterthought.

PUBLIC HEARINGS

2. Property Addressing

The second item on the March 17 agenda asks the Planning Commission to weigh in on a city policy about property addresses, specifically, when a vacant lot can get one. Right now, the city won’t assign an address to an empty parcel until the owner submits plans to build something on it. Staff is asking the Commission to help turn this practice into an official written policy.

One conundrum that needs to be worked out is that the Twentynine Palms Water District generally won’t install a water meter on a parcel that doesn’t have an address. So if you own a vacant lot and can’t afford to build yet, you also can’t get water service because you can’t get an address.

The one exception in the current system is for agricultural use. Landowners can get a water meter for a lot without an address if they sign a declaration that the water won’t be used to grow cannabis.3

Was this story useful to you? Help us reach our $10,000 goal ! Upgrade your subscription from free to paid today for just $50 per year or $5 per month.

Subscribe now

Want to make a one time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

Thanks for reading! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Share

AI was used to research the Desert Trumpet archives for past stories.

The Desert Trumpet prefers to cover City meetings in person, because the tone of the room is not conveyed via live streaming or video on demand. And the tone at last night’s meeting careened between annoyance, frustration and anger with a few lighthearted moments provided by the return of Joel Klink to Council chambers — it was a complicated evening. All Council members were present in addition to City Manager Stone James, Community Development Director Keith Gardner and City Clerk Cindy Villescas.

The City’s agenda packet is here; our agenda preview of the meeting is here; video footage of the meeting is here.

Pastor Amy Miranda of First Assembly of God Church kicked off the meeting with an invocation largely devoid of the religious proselytizing that has caused controversy at Yucca Valley Town Council meetings.

…May everyone’s words be constructive and may their decisions reflect your love and compassion. We pray for everyone’s ability to listen to one another with open hearts and minds, celebrating differences and working together in harmony. Let every decision made here today be rooted in honesty and integrity, ensuring the welfare of every citizen of 29 Palms. Help each person to have courage to stand for what is right. May we all be instruments of your peace, fostering goodwill and positive change within our city and lead to actions that uplift and support all members. May all of us here strive for justice, equality and equity and a greater good for everyone, especially those who are vulnerable and most at need…

AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND PROCLAMATIONS

Proclamations were made for Irish-American Heritage Month and Women’s History Month. Mayor Daniel Mintz presented certificates to Heather Drake and Mary Kay Sherry, respectively.

A surprise presentation by Building Inspector and Plan Reviewer Cameron Hepperly, which was not on the agenda, followed. He reported that the City issued 38 new residential building permits in 2025 — representing 53 total new housing units when multi-family projects are counted — the highest number in recent years and a notable jump from just 13 in 2024. He also noted that the department processed over 1,000 permits total in 2025, and flagged ADUs and alternative housing options as by far the most common topic residents raise at the Planning counter:

I know one of the big, big questions that we receive a lot is whether or not we have stock plans that are approved that people can use for ADUs. Currently we don’t. But that is a big concern.

Hepperly reiterated the need for stock plans when Mayor Pro Tem Scott asked what was driving the housing boom. After crediting the city’s growing appeal as a destination, he zeroed in on a specific gap with regard to ADUs:

I think a big thing would be ADU plans…. And so anything we can do to provide easier, cheaper housing to the residents, I think that’s great.

Hepperly appeared to be unaware that City Manager Stone James and Community Development Director Gardner had announced an ADU stock plan program at the October 14, 2025, City Council meeting, and that as of January 2026, City staff and consultants were actively developing a set of pre-approved, architect-vetted plans. Whether the program has stalled or is still in progress was not addressed. State law already requires cities to make pre-approved ADU plans available.

COUNCIL COMMENTS AND REPORTS OF MEETINGS ATTENDED

This used to be the least eventful section of a Council meeting and consisted of lists of meetings and birthday wishes. However, since Councilmember April Ramirez joined the dais, Council Comments and Meetings Attended has been used to make unsupported accusations and undermine fellow Councilmembers.

At this meeting Ramirez said the following, intentionally leaving out Mayor Pro Tem Octavious Scott, the most frequent target of her attacks:

With March as Women’s History Month, I’d like to take a moment to recognize the incredible women that are leading our homes, our communities and our government. Your voice matters, your strength inspires and your future is brighter because of you. I would also like to extend a sincere thank you to City Manager, Dr. Stone James, Mayor Mintz, Councilmember Wright and Councilmember Bilderain for their guidance and for sharing their knowledge and experience. Your leadership has helped ensure that City Hall and the dais remain a place where women know that they are welcome, respected and encouraged to serve.

When his turn to speak came around, Scott clarified:

I also want to just say I appreciate all the women of our community too, as well, for Women’s History month. I did participate in a fundraiser by Women of Color Global at the Freedom Plaza, there was a “Night in Harlem” murder [mystery] history dinner. It was well attended.

Being the sole woman on Council only makes Ramirez’s behavior more problematic, presenting a poor model for those who may follow her — and it has persisted under two mayors. At the August 25 Council meeting, Ramirez went after Scott twice, once for an unsubstantiated Brown Act violation, and again because she believed he had a conflict of interest with the Coachella Valley Housing Coalition (CVHC). It didn’t appear that she’d spoken with the City Attorney prior to airing either allegation in public and both proved baseless.

Free speech on the dais is important, but who is served when the privilege of being a Councilmember is used as a cudgel during comments?

CONSENT CALENDAR

The Consent Calendar consisted of the warrant register, meeting minutes and a reminder on septic maintenance. All were passed without discussion.

DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS: Councilmember pay discussion highlights a generational split

City Manager Stone James framed the salary discussion with a presentation on state guidelines and a regional comparison showing Twentynine Palms Councilmembers earning $465 a month against a regional average of $975. He walked through three mechanisms the state allows for increasing council pay:

• a time-based formula (which would yield $1,008)

• a population-based cap (which yields $950 for cities under 35,000 residents, and was staff’s recommendation)

• and Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustment (which he and the city attorney felt was impractical given how long the salary had gone unchanged).

He also noted that any increase approved that night would not take effect until December 2026 after the election.

James put the Council’s time commitment in perspective:

Your time up here during these meetings is actually the smallest amount of time that you spend as a Council. Really the big time commitment that the Council has is during your weekends, during the evenings, maybe taking phone calls during the day. It’s not two or three hours twice a month. It’s substantially more, especially if there’s committees, if there’s different causes that you’re working for.

