Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06/08/2021 - Study Session / Regular MeetingCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 I. ROLL CALL - 4:00 p.m. Present: Mayor Brad Avery, Mayor Pro Tem Kevin Muldoon (arrived at 4:01 p.m.), Council Member Noah Blom, Council Member Joy Brenner, Council Member Diane Dixon (via Zoom), Council Member Duffy Duffield, Council Member Will O'Neill II. CURRENT BUSINESS SS1. Clarification of Items on the Consent Calendar - None SS2. Review of the Draft Housing Element [100-20211 Community Development Director Jurjis and Deputy Community Development Director Campbell utilized a presentation to highlight Council feedback from the April 27, 2021 Study Session, and review questions and answers, overlay implementation, the sites inventory, options, and no net loss. In response to Council Member O'Neill's questions, Community Development Director Jurjis reported the development of Coyote Canyon at a density of 50 units per acre would need a Greenlight vote if an application were submitted prior to Council updating the Land Use Element. Deputy Community Development Director Campbell indicated a proposed development with fewer affordable housing units than anticipated would not need a Housing Element amendment. He noted that the difference between anticipated affordable housing units and actual housing units has to be contained in the housing plan because the City cannot deny a project that complies with the. inclusionary ordinance. Deputy Community Development Director Campbell concluded the presentation with staffs recommendation of Option 2, City Council considerations, and the tentative schedule. Council Member Dixon suggested conducting a Study Session to understand the various factors for incentivizing affordable housing development. Community Development Director Jurjis related that 15% is a temporary number, staff needs to vet a permanent number with Council, and there could be different numbers for different parts of the City. Council Member O'Neill suggested staff ask the owners of Banning Ranch and Coyote Canyon what numbers are feasible for them, the density may need to be higher, wanted to utilize realistic numbers, and units may be shifted to other areas or to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) if necessary. He reported that one way to achieve compliance without having a larger number of surplus units is to ensure the overlays have finite limitations. He stated that a micro -overlay pertains to a portion of an area and may be subject to limits of a macro -overlay, a targeted approach can be used once the overall approach has been developed, and housing overlays will be necessary because staff reached out to all property owners where redevelopment is possible and did not find enough units. He desired to see a hybrid of Options 1 and 2 with the development potential closer to Option 1 and stretch the goals for Coyote Canyon and Banning Ranch. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon's questions, Community Development Director Jurjis clarified that planning for extra units does not mean they will be built, staff is not aware of the State planning to convert a nominal increase to a real number, most cities are targeting a 17% buffer on average, buffer units remain in place until they are utilized, there are no consequences if the buffer units are not built, and there is not a need to build the buffer units. Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon indicated his certainty that the City has to provide a buffer because it has no control over the number of units proposed by an applicant, the City can preserve its plan if it allows Volume 65 - Page 58 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 some flexibility, the buffer allows flexibility without the units actually being built, and perhaps in the end the buffer means there is less of a mandate for the number of low-income housing or other units to be built. In response to Council Member Brenner's questions, Community Development Director Jurjis reiterated that the 15% in the inclusionary ordinance is staffs interim number while Council figures out the permanent number, the City is obligated to determine an interim number in six months and a permanent number in three years, staff will follow Council's direction for scheduling a discussion of the number, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) has to accept the buffer, the goal is to provide a compliant Housing Element, in the past the Banning Ranch Conservancy was not receptive to any type of housing opportunity, staff is exploring a way for existing ADUs to comply with code requirements and count toward the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), and an ADU can be improved to comply with code requirements, but it is expensive. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon's questions, Community Development Director Jurjis reported that Option 1 is the Council's direction from the prior Study Session, if development of Coyote Canyon did not supply the proposed units, it would utilize all buffer units and force the City to find and rezone opportunity sites in six months, and units in the Airport Area can be increased to provide a hybrid of Options 1 and 2. Council Member O'Neill clarified his earlier comments regarding a hybrid of Options 1 and 2 resulting in some areas, particularly the Airport Area and Newport Center, absorbing more units. Community Development Director Jurjis agreed that reducing the number of affordable units in Coyote Canyon means the number of units has to increase elsewhere. In response to Council Member Dixon's questions, staff reported the challenge is identifying parcels that have the potential to build to these levels and further, no one is preventing a developer from proposing a 100% affordable housing project, the buffer is needed for projects that provide less than the proposed number of affordable housing units, this is a plan that provides the maximum opportunity at all income levels, there may not be an opportunity for trading between parcels, what the parcel represents has to be listed in a document, the numbers are not fungible by district, the City has to provide the opportunity to develop to the RHNA number, and the inclusionary ordinance will drive the level of affordability. Staff stated that HCD was skeptical of the proposal for 1,000 ADUs and wanted a robust set of policies and incentives to achieve that goal; therefore, the next Housing Element draft