Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/25/2001 - Study SessionCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes Study Session September 25, 2001- 4:10 p.m. Present: Heffernan, O'Neil, Ridgeway, Glover, Bromberg, Proctor, Mayor Adams Absent: None CURRENT BUSINESS 1. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. In response to Mayor Adams' questions regarding Item 4 (West Newport Sewer Main Replacement Project — C- 3453), Public Works Director Badum reported that this project deals with a rare case in which a sealed pipe in a segment of a clay pipe is leaking due to corrosion. He indicated that conducting the work at night was looked at, but with the proximity of residents it was determined that the work could be done during the day since there are many points in which traffic volumes are low. Regarding Item 6 (Newport Coast Advisory Committee), Mayor Adams asked how Council makes its appointments. Assistant City Manager Kiff stated that the intent is to have the City Clerk have a call for applicants; have the applications reviewed by Council; and, with Council's concurrence, the Mayor would make the appointments. He noted that this procedure is outlined in Exhibit A. Mr. Mff confirmed for Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway that members have to live in Newport Coast and must submit an application. Regarding Item 8 (Buck Gully Pump Station Rehabilitation — C- 3368), Mayor Adams noted that this appears to be a 100% increase in professional services and that a lot of agencies prohibit this out of fairness to the engineering community. City Manager Bludau reported that the City does not have a threshold policy. Mayor Adams indicated that the City may want to consider this type of policy and maybe go out to bid for this, noting that the original contract was for $36,000 and now it is being proposed to be increased by $39,000. Public Works Director Badum explained that the two projects that were added were relatively minor in nature, yet similar in many ways, and doing it in this manner would expedite the CIP process. He indicated that they are not opposed to taking the two pump stations out of the contract, but do want to make some modifications to the additional work on the Buck Gully Pump Station because they feel they have a better design plan. He noted that the cost of this modification is about $9,242. He stated that, if this were to go out to bid, they are requesting that at least this amount remain. Mayor Adams indicated that he is alright with this if there were extenuating circumstances, but he believed that the City should be careful in these situations. He added that Council may want to entertain a policy to place a percent cap on extending current contracts. Mayor Pro Tern Volume 54 - Page 465 INDEX City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 25, 2001 2. Ridgeway suggested that Council discuss this during the regular meeting since this goes beyond clarifying an item on the Consent Calendar. Regarding Item 10 (Main Beach Sewer Force Main Replacement — C- 3296), Mayor Adams applauded staff for being creative, coming up with an alternate bid item, dealing with the homeowners association, and saving $40,000. Mayor Adams noted that Item 14 (Water Quality Testing in Storm Drains and Tributaries to Newport Bay) is a sole source contract with the University of California for $36,000 and believed that staff provided good justification for it. Regarding the 50% charge on overhead, Assistant City Manager Kiff explained that it is .5 times direct labor and materials costs ($12,000 on the $24,000 cost of labor and materials). He added that the University Regents also applied a 50% overhead to the original charge for administration. In response to Council Member Proctor's questions, Mr. Ki£f stated that there will be a lot to tackle once the City gets answers from the tests and finds out the exact problem, the source of the bacteria, and whether there are viruses present. Regarding doing more, he indicated that he is always open to suggestions. He added that the City received another $400,000 in State money to complete a variety of tests that have not been considered yet. This item will be brought before Council at the next meeting. Council Member Glover stated that the City needs to set goals regarding beach closures, how many the City will tolerate, and how to alleviate the closures. She indicated that the perception in the City is that the water is not clean and that Council needs to turn this perception around. Mr. Mff agreed and stated that this is important to address. In response to Mayor Adams' question regarding Item 15 (Newport Center First Station No. 3 Mechanical Upgrade and Restroom Addition — C- 3385), City Manager Bludau stated that it was his understanding that this was in the budget. Public Works Director Badum indicated that the additional funding includes $23,000 and noted that this is a CIP project. In response to Council Member Proctor's questions regarding the protest that was filed, Mr. Badum explained that the second low bidder was protesting that the low bidder did not list subcontractors that were specialized in several areas. However, under the B- License of building, the contractor can employ people with those types of skills and do the work himself. He pointed out that the second bidder indicated that contract law states that, if you do more than one percent of the work, you have to list the subcontractors in the contract. He stated that the City will be ensuring that he is doing the work himself. He reported that, since there is nothing that prohibits the contractor from hiring specialists, they had to reject the protest. Council Member Proctor asked if everyone