Public comment was also in favor of the increase with a letter from George Mulopulos being read into the record and Scott Curry and ex Mayor and Councilmember Joel Klink speaking in person. Klink, who had suggested the increase in October 2024, opened with humor:

I don't think you guys need to raise it at all, just kidding…

When I did this in 2024... that was like 24 years of $465 a month for the Council Members. Looking now with the way things are going, the cost of gas — you guys do a lot of traveling, just in the area right here, and you don't get paid for that... The gas is now going to be expensive, and I think the City of Twentynine Palms residents would say $950 is a good amount, so I hope that's what you guys come up with.

The Council discussion that followed public comment revealed a telling generational and experiential divide. Councilmembers Bilderain, Wright, and Mintz — all multi-term Council veterans — framed the question almost entirely in terms of their own discomfort. Bilderain said he felt bad "trying to get a pay raise when we're trying to raise taxes at the same time." Wright said he'd been "wrestling with this," noting that like Bilderain, he didn't know council members got paid when he first ran, and wasn't in it for the money. Mintz was brief: "I'm going to tell you now I won't vote for 950. I don't do this, obviously, for the money either."

What none of the three addressed was the harder question: who can afford to serve on a city council paying $465 a month? Only the two younger first-term members addressed that issue. Mayor Pro Tem Scott noted that $465 was "just a little low" and that staff members receive cost-of-living raises — why shouldn't Council?

Councilmember Ramirez, who made the first motion, was the most direct, thanking Klink for raising the issue:

I'm a firm believer that leaders eat last, and that's the best way to lead. And so I just want to take the time to thank Mayor Pro Tem Klink for even bringing this up as he was exiting, because it shows a lot about his leadership style.

She then calculated her motion based on real household costs:

I'm going to make a motion to increase the salaries to $825... It goes back to some amount that I did in my head based off of gas expenses, mileage, sometimes for me childcare — my husband's in the military, he's not always here. Something to make it balance out a little bit.

City Manager James backed her up, noting that adjusted for CPI, $465 in 2002 is worth $832 to $850 today — meaning Councilmembers have effectively taken a pay cut every year for 24 years. Yet Mintz was unmoved. "That's too high for me."

But Ramirez’s motion for $825 failed 3-2, with only Ramirez and Scott voting yes.

Wright then moved $700, which passed 4-1, with Mintz the lone no vote. Both Wright and Mintz, it’s worth noting, ran unopposed in 2022 and are up for reelection in 2026.

The generational split is reflective of larger issues in Twentynine Palms, which has traditionally relied on a volunteer economy. Younger, more recent transplants to the community believe that most labor should be compensated. This shift is illustrated in the evolution of how artists are treated by the Public Arts Advisory Committee (PAAC), which in the past failed to pay artists for service to the City. Beginning in 2023, Committee members accepted the common refrain “artwork is real work” and insisted that artists be compensated. However, it should be noted that PAAC members themselves still serve without stipends.

Desert Trumpet is a nonprofit, reader-supported publication covering the civic issues that matter most to Twentynine Palms. If you value this kind of on-the-ground local reporting, please consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Subscribe now

CITY MANAGERS REPORT

Highlights from Stone James’ report:

• A five person Public Works crew laid 700 tons of asphalt over the past two days — on top of 350 tons the prior week — as part of a paving push that typically “puts down” 5,000 to 6,000 tons per season.

• The next community cleanup is scheduled for Saturday, April 4, 7 a.m. to noon at Luckie Park Activity Center (ELPAC), with Burrtec accepting mattresses, yard waste, trash, e-waste, appliances, scrap metal and shredding — no tires, oil or paint.

• The Split Rock bridge road closure remains in effect and is expected to reopen by the end of December 2026.

Mayor Pro Tem Scott asked James for an update on a community informational session about the Flock cameras. James said he would reach out to the Sheriff’s department.

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

Mayor Pro Tem Scott requested a discussion item on guidelines for use of City Hall meeting rooms by elected and appointed officials for official city business.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Lori Cosgriff of the 29 Palms Community Food Pantry came to thank the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for donating 31,079 pounds of non-perishable food — the largest single distribution the pantry has coordinated in its four years partnering with the church. The donation, part of a nationwide effort tied to America’s 250th anniversary, was shared with 33 groups across the Morongo Basin, from Morongo Valley to the Marine Corps Base. Cosgriff reserved special recognition for Susie Dick, who she said had kept the pressure on church leaders after being told no as late as February 13 — and received a yes two days later.

47 million Americans are facing hunger every day. I give sincere thanks to all 33 of the agencies in our basin who received food from this distribution. I thank them for the work that they do to alleviate hunger in our communities.

Also speaking was Scott Curry, who reported that Flying Doctors held a two-day clinic at Yucca Valley High School offering 122 dental patients, 57 vision, 36 hearing, 43 haircuts, 32 massage therapy sessions, 56 EKGs and 12 vaccinations, with roughly 110 of the 150 volunteers being students from Twentynine Palms and Yucca Valley. Looking ahead, he asked the council for $25,000 to purchase five traveling dental chairs, noting that Flying Doctors currently rents them and that some physicians couldn't fly in that weekend due to high winds.

What was new this meeting were speakers connecting their opposition to Flock cameras to the broader national political moment in direct terms. Booker Harrap made the most detailed case, opening with a methodical recitation of ICE enforcement patterns — rescinded protections for sensitive locations, warrantless entries into homes, a 2,450% surge in detainees with no criminal convictions, at least 170 U.S. citizens detained — before connecting that record directly to the risks of a city-maintained license plate database:

Do we honestly feel secure with this data, considering the facts just stated? I’ll remind you that the Supreme Court held in Carpenter v. United States that long-term location tracking is a search requiring a warrant. Flock does exactly that — passively, continually tracking every person who drives these streets every day.

Others also used stark terms: Heather Drake and Heather H. each applied the word “fascist” to the current federal government — believed to be a first at a Twentynine Palms City Council meeting. Drake called out the contradiction of elected officials who "claim to care about the troops" while remaining silent as service members were sent, in her words, as "pawns and disposable cannon fodder" into what she described as an illegal war with Iran that Congress never approved. Both Drake and “H” framed the Flock camera contract as part of a broader pattern connecting surveillance technology, billionaire tech executives, and the concentration of federal power.

Planning Commissioner Alex Garcia introduced himself as a concerned citizen before speaking on Flock cameras and the solar project — at which point Councilmember Wright interrupted, “Yeah, I’m not sure if you can speak.”

Appointed officials have limits on giving public comment on items that may come before their body. As City Attorney Patrick Muñoz made clear at a May 19, 2025 closed session — when Planning Commissioner Jim Krushat attempted general public comment regarding campground zoning: “You’re on the Planning Commission,” Muñoz told Krushat that day. “You don’t get that benefit of being able to switch hats.”