is comfortable that there is no basis in fact or law for this issue to be reexamined. Mr. Badum stated that the Project Manager, Lloyd Dalton, consulted with the City Attorney's office and believed that everyone is satisfied. INDEX 01 COUNCIL REVIEW OF STAFF'S PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF I GPA 97 -3(F) CITY ACQUISITION OF DUNES LEASEHOLD. Dunes Leasehold Volume 54 - Page 466 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 25, 2001 Mayor Adams reported that he received a call from Nancy Skinner prior to September 11, 2001, asking that the discussion be less formal and provide for more flexible debate and discussion from the public. He indicated that he will try to accommodate this since this issue is something the public has expressed a great interest in. He reported that, with Council permission, Council will receive the presentation by staff, open Council discussion, and then the public will be invited to speak for three minutes individually. However, after all the public has had the chance to speak for three minutes, he will invite people back to speak again for an additional three minutes so there will be a chance to have discussion or comment. Council Member Glover indicated that she is not particularly comfortable with the proposed procedure. Mayor Adams noted that the difference from normal policy is that people are given three minutes instead of five minute and they also will be allowed to speak more than once. City Manager Bludau stated that, after the Closed Session agenda went out, he received word that the window to accept bids closes on October 15, 2001. He indicated that, based on the closing date, he will be requesting that Council add this item to the Closed Session agenda at the end of the study session since it came up after the agenda was printed. Mr. Bludau stated that Council Member Bromberg requested that staff take a preliminary look at the Newport Dunes leasehold and report back to Council so a determination can be made on whether it is interested and possibly propose to purchase the leasehold. He reported that the current leasehold is held by the Newport Dunes Partnership; is 100 acres, which includes the water; is leased from the County of Orange; is tidelands, except for about 5% of the leasehold which is uplands; and is presently operating as a recreational vehicle (RV) park and marina. He noted that the use of the tidelands is governed by Chapter 526 of the California Statutes. Mr. Bludau utilized a PowerPoint presentation and reported that, prior to 1955, the area was nothing more than a saltwater marsh. However, in 1955, the County began a dredging project that took two years. In 1958, the lease was entered into with Newport Dunes, Incorporated. Beginning in 1976, the County and Newport Dunes started planning for the enlargement and improvement of existing facilities and the construction of new facilities. He stated that included in this was the construction of a family inn with 350 rooms and meeting rooms with the capacity to seat 400 people. He reported that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was generated and the City challenged the EIR in 1981, which resulted in a settlement agreement in 1983 that gave the City land use authority over the property and identified what the improvements could be and its scope. He reported that the City regulates the site through a Newport Dunes Planned Community (PC) District Plan and utilized a map to show the five different planned uses (RV resort area; Bay, beach, and lagoon area; boat launch and storage area; marina area; and the proposed resort). Regarding the map, he indicated that it simply shows the areas in the PC District Plan and its authorized uses, and was not meant to show the entitled plan for the proposed resort. Mr. Bludau utilized a slide which highlights how the different land uses compare with the settlement agreement. He reported that the entitled 275- Volume 54 - Page 467 INDEX (45) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 25, 2001 INDEX room tamely inn that could be up to 500,000 square feet, and the 27,500 square foot restaurant are not built yet. He also stated that there is a difference between what was required by the settlement agreement and what is available, pointing out that, instead of having 450 slips, there are 430 slips and 20 temporary slips. Mr. Bludau reported that the Newport Dunes Partnership leases the property from the County and has a 50 -year lease that was entered into on February 16, 1989. He noted that the lease has had about four major amendments and the purpose of the property, as sited in the lease, is for the County to enter into the lease in order to promote the redevelopment of the Newport Dunes and to make tenant - provided recreational facilities and services available for the benefit of the public. He reported that there is an annual minimum rent with a provision for adjustments by the County every five years. He explained that the percentage of rent against the gross, which is subject to periodic adjustments by the County, is generated from specific uses and pointed out that the percentages are outlined in the staff report. Further, the tenant must establish a capital replacement fund for replacing furniture, fixtures, marina facilities, and capital repairs and improvements; and the lease requires specific mandatory demolitions that have already taken place. Mr. Bludau reported that the tenant is solely responsible for the site maintenance, with the exception of dredging which is established and funded by the County when it is needed. Further, lifeguards are required at the swimming area when it is open to the public, plus there are insurance requirements. He