With the solar project scheduled for a Council hearing on March 23, Garcia’s comment on that item was out of bounds regardless of how he introduced himself. Garcia noted the project was already “out of our hands,” having been referred to Council by the Planning Commission, but Wright was unequivocal: “You’re still on the Planning Commission.” Garcia apologized and confined his remaining remarks to Flock, adding to the list of opponents to the cameras.

Opposition speakers continued to make their case, focusing on health risks from mass grading, threats to desert tortoise habitat, E-Group's lack of a completed project anywhere in the United States1, and the validity of the company's AB 205 threat given the project's 38 megawatt AC capacity.

Elliot Balsley, the final speaker, delivered what may have been the evening's most consequential public comment, reading a letter from Eric Knight at the California Energy Commission confirming that the 50 megawatt threshold in AB 205 refers to AC capacity — meaning E-Group's 38 megawatt AC project does not qualify for the state override the developer has been threatening. The Desert Trumpet, which had received the letter prior to the meeting, reported it as breaking news on March 11.

The meeting was adjourned to Monday, March 23 — moved from the regular Tuesday date — when the E-Group solar project is scheduled for a hearing.

This article was written with AI assistance.

Was this story useful to you? Help us reach our $10,000 goal ! Upgrade your subscription from free to paid today for just $50 per year or $5 per month.

Subscribe now

Want to make a one time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

Updated with a clarification on the City’s lack of due diligence in seeking clarification from the California Energy Commission on how power output is measured.

A written response from a California Energy Commission official has undercut the central legal threat behind the proposed E-Group Solar Project — just two weeks before the Twentynine Palms City Council is scheduled to vote on the facility.

Since May 2023, E-Group attorney Robert Smith of K&L Gates LLP has warned the city that if it did not approve the project, the developer would seek state certification under Assembly Bill 205, bypassing local control entirely. That threat shaped the city’s response from the beginning, with city staff telling the Council in 2023 that AB205 “essentially dictates that if a local jurisdiction does not permit a solar farm, then the State would assume jurisdiction.”

AB205 applies only to solar facilities with a generating capacity of 50 megawatts or more. The dispute is over how that capacity is measured. E-Group has argued the threshold is met using the project’s DC output from its solar panels — approximately 51 MW. Opponents have countered that generating capacity is universally measured in AC power, the electricity actually delivered to the grid, which for this project is approximately 38 MW.

On March 5, Twentynine Palms resident Suzanne Lyons — not the city — sent a formal inquiry to the CEC asking for clarification. Eric Knight, Program Manager for the CEC’s Siting and Environmental Branch, replied the same day.

“The 50-MW threshold refers to AC generating capacity — the maximum continuous electrical output that can actually be delivered to the grid — not the DC module or nameplate rating,” Knight wrote. “A 38-MWac solar project does not qualify for opting into the CEC’s exclusive licensing authority under AB205.”

Did the City Ever Verify the Claim?

The Desert Trumpet asked Community Development Director Keith Gardner at Tuesday night’s City Council meeting whether the city had independently verified with the CEC whether the project actually meets the AB205 threshold. Gardner said he had not seen the CEC letter, and added, “I can tell you we took our lead from our legal team.” When pressed further, he said, “A lot of this stuff was put in motion before me.”

Gardner’s responses reflect a significant staffing reality: both the City Manager and Community Development Director changed after the E-Group project was initiated in 2023, leaving the city’s institutional knowledge of the project’s origins with its legal team and outside consultants.1 The Desert Trumpet has also sought comment from the City Attorney and Terra Nova Representative Nicole Criste, the city’s CEQA consultant, both of whom were in their positions when the project began. Neither had responded by press time.

E-Group’s Response

Asked to comment, Smith did not dispute the CEC’s AC interpretation. Instead, he stated that “currently, CEC approval under AB205 is not being sought for the project” and that “E-Group PS is reviewing recent CEC staff communications” — language that notably stops short of defending the DC-based argument the company has made throughout the review process.

Smith maintained that the project could still qualify for AB205 if needed by adding inverters. “If the CEC required a solar project to establish a 50 MW AC threshold, the project would still meet required thresholds by installing additional inverters without modification to the overall site footprint,” he wrote.

Smith did not address whether a roughly 31% increase in generating capacity — from 38 MW AC to 50 MW AC — would require an amended Environmental Impact Report and additional Planning Commission and City Council review. He also did not address whether E-Group is withdrawing the AB205 threat that has shaped the city’s handling of this project since 2023.

The Desert Trumpet sent Smith follow-up questions on both points, as well as asking whether he is aware of any CEC guidance contradicting Knight’s March 5 statement. No response was received by press time.

What’s at Stake

The Planning Commission sent the project to City Council without a clear recommendation after a split vote on March 3. The Council is scheduled to take up the project on March 23, 2026.

This story will be updated if responses are received from E-Group, K&L Gates, the City Attorney, or Terra Nova.

This article was written with AI assistance.

Was this story useful to you? Help us reach our $10,000 goal ! Upgrade your subscription from free to paid today for just $50 per year or $5 per month.

Subscribe now

Want to make a one time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

At its March 3 meeting, Planning Commissioners were asked to consider the controversial recommendation from City staff that they transfer their decision-making authority to the City Council on the proposed E-Group Solar Project.

E-Group’s attorney returned with new renderings of views, valley fever statistics, and an offer of HEPA filters for downwind neighbors. Fifteen residents lined up to comment, most of them opposed. When the dais finally took over, the divisions were clear. The Commission ended the night deadlocked and forwarded a split recommendation to City Council with no clear direction. The City Council meeting will take place on Monday (note change in usual date), March 23 at City Hall.

All Commissioners were present. In addition, Community Development Director Keith Gardner, Planning Assistant Shelley Green and Assistant Planner Diane Olsen, Assistant City Attorney Jennifer Farrell, and Terra Nova Representative Nicole Criste were also present.

For reference:

• The City’s agenda

• Our agenda preview

• Video of the meeting

• Recaps of the February 17 Planning Commission meeting: Part 1 and Part 2

PUBLIC HEARINGS

Staff and E-Group PS Presentations

Keith Gardner gave a framework for the evening’s meeting. He said that the Staff’s recommendation, given the size, scope, and policy implications of the project, was for the Planning Commission to transfer decision-making authority to the City Council. If the Commission wishes following the recommendation, he said, the Commission could pass along any comments, concerns, or suggestions about the project. What Gardner didn’t say is that those comments would not carry the weight of a vote.

He also suggested that the Commission could adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), but he did not point out that the EIR had yet to be finalized.1

Robert Smith, the attorney who represents E-Group PS, responded to Commissioners’ and residents’ comments from the February 17 Planning Commission meeting. He emphasized the solar farm’s potential to become a top financial contributor to Twentynine Palms. Smith highlighted that E-Group is already giving back, citing $4,000 for food distribution through Hope Project, a program of CLEP, the nonprofit arm of the Sanctuary Church. He also mentioned 80 books on STEM subjects donated to the public library, and $3,600 donation, again to the Hope Project, for their upcoming Color Run.

Leadership of the Sanctuary Church2 supported the project at the February 17 meeting and at this meeting. Last month, Bishop Perry Ford and Dr. Sylvester Cullum spoke generally about benefits to the community that are not part of the benefits package. Church leader Dr. Shanese Risper also spoke at this meeting in support of E-Group (more below).

Smith focused on the project’s long-term economic impact. He stated that the development would immediately become the City’s largest taxpayer, contributing roughly 10% of the City’s annual sales tax revenue. Over its 35-year lifespan, the project is expected to cover more than $180,000 in infrastructure costs, filling budget gaps projected by the City Council.

Addressing environmental concerns, Smith shared renderings from of how the solar facility would look from the 49 Palms Oasis trail in Joshua Tree National Park as well as from Indian Trail Road north of the site. He maintained that the visuals of the project would be “largely subsumed by the surrounding foreground environment.”

Regarding water, he promised a dust-suppression program during the 40-day grading period. He estimated the project would use 1.3 acre-feet of water—only 3% of what other recently reviewed projects require—and noted that water would be trucked in by a third party to avoid depleting the local supply.

Smith argued that the valley fever risk from the solar project is real but manageable, and should not be a reason to block the project. He pointed to state health data showing that San Bernardino County had only 178 confirmed or suspected cases in 2024, compared to nearly 3,900 in neighboring Kern County — about 20 times more. Early 2026 data, he noted, shows numbers declining.

Smith also pushed back against the idea of a “zero risk” policy (despite no suggestion of one), arguing it would effectively shut down all development in Twentynine Palms.

But if there were such a policy, would basically bring development in the City of 29 Palms to a halt. Any new road or infrastructure requires grading of undeveloped areas….It also eliminates the development of residential housing or any other expansion of the City in areas that are currently developed. And that's, you know, a very significant concern.

On worker safety, Smith argued that dust exposure is already regulated at the state level, and that E-Group would require contractors to use dust masks and proper equipment during grading.

For nearby residents, Smith offered a mitigation measure: E-Group would provide HEPA air filters and replacement filters to all homes within 1.5 miles east of the site — downwind of prevailing winds — for the entire duration of construction. (He made no mention of protecting against dust issues caused by grading after construction.)

Questions from Planning Commissioners

Planning Commissioner Jim Krushat made a forceful argument against approving the E-Group Solar Project.

His core point: Twentynine Palms has had a moratorium on commercial solar fields since 2012, and not a single resident, elected official, or community group ever challenged it. That moratorium exists for a reason, he said — the community doesn’t want industrial solar inside City limits. State law AB 205 is the only reason the project is even being considered.

On the community benefits package, Krushat was dismissive. The annual payment is small, undesignated, and would disappear into the general fund. The City isn’t hurting for money.

Most strategically, Krushat argued that rejecting the project isn’t the end of the road — it sends the project to the California Energy Commission, which has far more expertise to scrutinize it properly.

Let me give you an analogy. If somebody came to my yard and said, I’m going to tear your yard up, and I’ll give you $20 a month. But if I have to go to the state and get permission to do it. I’m only going to give you $10 a month. I still get my yard torn up. So why aren’t we fighting for the citizens of 29 Palms and saying, “Okay, let’s stick to the moratorium and see where it goes?”

Commissioner Krushat also asked, as he had on February 17, “what is your projected revenue? I don’t think it’s unusual to ask.” The Ofland Resort, he said, “told us exactly what they expected and what we could expect.”

Smith’s argued that unlike a hotel, where projected revenue can be calculated from room rates, a solar project’s revenue depends on a future power purchase agreement that doesn’t exist yet. Without a buyer, any revenue projection would be “pure speculation.”

When pressed, Smith offered no numbers of his own, instead redirecting to a third-party analysis the City commissioned, which he said showed the community benefit payment compares favorably to similar solar projects elsewhere.

Downplaying the profits E-Group would make from the sale of electricity, Commissioner Max Walker asked about maintenance costs once the project is finished:

On the Base we’re replacing one of the solar farms. Replacing the inverters costs roughly $5 million...and they’ve only been in place 10 plus years. Imagine the maintenance is going to be expensive, and people are thinking they’re going to be making millions upon millions of dollars, but I don’t necessarily know if that’s true. The profit margin isn’t that great.

Smith’s response on maintenance costs pivoted quickly to a broader argument about how expensive the project is to build in the first place — framing high upfront costs as context for why the community benefit package is what it is.

He cited rising steel prices, SCE interconnection upgrades, and site grading as major expenses. Federal restrictions on tax credits added further financial pressure. He added:

The mitigation costs associated with the project, because of the desert tortoise restoration and habitat mitigation, are in the millions of dollars which will depend on the alternative about that’s3 required by CDFW and US Fish and Wildlife, there’ll be at least a million, if not more.

Smith never actually answered the question about ongoing maintenance costs. Instead, his response read more like a justification for the modest community benefit package — essentially arguing that the developers have significant costs of their own.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Many commenters reiterated the points they made in the February 17 meeting. We have highlighted new speakers and arguments.

Dr. Shanese Risper, Evangelist at the Sanctuary Church, spoke first. She praised E-Group as a potential long-term community partner. As noted above, the Sanctuary Church, through the Hope Project, has received more than $7,000 in donations from E-Group. In addition, the Church has an existing financial relationship with the City, which has been advocating for the solar project.

George Mulopulos, the landowner leasing the property to E-Group, noted that:

The two parcels involved in this project were purchased in 2004 and since then, more than a dozen solar companies have expressed interest in developing this property. Why? Because of its proximity to the Carodean substation. It is one of the most viable solar locations in our region.

He said that no homebuilders have ever shown serious interest, and that the project brings real revenue unlike nearby solar fields outside City limits. He dismissed opposition as largely coming from non-residents. Mulopulos, it should be noted, lists his residence as Las Vegas on LinkedIn. His support carries an obvious financial conflict of interest as the property owner.

Other commenters including Dane Austin and Paul Nugent, as well as students Kayla and Reina,4 spoke in favor of the solar project and repeated their past statements or offered general support without substantive arguments.

Pat Flanagan, Jeff Johnson, David Fick, Kurt Kepler, and Mary Kay Sherry amplified their comments from February 17, sometimes responding directly to points made by the E-Group attorney. John Talley-Jones noted the new solar field being built on County land on Lear Road and argued that the City should not rush to meet E-Group’s tax credit deadline.