reported that the lease transfer does require County approval and the County also has the right of first refusal to match any bona fide purchase offer within 45 days. Lastly, the County must agree to the boat launch and marina fee changes. Mr. Bludau stated that there is no minimum bid. He reiterated that the cutoff date for accepting purchase offers is October 15, 2001; the entire leasehold is for sale; the seller is not interested in purchase payments over time; the County has 45 days to match any purchase offer; and leasehold revenues have increased on the average of 6% to 8% annually. He reported that, from the latest audit, the combined revenues for the last audit year were a little more than $11 million; the gross operating profit was $4.6 million; the lease payment to the County is almost $1.8 million; property taxes, insurance, and other expenditures were in excess of $580,000; the net income is $2.2 million; and the property and equipment value is almost $29 million, but has been depreciated and amortized down to $16 million. Mr. Bludau indicated that he was most interested in the $2.2 million net income and what the City could bond off of. Council Member O'Neil asked what types of financing methods are available to the City if it wanted to buy the lease. Mr. Bludau indicated that the first question to answer is whether the City would be able to borrow the money and, if it sells bonds, will the bonds be tax free because that would reduce the interest rate. He stated that, in providing information to Council, he made the assumption that the revenues generated will need to pay for the borrowing of the money since the City probably would not want the General Fund to support this purchase. He estimated the property to be worth $25 million to $50 million for the 39 year leasehold. He recommended that a Volume 54 - Page 468 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 25, 2001 INDEX consultant be brought on board, if Council were interested, to take a look at the financials and determine a price that the City may be interested in offering. Council Member Glover believed that Council needs to know what this would cost per parcel for each household because, if the City buys this, it would have to be paid for by the citizens and would need to become a ballot issue. She stated that her district is surrounded on three sides by commercial area and, if the Dunes were turned into a park, inlanders would be driving off of Newport Boulevard through Cliff Haven, Mariners, and Newport Heights to get to the Dunes. She expressed the opinion that this would be a disaster for her district. She stated that this does not make any sense unless the City is willing to gate her district, which should also be paid for by the taxpayers who want a park at the Dunes. Mr. Bludau added that the $2.2 million shows what the net profit is right now. He stated that there is probably about $2 million that can be bonded indebtedness. However, with anything over $30 million, the City would need more money and, if the community was really interested in doing this, one way of doing this would be to make up the differential between the profit that comes off of the site and what the cost of the bond payment would be each year. This would necessitate having a property tax override which requires a 2/3 vote. Mr. Bludau stated that the City would not be able to determine what the amount to each resident would be until it determines what it believed to be a fair purchase price. Council Member Heffernan expressed concern about the City going into businesses that they should not necessarily be in. He suggested that, if the City purchased the property, it sell off the other pieces (RV park, slips, boat dock, etc.) to people who are in these types of businesses. The City should end up with the hotel site, and downgrade it to open space for a park. Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway agreed that the City should only be focused on the 30 acres. He asked if the City has conducted a needs assessment and defined what that space is going to be. He asked, if the space is going to be a park, will it be an active park or a passive park, noting that the City's parks are extremely underutilized. Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway indicated that citizens of his district would not be amiable to paying for open space on this side of the Bay to the exclusion of the district. Regarding the other parcels, the City needs to bifurcate ownership and stay interested in the undeveloped parcel since the City has no right as a governmental entity to be in these types of private businesses. He stated, however, that it would be a steal to get the entire parcel for $50 million since there is about $23 million for the operational component. He pointed out that the undeveloped 30 acres that is entitled has a value, noting that land along Coast Highway is in excess of $100 /foot. Additionally, this calculates to about $4 million/acre which makes the 30 acres worth $120 million. He clarified that he does not believe the land is worth this, but just wanted to give people the comparables that are out there. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway stated that this gets more complicated because a proposal needs to be in by October 15; the City would need to buy the entire parcel; find a buyer for the remainder parcels; and put some type of public financing on this. He also asked if someone has talked with the Volume 54 - Page 469 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 25, 2001 INDEX County to determine if they are prepared to lose the income on that piece of property. He pointed out that the City has an expectation for a certain amount of tax dollars from that property (revenue and transient occupancy tax) and now this will be lost. He asked if this was included in the formula. He indicated that he is willing to put this to a vote, but believed the citizens are not prepared to approve the purchase by a 2/3 vote. Council Member Bromberg stated that, if there is the slightest glimmer that this Council might be interested in acquiring this property or bid on this property, Council should consider the studies that Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway mentioned. However, if October 15 is the date to close bids, the City would never be able to make a bid or offer on a project like this. He added that doing a study would still take a few months. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway noted that the City had a willing and cooperative seller for Upper Castaways which was previously voted on by the citizens, but that still took months to posture. He emphasized that this is not the case with the Dunes as the seller is desirous to close. Further, the Upper Castaways election occurred when the 2/3 vote rule did not exist. Council Member Proctor believed that the City needs to approach this, not withstanding the October 15 date, with a feasibility study and a needs assessment. Further, costs, how to finance this, and whether the voters will be willing to accept the financial responsibilities also need to be determined. Mayor Adams asked if the County has discretion over the lease transfer and suggested that the City work through the County to possibly extend the October 15 date. Further, he asked if the County can tell the Dunes that they cannot transfer ownership. Mr. Bludau stated that the County would have to have a good reason not to approve the transfer. Council Member Heffernan stated that people should understand that, even though the hotel is entitled, it does not mean this is the end of City review. Mayor Adams clarified that this is incorrect and reported that the developer pretty much has a green light and the City would have very little discretion on how and where it gets built, and its characteristics on the site. He reiterated that there is an entitlement for a hotel on the property and noted that there was recently a proposal to change the characteristics of the hotel by adding a meeting space and slightly increasing the square footage. City Attorney Burnham pointed out that permitting timeshares was never in the settlement agreement. Bob Caustin stated that he is in attendance on behalf of his wife, Susan Skinner Caustin of Stop the Dunes Hotel. Noting that he lives in Council Member Glover's district, he indicated that he does not believe people will be driving through their streets to get to the Dunes. He stated that he does take his child to the park and that it is important to make them available to everyone. Regarding bond financing, he indicated that the current tax free rates are about 4.5% which means about $30 million can be floated on that existing income stream. He noted that the seller's EIR states that the hotel site could not make money under its current approved plan and, if the City bought the land, it could probably negotiate something. He agreed with a Volume 54 - Page 470 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes f September 25, 2001 INDEX previous comment that there may not be a reason to continue to discuss this at this point if the October 15 date is absolute. However, he expressed hope that negotiations continue and the City explores what the individual pieces of land are worth, believing that buyers may be able to come to the table and jointly buy the property with the City. He requested that, since many people could not attend tonight's meeting, this be rescheduled. Council Member Glover asked what Mr. Caustin thought about the citizens buying the property, assessing parcels, and voting on this issue. Mr. Caustin believed that this should be brought to a vote of the people, but they need to know what the property is going to be and what it is worth, especially since the City only wants the vacant lot. Council Member Glover expressed the opinion that this could only be done if the citizens are willing to pay for it because the City cannot indebt itself this way. She noted that the City is not a realtor and does not buy and sell off pieces of property. Mayor Adams noted that the map is inaccurate since the RV park stems into the vacant lot, making the acreage smaller than what is shown. Further, the boat ramp operation also encroaches more to the south. Ray Carpenter indicated that he emailed Council and the Daily Pilot regarding the Pilot's question relative to whether the hotel should be built. He stated that he was under the opinion that this was still up for a vote. Mayor Adams explained that no vote is necessary for the entitled 275 room hotel and that a leaseholder can build that with virtually no input from the City. He noted that this has not happened for over ten years since the owners elected not to build it, but reported that they came to the City last year to change the entitlement. Mr. Carpenter believed that the growth in the City since 1962 has been helpful for the City; however, another hotel is nothing more than private people wanting to put up another hotel. He asked if the City really needs this and asked about the traffic congestion. He also noted that the Balboa Bay Club is already adding over 200 rooms to its property. He reported that the room occupancy in the hotels has decreased, and asked how many hotels the City is going to allow. Further, he wanted to know if the needs of the current hotel owners have been considered. Mr. Carpenter stated that long time residents keep seeing growth and