Aiden Marshall spoke on behalf of Citizens for Responsible Industry, Marshall argued the project remains premature because the City has not complied with CEQA, and that the draft and final EIR both failed to adequately analyze significant health, public safety, and biological resource impacts.

Russ Kohn raised the point that E-Group has no operating solar fields anywhere in the United States, meaning Twentynine Palms would essentially be their first project. He questioned why the City would approve a major industrial project from an unproven developer and compared it to hiring a contractor without references.

I take issue with the person who said most of the people were not residents of the City. I know many people. We’re all residents here. I live in 29 palms. My wife and I know plenty of people. And he was incorrect. We do live here and we care for this town.

Cindy Bernard, editor of the Desert Trumpet, accused E-Group’s attorney of misrepresenting a City Council vote in a public hearing — calling it a significant ethical lapse for a lawyer. She dismantled the project’s comparable “comps,” noting the Darden Fresno facility cited is 9,500 acres, generates 2,000 jobs, and $160 million in community benefits — making it an entirely inapt comparison. She argued the push to transfer authority to City Council was a direct response to the Planning Commission asking hard questions, characterized it as a deliberate end-run, and urged Commissioners to continue their work at their own pace rather than E-Group’s. Addressing the Commission, Bernard said:

You were doing great work last week. All of you were asking really great questions. Continue to do that work. Take the time you need. Whatever timeline they have, that’s their timeline. It’s not our timeline.

The Planning Commission’s Vote

Following public comment, the Commission’s discussion and vote revealed deep divisions. Commissioner Krushat noted the City has maintained a moratorium on commercial solar fields since 2012, that no one had previously moved to overturn it, and that the annual benefit amount would not represent a significant addition to the City budget. He outlined three possible outcomes if the Commission and council denied the project:

• E-Group withdraws,

• the California Energy Commission reviews and denies it, or

• the CEC reviews and approves it with potentially less benefit to the City.

Commissioner Garcia stated he knew residents downwind of the project who depend on clean air, that dust mitigation would be insufficient, and that the benefits package was inadequate given the scope of land disturbance.

Chair Jessica Cure sought clarifications on whether AB 205 specifies AC or DC output. AB 205 gives the California Energy Commission exclusive jurisdiction over solar projects at or above 50 megawatts, bypassing local approval. The question is whether that 50 megawatt threshold is measured in AC or DC power output — because the project’s DC capacity apparently exceeds 50 megawatts while its AC capacity does not.

City Attorney Farrell stated the statute does not specify AC or DC, and that the state would likely interpret it to favor their policy mandate regardless. Since the meeting, the Desert Trumpet has received confirmation from the CEC that the 50 -megawatt threshold refers to AC generating capacity5 Community Development Director Gardner confirmed the project’s capacity is measured in DC.

On the benefits package, Gardner stated that City Council had reviewed it and given consensus to move it forward. As we noted in our coverage of the February 17 meeting, although Council discussed the benefits package, but did not formally vote to approve it or move it forward.

After much discussion and much confusion, two Commissioners (Walker and Leslie Paahana) voted in favor of approving the general plan amendment, rezoning, development code amendment, conditional use permit, development agreement, and certification of the environmental impact report — and a Commissioner and Vice Chair (Krushat and Alex Garcia) voted in favor of denying all of those same items — with Chair Cure neutral.

CITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR’S REPORT

Director Gardner briefly reported a City building to the north is being renovated.

SELECTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR

Three motions were made. First, Krushat nominated himself as chair and suggested that current Vice Chair Garcia repeat in that position saying “I think Alex having an extra year will give him the experience he needs to step in the position [of chair]”— that motion failed 2-3, with Krushat and Garcia in favor, Paahana, Cure, and Walker opposed. Second, Cure nominated Paahana as chair and Garcia as vice chair — that motion also failed. Third, a motion was made to select Walker as chair and Krushat as vice chair — that motion passed unanimously, this despite Garcia having grown a great deal in his role on the Planning Commission.

Walker then adjourned the meeting.

Help us get to to $9,000 — we’re just $15 away!! Upgrade your subscription from free to paid today for just $50 per year or $5 per month.

Want to make a one time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Subscribe now

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

Thanks for reading! This post is public, so feel free to share it.

Share

You may be wondering— What? No solar project? That’s right. It looks like City Council members will have extra time to read the newly published behemoth that’s the final Environmental Impact Report plus all the letters in the last Planning Commission agenda. We understand that the solar project will land at an off-calendar Council meeting scheduled for Monday, March 23 at 6pm.

The result is a relatively lean March 10 agenda — there’s just one consent calendar item beyond the routine warrant register approval, and a single action item. But that action item, a proposed City Council salary increase, is worth your attention.

The meeting begins at 6 pm. at City Hall, 6136 Adobe Road. Proceedings may be viewed on demand at the CIty’s YouTube channel or live streamed at www.29palms.org.

PUBLIC COMMENT

You can comment on agenda items and issues important to you at every City Council meeting. Comments on agenda items take place during discussion of that item, while comments on non-agenda items take place near the end of the meeting. The Brown Act prevents Council from commenting on non-agenda items. To comment, just pick up a form at the entry desk, fill it out, and hand it to the Clerk, who usually sits just in front of the Council bench toward the right.

Here’s the list of Council email addresses to write if you can’t get to the meeting — be sure to email them prior to 2 pm on the date of the meeting so they have time to read your email prior to discussion. You can also copy the clerk at cvillescas@29palms.org and ask that your letter be made part of the public record.

AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND PROCLAMATIONS

Council will open with two proclamations: one recognizing March 2026 as Irish-American Heritage Month and a second recognizing March 2026 as Women’s History Month.

CONSENT CALENDAR

The Consent Calendar consists of items usually approved with a single vote. The public is given a chance to make public comment on these items prior to the Council motion. Fill out a comment form specifying the item you wish to address and submit it in person, or send an email in advance regarding any of the items on this meeting’s Consent Calendar.

The warrant register for this meeting totals $1,319,350.36. A few line items are worth flagging: $39,456.00 to USGS National Center MS 270, likely connected to ongoing groundwater assessment efforts, and the now-familiar $8,400 monthly payment to Clifford Moss LLC, the consultant overseeing Probolsky Research’s community survey in support of the proposed 1% sales tax measure. The Consent Calendar also includes approval of the minutes of the February 24, 2026, meeting and the standard waiver of the reading of ordinances.

The one item of community interest in this meeting’s Consent Calendar:

6. Information on the Importance of Periodic Septic System Maintenance

This item continues a commitment the City made at a prior meeting to keep the public informed about groundwater protection. As a reminder: Twentynine Palms has no centralized sewer system. Residents rely entirely on septic systems, and the entire community draws its drinking water from underground aquifers. The City and Twentynine Palms Water District (TPWD) are collaborating on a Salt and Nutrient Management Plan required by the Colorado River Basin Regional Water Quality Control Board, and a key component of that plan is public education.

The staff report notes that there are currently eight batch treatment systems in the City — the larger-scale systems that typically serve residential developments, hotels, and commercial areas — and, per the staff report, three of them are known to be failing. The report does not identify their locations, nor does it provide a count of the individual residential and commercial septic systems operating within city limits. For a community that relies entirely on septic systems for wastewater management and is actively tracking groundwater contamination risk, that seems like information the public has a right to know. Improperly maintained septic systems can contaminate the shallow groundwater aquifer, which — while separated from the deeper drinking water aquifer by a clay layer — still poses a potential long-term risk.

The EPA recommends having a professional inspect your system at least every three years and pump it out every three to five years. Educational materials prepared jointly by the City and the Water District are included in the agenda packet. The City intends to place this item on the Consent Calendar at each meeting going forward as a standing reminder.

DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS

7. City Council Salary Increase

This is the first reading of a proposed ordinance to raise City Council member salaries from $465 per month — a figure that has not changed since December 10, 2002 — to $950 per month, the maximum allowed by State law for cities with populations of 35,000 or fewer.

The item was initiated by then-Mayor Pro Tem Joel Klink, who raised the issue at the October 22, 20241 Council meeting as a future agenda item:

Since I’m going off the Council, I would like to discuss before December 10, an increase in the money that City Council members receive each month.

City Manager Stone James followed up at the November 12 meeting:

Looked into it. Cindy Canary, just great professional within our finance department, did some research. And ultimately, what we’re looking at is, I’m going to have to take this back before the Council. My goal will be to bring it before Council, and maybe quarter one or quarter two of this coming year of 2025 so that we can go ahead and have the Council adopt it…And so as as previously was identified, the Council salaries are remarkably low, and it has been, if I if I saw correctly, since 2002 they were set, so it is long overdue that they be changed.

Despite some consensus that salaries should discussed and potentially updated, it’s taken a year for the proposal to wind its way back to an agenda.

Under State law (Government Code Section 36516, as amended by Senate Bill 329 in 2024), cities have three options for calculating a salary increase. The staff report analyzes all three:

• Time-based calculation (5% per year since the last adjustment): Over 24 years, this would yield a maximum of $1,008 per month.

• Population-based flat rate: For cities under 35,000 in population, up to $950 per month. This is what staff is recommending.

• CPI-based adjustment: Staff notes this method lacks readily available data and is not practical for this cycle.

The proposed $950/month figure matches what the Yucca Valley Town Council adopted in early 2024 under the same Senate Bill 329 framework.

There are a few important procedural points for residents to understand. First, the salary increase cannot take effect until after the November 2026 election — specifically, when the Council certifies election results and new members take their seats in December 2026. The current Council cannot vote itself an immediate raise. If tonight’s first reading passes, a second reading must occur prior to November 1, 2026, otherwise the increase is pushed to after the 2028 election.

Second, any Council member may choose to waive the compensation.

The fiscal impact, if approved at the State maximum, would be an additional $29,100 annually in total Council salary costs per year.

This is a reasonable conversation to have. Twenty-four years without a raise is a long time, and the difficulty of attracting qualified candidates to serve on Council is a legitimate public concern, especially in an economically deprived city. Council seats in Districts 3, 4 and 5 are up for election in 2026—those are currently held by Mayor Daniel Mintz, Mayor Pro Tem Octavious Scott and Councilmember McArthur Wright, and competitive elections ensure that important issues are discussed.

At the same time, the public has a right to weigh in on how their elected officials are compensated. This is your opportunity to do so.

The meeting will conclude with public comment on non-agenda items, consideration of future agenda items, and the City Manager’s report.

Note: Desert Trumpet was recently granted a nonprofit license for Claude.ai. While we remain a human-produced publication, we are experimenting with how Claude can reduce our city hall workload and enable additional reporting. We used Claude.ai to research and generate a first draft of this agenda preview in the style of the Desert Trumpet, which was then corrected and amended for additional details by the author. Desert Trumpet is working on an AI policy to be published later this month. We welcome our readers’ thoughts on AI use in our comments.

The Desert Trumpet covers Twentynine Palms City Hall so you don’t have to miss a thing. If this preview was useful to you, consider becoming a paid subscriber.

Subscribe now

Want to make a one time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

Thanks for reading! This post is public, so feel free to share it.

Share

Last Tuesday, the Twentynine Palms City Council held a ninety-minute meeting in which they approved budget transfers for three financial fund categories and discussed placement of a youth tile project in Freedom Plaza. They again heard from citizens on Flock camera concerns and the proposed E-Group PS solar facility near Harmony Acres.

The City’s agenda packet is here; our agenda preview of the meeting is here; video footage of the meeting is here.

AWARDS, PRESENTATIONS, APPOINTMENTS AND PROCLAMATIONS

Public Works Department Update

Craig Stacey of the Twentynine Palms Public Works Department updated the Council on its current projects. He gave an overview of his department’s work on the 150 miles of paved and 20 miles of unpaved roads the City maintains as well as the 14 major municipal buildings and numerous smaller facilities scattered throughout the city.

Stacey said “paving season” is currently in its second week. The city uses various funding sources, including $787,500 in SB 1 (Road Repair and Accountability Act) funding. Stacey said,

this is what makes the magic happen….When people leave for work and it looks like a bomb went off, storm destroyed all the roads, dirt everywhere, the shoulders are washed out, they go to work and they come back home from work and it’s all put back so it does have kind of a magical feeling.

By performing much of this work “in-house”—meaning using city staff and equipment rather than hiring outside contractors—Public Works is able to stretch its budget further. Stacey noted that this approach allows the city to get more work done for the taxpayers’ dollar.

Meetings Attended

Councilmembers reported meeting with constituents with concerns such as homelessness, economic growth, and children’s safety, as well as attending the mayor’s prayer breakfast and a fundraiser for the animal shelter. Councilmember Ramirez noted attending the San Bernardino County Office of Homeless Services East Desert Regional Steering Committee meeting, saying:

as a direct result of our involvement and partnership with the county, we’ve also secured $95,000 in grant funding….These funds are available to Twentynine Palms residents. I have the one-page application and it is specifically for people who are currently homeless or are at risk of becoming homeless. That being said, these funds are now available. They’ve been released, and I can help with first and last month’s rent down payment assistance and the turnaround time.