it always comes from people who just want to make a profit and do not care how the citizens feel. Mayor Adams clarified that all of the City's traffic models and forecasts have the rooms at the Balboa Bay Club and the 275 rooms at the Dunes built into its long range planning. He stated that the entitlement is outside the City's jurisdiction since the County is the custodian of the land, but noted that the property is public land. He stated that the leaseholder went to the County 18 years ago requesting a master plan which included a large hotel; however, the City voiced its concerns and a compromise was reached through a settlement agreement. Mayor Adams reported that Council has received a lot of letters on this subject and people feel that, if the City intervenes and took over the lease, this could be the City's chance to make the hotel entitlement disappear. He emphasized that this is why Council is discussing this. Volume 54 - Page 471 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 25, 2001 INDEX Mr. Carpenter asked if the traffic generated from the additional apartments along MacArthur Boulevard were taken into consideration. Mayor Adams confirmed that all the development that occurs, which is entitled by the property owners, has been factored into the City's General Plan. He stated that the City has a roadway system that is theoretically built to accommodate development. Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway reported that the settlement agreement does give the City jurisdiction over the property. Elaine Linhoff, 1760 E. Ocean Boulevard, believed that, if a bond election was held 1.5 years ago to buy the Dunes property, it probably would have passed by 67% just like Greenlight because the Dunes was what people thought about when they were thinking about Greenlight. She added that, if the vacant lot is kept as a park, she cannot see how it is going to be causing much more traffic than the City has now. Council Member Glover asked Ms. Linhoff if she would be in favor of placing this issue on the ballot. Ms. Linhoff believed that she would be in favor of this but does not want to commit herself. She stated that, in order to purchase the land, the City would need to do some creative financing to keep the price down because people may not want to assess themselves for an astronomical amount. She expressed the opinion that the City wastes money in other places, but when it is time to buy open space, the people have to pay for it. In response to Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway's previous statement, Ms. Linhoff indicated that, when she was petitioning for Greenlight, the Peninsula residents were upset about the Dunes. Mayor Pro Tom Ridgeway clarified that he feels everyone on the Peninsula cares about the quality of life in the City; however, he is not sure if they are prepared to pay for the next 15 years to allow a bond issue for a passive park or an open space area on the other side of the Bay. He emphasized that his position as an elected official is to look at the City at- large, not just his district. Robert Gleason, Newport Dunes, reported that they began the public process of selling this around the end of July, first part of August. He indicated that it was never true that there was no cutoff date, but it was only true that they did not establish a specific cutoff date. Regarding net income on the property, he reported that the numbers that were used were from financial statements prepared previously with adjustments for corporate charges, non - project overhead, and other non -cash adjustments, and noted that the net cash flow is actually about $2.9 million. Mr. Gleason stated that the PC District Plan that has been shown tonight was the plan that was developed during the application process for the hotel. He noted that, in the end, it was not adopted in that form and the current hotel parcel is actually about 15 acres, not 30 acres. He added that the County approval for a lease transaction would be governed under the terms of the lease. Council Member Bromberg asked Mr. Gleason if he was aware of what the City would need to go through to even consider becoming a bidder and questioned the October 15 cutoff date. Mr. Gleason explained that the date Volume 54 - Page 472 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 25, 2001 INDEX was set due to the current marketing efforts that have happened over the last 60 days and the amount of interest generated in the property. Steve McKenzie, Eastdil Realty in Century City, stated that they were engaged by the Evans family to bring this property out to the market and expose it to whatever complement of investors there may be that would be ready, willing, and capable of purchasing the property under the terms, conditions, and timeframes that were favorable to them as a seller of an asset in the free market. He indicated that they did this and that it is their judgment that, based on the large number of inquiries they have received and the number of people who have reviewed detailed offering materials that were also made available to the City, they would be in a position by mid - October to receive initial bids. He indicated that, once the bids are received, they will be reviewing them with their client and deciding which bids merit further consideration. He noted that this is a typical process. He emphasized that they did not start this process with any anticipation that the best use for the site would be the conversion to a municipal park. He stated that they welcome any offer and will discuss them with their client. Mr. McKenzie clarified that the County considers Newport Dunes as one leasehold premises and is not something that is subdivided, pointing