She amplified the grant announcement on social media the following day, which seemed to turn grants offered through Inland Housing Solutions in Loma Linda into an effort that was the result solely of her efforts, framing it as a campaign pitch.

The Desert Trumpet has reported extensively on Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention Program (HHAP) grants, which are administered by the San Bernardino County East Desert Regional Steering Committee, consisting of eight members. Participating are representatives from Yucca Valley, Supervisor Dawn Rowe’s office, Molding Hearts, the Morongo Basin Conservation Association, Reach Out Morongo Basin and Rescue + Reisdence, in addition to Councilmember Ramirez and City Manager Stone James. In the past the grants have been available through other organizations such as Reach Out Morongo Basin —see “RECAP: SBCO East Desert Regional Committee on Homelessness, October 16, 2025” and “Recap: Twentynine Palms City Council, May 13, 2025.”

CONSENT CALENDAR

The Consent Calendar consisted only of the minutes for the February 10 meeting and the adoption of a resolution that changes the length of time before City records are destroyed or deleted. It was passed unanimously without discussion.

In public comment on City records, Heather Drake asked asked where she could find the text of the resolution referenced in the Staff report.

DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS

Twentynine Palms Mid-Year Budget Report

Finance Director Abigail Hernandez-Conde presented a summary to the City Council regarding the city’s performance through the midpoint of the 2025-2026 fiscal year.

General Fund Mid-Year Budget Update

The city’s General Fund, which pays for everyday services like police and parks, remains in a healthy postion, Hernandez-Conde reported. As of December 31, 2025, the city held $19.8 million in total cash and investment balances. To make this money grow, the City Treasurer invested $10 million in a local agency fund (LAIF), which earned a 4.2% interest rate. Another $25.2 million is held in certificates of deposit (CDs), and $1.3 million is in U.S. Treasury bills.

In terms of income, the city has collected $7.8 million, or 52% of its expected revenue for the year. Property taxes and vehicle fees are performing well, but sales tax revenue is expected to stay flat due to high interest rates and national economic uncertainty. On the spending side, the city has used $8 million (54% of the budget). Law enforcement is the largest expense, accounting for 43% of the city’s total operating costs. Because of necessary adjustments, the city’s projected surplus was reduced by $137,000.

Capital Projects and Special Revenue Funds

Capital projects are long-term investments in city infrastructure. The city is currently managing several major efforts, including the Split Rock construction, the Sullivan bike path, and renovations to the Senior Center. To ensure these projects stay on schedule, the City Council approved moving $183,300 from the General Fund into these accounts. Additionally, the city continues to receive “COPS” program funds, which are restricted specifically for public safety and citizen-option programs.

Project Phoenix and Enterprise Sewer Fund

Because of his wife’s business in the downtown area, Mayor Daniel Mintz recused himself from this discussion. Project Phoenix is a major downtown development initiative, Hernandez-Conde explained. A key part of this project involves the package treatment plant that manages wastewater for some of the downtown area. To support this, the council approved a transfer of $80,000 from the General Fund to the Sewer Fund. This money is specifically designated for utility connections and infrastructure costs required to make the treatment plant fully operation.

All three budget transfer requests were approved by City Council with very few questions.

Freedom Plaza Youth Mural Project

Rhonda Coleman, Director of Groundwork Arts, outlined an upcoming collaborative project with Twentynine Palms Parks & Recreation Department to create a student-made tile mural for Freedom Plaza. Funding comes from California Arts Council including a $18,500 grant to Parks & Recreation and $21,500 to Groundwork Arts. An additional $15,000 left over from an allocation for public art at Freedom Plaza was awarded with approval from the Public Arts Advisory Committee. (Because of his connection to Freedom Plaza, Mayor Mintz again recused himself from the conversation.)

Coleman presented the timeline, saying turnaround time would be quick:

• March: Community engagement and surveys. Digital and paper surveys will be distributed to residents to collect ideas on themes, local imagery, and preferred color palettes.

• April: Design concept presentation. Groundwork Arts will work directly with all MUSD schools. They will collect feedback from more than 3,000 students, as well as teachers and staff, to ensure the youth perspective is the heart of the design.

• April–July: Community members and students will participate in hands-on workshops. Here, they will help create the actual individual ceramic tiles that will make up the larger mosaic.

• June–September: Mural assembly.

• October: Final installation. Coleman assured Councilmembers that her team would seek the best price point for quality of work for the mural’s placement.

Councilmembers expressed strong support for the project, and a key point was the project’s funding strategy. Council members were impressed that Groundwork Arts didn’t just ask for more money; instead, they secured significant outside grants to supplement the city’s $15,000 contribution.

Some initial concerns were raised about the durability and “professional look” of a youth-led project. Coleman reassured the council that with her 35 years of experience and a professional staff of artists and designers, the result would be a high-quality, permanent landmark that fits the city’s identity as an oasis of murals.

There was much discussion of the tile mural’s location, including the back of the stage at Freedom Plaza, the front of the stage, and the side of the Joshua Tree National Park Visitor Center. Paul Razo, Chair of the Public Arts Advisory Committee, was enthusiastic in his support.

Council voted unanimously to support the project.

PUBLIC COMMENT

For the third consecutive Council meeting, public comment focused on Flock cameras. Heather Drake argued that the Flock surveillance cameras are a violation of privacy and a “corrupt waste of money” that turns the community into a “police state”. Drawing on her 15 years of experience in information technology, she warned that the centralized database treats citizens like “data points” and will ultimately hurt local tourism and the arts scene. Drake was also concerned about the scheduled destruction of documents included in the Consent Calendar.

Victor Lewis echoed Drake’s points and noted that while they did not have new arguments to add to the discussion, they felt it was important to formally record their disagreement with the project.

The fact that you once again have a full house, or nearly full house, of people begging you to reconsider this should be enough to make you question your decisions. Thus far, it's our job to tell you when you could be doing better. I hope you've realized by now that we will keep telling you and keep showing up until this issue is addressed properly. Please show us that you value our voices and feedback.

These concerns were also echoed by Jeff Johnson, “Heather,” Gretchen Grunt, and Pauline Pisano, who said:

The tracking of people's location constitutes a significant invasion of privacy which can reveal many things about our lives, such as what friends they visit, what doctors we visit, what spiritual places of worship we visit, and our society is a core principle that government does not invade people's privacy and collect information.

It's okay to change your mind.

Booker Harper argued that the “Flock” camera system constitutes a Fourth Amendment violation by allowing law enforcement to track movement patterns without a warrant. He expressed deep concern over the lack of transparency regarding which agencies have access to this data, noting that even the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department could not confirm if the FBI has access. Harper cited legal precedents and examples of other California cities such as Santa Cruz and Los Alto Hills that terminated their contracts after discovering police were using the searchable databases for personal reasons like stalking.

Demanding the City terminate its contract with Flock Safety, Elliot Balsley cited "Big Brother" surveillance risks and a petition signed by more than 570 residents.

You had a few weeks to read and digest the numerous news articles. All written on the subject, and you all remain silent. So at this point, I have to assume you don't care about these risks and you like living under Big Brother surveillance.

Balsley went on to say:

The Flock company provides audit logs for accountability, showing how many searches are being run by each officer, and these include timestamps and reasons, and these are public records, so I've read them, and they show some interesting trends. One thing that stands out in San Bernardino County, five officers of the San Bernardino Sheriff are running searches 24 hours a day. Now I know these sheriffs are probably dedicated public servants, but I don't believe any of them are working 24 hours a day. So who is running these searches, surveilling people? Does that seem strange to any of you? The most likely explanation is that they've shared their password with someone else, maybe another officer, maybe an ice agent, or maybe it was stolen by a hacker.

John Talley-Jones discussed a letter from the California Department of Housing and Community Development regarding potential violations of the Housing Crisis Act (SB 330). He stated that improper rezoning for the Ofland Resort may have illegally reduced residential capacity and said the letter demanded the city comply with state law by March 20.

On behalf of the 29 Palms Ministerial Association, LeeAnne Clark thanked the mayor, city council, and community for attending the recent Mayor’s Prayer Breakfast. She highlighted several upcoming events, including an emergency preparedness meeting on March 19, a Good Friday service on April 3, and an Easter sunrise service at Freedom Plaza on April 5. She invited the public to the National Day of Prayer on May 7.

City Manager’s Report

Dr. H. Stone James highlighted several infrastructure improvements and community milestones for Twentynine Palms. A major focus is on local parks, specifically a $98,000 ADA parking lot improvement at the south entrance of Lucky Park scheduled for completion in March. The city is also seeking additional federal grants to upgrade the park’s courtyard and playground equipment.

Power stability is another priority, as Southern California Edison plans to replace 70 electric poles and install a second 33 kilowatt power line starting in late 2026. This project will take six to eight months and may cause one-lane traffic delays on Highway 62. He did not mention whether these upgrades would again inconvenience downtown businesses, as they did last summer. Additionally, Edison is upgrading circuit breakers and using coded lines to prevent proactive power shutoffs in the downtown area.

He also reported that the War Hawks football team now practices at the junior high, improving access for families who previously could not enter the military base. He said two major 75th-anniversary celebrations are approaching for the Mojave Trails National Monument and the Marine Corps Base.

Prompted by concerns expressed by Heather Drake, Dr. James said that a recent closed session of the council focused exclusively on site security.

NOTE: Desert Trumpet staff members Cindy Bernard, Kat Talley-Jones, and Heidi Heard live in the Indian Cove neighborhood, adjacent to the Ofland development project, and are on the organizing committees of Indian Cove Neighbors and Say No to Ofland. Read our policy for covering Ofland here.

Help us get to to $9,000 — we’re just $15 away!! Upgrade your subscription from free to paid today for just $50 per year or $5 per month.

Subscribe now

Want to make a one time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

Thanks for reading! This post is public, so feel free to share it.

Share

At its February 17, 2026, meeting,1 the Planning Commission voted to continue their discussion of and decision on the approval of the conditional use permit for the E-Group Solar Project to the March 3 meeting. The agenda packet for the upcoming meeting is 818 pages long (linked here) and includes a bombshell: staff is recommending that the decision about the project be transferred from the Planning Commission to the City Council.

RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission transfer its decision-making authority to the City Council pursuant to Section 19.28.110 of the Development Code due to the policy implications, unique or unusual circumstances, and/or the magnitude of the proposed E-Group Solar Project.

This is a significant procedural move.

Searches through City minutes online reveal that this move is unprecedented in Twentynine Palms. Moving the decision from the Planning Commission to the City Council is not unusual in locations like Los Angeles, however, where there are frequent complex decisions to be made.

Staff are likely making this recommendation for several reasons:

1. Accountability: Planning Commissioners are appointed while City Council members are elected. By transferring authority, the decision is placed in the hands of people who are directly accountable to voters—some of whom have been vocal about their opposition to this project. Because there are significant environmental impacts per the Draft Environmental Impact Report and because other fast-tracked projects have resulted in litigation (“Lawsuit Filed Against the City of Twentynine Palms to Challenge the Approval of the Ofland Resort”), this moves the political heat to elected officials.

2. A faster decision: E-Group PS is under time pressure to begin the project with tax credits in jeopardy if work has not started by July 4, 2026. Kicking the process to City Council eliminates a step and a possible rejection by the Planning Commission, who did not all look on the community benefits package offered by E-Group with favor.

It would seem that by moving the decision to the City Council, the city is acknowledging that the E-Group project is a political and legal decision as much as it is a land-use one. And since it is so significant, why didn’t Staff make this recommendation from the start of the process?

The agenda’s discussion section states that much of the discussion at the February 17 meeting centered on the benefits package and asserts that “City Staff represented to the Planning Commission that the benefits package was negotiated based on parameters provided by the City Council.” As we reported here, our analysis of the City Council minutes subsequent to a discussion of the benefits package led by E-Group representative Robert Smith on June 24, 2025, shows it was never voted on or approved by Council—and that E-Group misrepresented a workshop item as a vote.

What Will Happen at Tuesday’s Meeting?

1. Community Development Director Keith Gardner will present the staff report

2. Planning Commission will ask questions

3. Public comment will be opened

4. The hearing will be closed

5. The Planning Commission will discuss transferring the decision to the City Council

6. The Planning Commission will vote

As we reported in our coverage of the last Planning Commission, there was considerable public pushback on approving the E-Group PS Solar Project based on concerns about dust, health (Valley Fever), "aesthetic damage," and the fate of desert tortoises that live on the parcels in question. In addition, the Environmental Impact Report has yet to be finalized.

The Planning Commission meeting takes place Tuesday, March 3, at 5 pm at City Hall.

Help us get to to $9,000 — we’re just $15 away!! Upgrade your subscription from free to paid today for just $50 per year or $5 per month.

Subscribe now

Want to make a one time donation or are you able to give more than $100? Donate via Paypal!

Leave your thoughts in the comments below. Please note that we do not allow anonymous comments. Please be sure your first and last name is on your profile prior to commenting. Anonymous comments will be deleted.

Leave a comment

Thanks for reading! This post is public, so feel free to share it.

Share