out that the lease's definition of "premises" is a single premise. However, he noted that, with good lawyers, time, and money, a subdivision may be possible. Council Member Glover noted that, even if this goes before a vote of the people, it could not take place until November 2002 because the City probably will not have sufficient information to put this on the ballot in March 2002. She asked if this is viable or if they would not know until October 15. Mr. McKenzie indicated that this is a decision the client would have to make; however, their advice would be that the election would be a passage of time that inherently carries risks that their client will not be well advised to undertake without compensation. Council Member Glover asked if it could take several years to get a viable offer on something of this nature with multiple uses. Mr. McKenzie indicated that they anticipate that it would only take until the first week of November for them and their client to determine who the most attractive bidder is and then present that party to the County of Orange for approval. He stated that the County has 45 days to process the approval and believed that a qualified party can line up financing during that 45 day period and be capable of closing sometime in the first quarter of 2002. He indicated that a wide variety of investors are looking at this due to the present mixed use of the site. In response to Council Member Proctor's question, Mr. McKenzie indicated that they did not set a minimum bid amount and are working on a sealed bid process. Council Member Bromberg stated that he feels a bit guilty asking for a study session on this item because Council's time might have been wasted. He indicated that the City could do nothing or agendize this for the next meeting to determine whether Council wants to form a committee to conduct a feasibility study. He suggested that the City do nothing at this point and wait until shortly after October 15 to contact the Dunes to determine whether they are interested in extending that time period, adding that the Volume 54 - Page 473 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 25, 2001 City should not have to pay for them to extend the date for about six months. Mayor Adams added that, if a grassroots group came to Council with an initiative, the City could put it up for a special election. Council Member Bromberg pointed out that they probably could not do it in three weeks. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway believed that there is not going to be a groundswell for an initiative and, even if there was, the City cannot interfere with contractual rights. He stated that he will not support anything that may interfere with these rights. Council Member Proctor expressed the opinion that this should be agendized and taken to the next level which includes a feasibility and cost study so that Council has hard data in front of them. He stated that Council owes that to the citizens, especially since there is a lot of misinformation. He emphasized that this is a settlement agreement based on a lawsuit from 18 years ago. Regarding the 15 acre site, Mr. Caustin reiterated that the EIR indicated that the property was not financially viable and that they needed timeshares in order to get financing. He believed that the land is currently zoned open space and that they would need to do a General Plan Amendment in order to build the hotel. Mr. Bludau believed that there is still value in Council having a discussion about this during Closed Session. Mr. Burnham clarified that Council cannot decide in Closed Session to hear the matter at the next Council meeting, but any member of Council can ask that the matter be brought back on a regular agenda. Mr. Bludau reported that, after the Closed Session agenda was posted, he was informed by representatives of the Newport Dunes that they would only accept offers for the leasehold interests that were submitted on or before October 15, 2001. He stated that, assuming that Council is interested in submitting a bid, the City would need to commence negotiations with the Newport Dunes representatives well before the next Council Meeting. Accordingly, he believe that there is a need to discuss the possible acquisition of the Newport Dunes lease in Closed Session. He reported that, according to the City Attorney, the proper procedure is for a member of Council to move that the acquisition of the Newport Dunes lease be added to the Closed Session agenda. This motion should be accompanied by a finding that there is a need to take immediate action in Closed Session and that the need arose after the agenda was posted. Motion by Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway to move that the acquisition of the Newport Dunes lease be added to the Closed Session agenda. Further, he stated that there is a need to take immediate action in Closed Session and that the need arose after the agenda was posted. The motion carried without objection. 3. BALBOA VILLAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT FUNDING OPTIONS. In response to City Manager Bludau's question, Administrative Services Director Danner stated that it is not imperative that this item be discussed Volume 54 - Page 474 ITNi STN C -3333 Balboa Village Improvement Project Funding City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes September 25, 2001 today. Mayor Adams suggested taking this up at the next study session. PUBLIC COMMENTS -None. ADJOURNMENT - 5:45 p.m. The agenda for the Study Session was posted on September 19, 2001, at 3:00 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. City Clerk cw�. Q_ 1J3ffwkJ Recording Secretary Mayor Volume 54 - Page 475 INDEX (38)