will include additional incentives and programs for ADUs. Council Member Dixon supported Council Member Brenner's suggestion to legalize existing ADUs and listing 1,000 ADUs in the Housing Element. In response to Council Member Duffield's questions, Community Development Director Jurjis advised that affordability is based on a family of four and the average income for the County, the Area Median Income (AMI) for Orange County is approximately $100,000, very -low income is $50,000, moderate income is $100,000, the table lists housing units by affordability, the City has to plan for and make available housing units for people making $50,000 per year, the City has to plan for 617 housing units in the Airport Area, a significant number of housing units are also planned for Newport Center, Coyote Canyon, and Banning Ranch, and where to put the housing units is a challenge. Council Member Duffield took issue that it appears that the Airport Area is the dumping zone for most of the units and staff is putting it all in one place rather than spreading the units throughout the City. In response to Council Member Blom's questions, Community Development Director Jurjis related that HCD is not just going to approve the draft Housing Element but is obligated to provide feedback, the initial plan will not be accepted, and the intent is to have as few corrections to the plan as possible. Council Member Blom stated the initial draft is a baseline to begin negotiations, Coyote Canyon and Banning Ranch lacks infrastructure, going beyond 15% in the inclusionary ordinance is a concern because it could lead to looking for 100% affordable housing Volume 65 - Page 59 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 developers, we are creating areas of the City that have been the largest deterrent for everyone talking about the Housing Element, affordability is not necessarily what this does, the meaning of affordability seems to have been lost, some of those places are not necessarily a negative if they are spread throughout the City, and the approach is great for building a baseline. He appreciated Option 2, did not want a larger buffer, supported negotiating for something in between, and did not like the high affordability numbers. In response to Mayor Avery's questions, Community Development Director Jurjis indicated that densities probably dictate that majority of the housing will be for -rent products, developers would likely rather be first in, but they should wait for the City to update the Land Use Element and zoning. Mayor Avery believed there are issues with creating places where people want to live, which means open space and other amenities, the City is in a challenging position, and the Airport Area is a less -than -desirable area. Council Member Duffield noted that development in Coyote Canyon and Banning Ranch will probably never happen, and reiterated his displeasure for dumping most of the affordable housing units in the Airport Area. Carol Lind, Banning Ranch Conservancy Board Member, discussed the Conservancy's mission and read a letter from Conservancy President Terry Welsh encouraging the City to look at parcels other than Banning Reach to meet its RHNA goals. Debra Allen, President of the Harbor View Hills Community Association, discussed the site plane ordinance, requested a redline version of the sites analysis table if it is revised in the June 30, 2021 draft, and suggested reducing the buffer if the first draft begins negotiations with HCD and scheduling a Study Session regarding inclusionary zoning. Nancy Scarbrough, Good Neighbors Committee, encouraged Council to increase ADUs to 1,500, delay submitting the draft Housing Element for HCD review as long as possible, use a low buffer number, and begin with a 40% inclusionary ordinance. In response to Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon's questions, Community Development Director Jurjis indicated HCD will provide a list of comments regarding the draft Housing Element and the City has to comply with all HCD requirements, it is probably not a negotiation with HCD, the City's RHNA number is 4,845 units, the buffer is a request for flexibility to meet the RHNA number, the Airport Area has more opportunity site acreage, staff is not looking at other sites unless Council directs otherwise, the Housing Element Update Advisory Committee (HEUAC) has reviewed areas and drafted the list of sites, the percentage of affordable units in the Airport Area can be reduced but have to be placed in another area, in Listen and Learn sessions, the community selected areas for housing, the HEUAC refined the community's selections, and staff can look at increasing the density and reducing the number of affordable units in the Airport Area. Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon took issue that the State has given the City an impractical and impossible task. Council Member O'Neill noted that the HEUAC divided the City into areas because each area is different and found one-story commercial development in the Airport Area where four or five - story mixed-use developments are logical, high-rise development in the Airport Area is not possible because of FAA restrictions, the numbers for the Airport Area are substantially lower than in the first round, large sites suitable for conversion are not available in Corona del Mar, Newport Coast, and other areas, and most property owners did not respond to inquiries about converting their properties. He reiterated his interest in a hybrid of Options 1 and 2 and to stretch goals for Banning Ranch and Coyote Canyon, and concurred with Council Member Dixon's suggestion to hold a discussion about the inclusionary ordinance prior to submitting the draft Housing Element for HCD review. Volume 65 - Page 60 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 Council Member Duffield expressed the opinion that very -low-income and low-income projects will be built in the Airport Area because developers specialize in affordable housing, the 600 units will reduce property values in the Airport Area, this has to be spread throughout the City to reduce the impact on surrounding properties, and dumping affordable housing in his district is not a solution. Council Member Brenner supported the suggestion to delay submitting the draft Housing Element, indicated her struggle with choosing between Options 2 and 3, recalled affordable housing developers' comments regarding low-income tenants and housing, and noted Council's need for additional discussions. Council Member Dixon suggested the solution is a 60/40 mix of market -rate and affordable housing, the number for the Airport Area can be reached by adjusting the percentage with a few more hundred market -rate units, and stated that staff adjusted the Airport Area number so that market -rate units subsidize affordable units. She supported listing ADUs at 1,500 units, scheduling a Council discussion relative to the inclusionary ordinance sooner rather than later, and delaying submission of the draft Housing Element. Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon noted the buffer benefits the City rather than the State and does not have to be incredibly high and a potential solution for the Airport Area is a mix of 60% above - moderate units and 40% affordable units. Charles Klobe directed and encouraged Council to consider some version of Option 3 because it has the highest buffer in each area and suggested that ADUs spread the pain around the City. III. PUBLIC COMMENTS Avery Counts, Constituent Services Manager for Orange County 2nd District Supervisor Foley, reported that Supervisor Foley advocated for funding to assist with homelessness efforts and the environment during the budget discussion and invited Newport Beach residents to attend upcoming events. Council Member Blom recused himself from Item IV.B due to real property interest conflicts. City Attorney Harp reported that the City Council would adjourn to Closed Session to discuss the items listed in the Closed Session agenda and read the titles. IV. CLOSED SESSION — Council Chambers Conference Room A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Government Code § 54957.6) Agency Designated Representatives: Grace K. Leung, City Manager, Carol Jacobs, Assistant City Manager, Barbara Salvini, Human Resources Director, and Charles Sakai, Esq., Negotiators. Employee Organizations: Association of Newport Beach Ocean Lifeguards (ANBOL) and Newport Beach Police Association (NBPA). B. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS (Government Code § 54956.8): 1 Matter Properties: 3300 Newport Boulevard, Newport Beach, CA 92663 and 475 32nd St, Newport Beach, CA 92663. Agency Negotiators: Seimone Jurjis, Community Development Director. Negotiating Parties: Robert D. Olson, President of Olson Real Estate Group, Inc. the Manager of Lido House. LLC, a California limited liability company. Volume 65 - Page 61 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June S, 2021 Under Negotiation: Instruction to negotiator regarding price and terms of payment. The City Council will not be considering the sale of either property and will only be discussing a leasehold interest in the properties. V. RECESSED - 5:44 p.m. VI. RECONVENED AT 6:39 P.M. FOR REGULAR MEETING VII. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Brad Avery, Mayor Pro Tem Kevin Muldoon, Council Member Noah Blom, Council Member Joy Brenner, Council Member Diane Dixon (via Zoom), Council Member Duffy Duffield, Council Member Will O'Neill VIII. CLOSED SESSION REPORT City Attorney Harp announced that no reportable actions were taken. IX. INVOCATION - Council Member O'Neill X. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - Council Member Brenner XI. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC XII. CITY COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS AND ORAL REPORTS FROM CITY COUNCIL ON COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES Council Member Brenner: • Utilized slides to highlight her meeting with Senator Dave Min and George Lesley at the Field of Honor and their discussion about local issues; her attendance with Mayor Avery and Council Member Dixon at the American Legion's Memorial Day event; and her meeting with Council Member Dixon, Homeless Coordinator Basmaciyan, and City Net representatives regarding interactions with homeless individuals • Announced the Corona del Mar Branch Library opened yesterday for full service • Requested a future agenda item regarding ways to assist homeless individuals who are not interested in going to a shelter Council Member Dixon: • Utilized slides to share aviation -related news and activities (newportbeachca.gov/jwa), and announced the next Aviation Committee meeting on June 21, 2021 and a District 1 Virtual Town Hall Meeting on June 17, 2021 • Announced the sale of the Balboa Fun Zone and Ocean Quest property to the Pyle Family and the plans for the Balboa Village Theater are progressing • Attended Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and Orange County Council of Governments (OCCOG) meetings, announced OCCOG authorized legal counsel to file a petition for writ of mandate against the California Department of Housing and Community Development, and provided the reasons for the writ • Requested a future item regarding a partnership with residents and businesses to improve cleanliness in public areas in Newport Beach Council Member Blom: • Rode with Huntington Beach Air Support to learn what they do for Newport Beach and other cities Council Member Duffield: • Attended a Water Quality/Coastal Tidelands Committee meeting • Announced and congratulated Paul Blank for being named the new Harbormaster Volume 65 - Page 62 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 Mayor Avery: • Attended the American Legion's Memorial Day event • Utilized slides to announce July 4th celebrations XIII. MATTERS WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE ASKED TO BE PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA • Direct the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission to agendize an Ocean Boulevard Bluff Walk presentation from the resident community group who proposes to enhance the walkways and viewpoints with an emphasis on the pedestrian experience, and forward a recommendation to the City Council on an action plan for their consideration [Brenner] The City Council concurred 7-0 to bring the item back at a future meeting. XIV. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CONSENT CALENDAR Hoiyin Ip, addressing Item 15 (Board and Commission Scheduled Vacancies — Confirmation of Nominees), discussed members of the Water Quality/Coastal Tidelands Committee, noted repeated questions about her addressing Newport Beach restaurants regarding the plastics ban, believed talking about the same topic is not a good use of meeting time and resources, and suggested an effective change would be transparency in the process for selecting committee members. XV. CONSENT CALENDAR READING OF MINUTES AND ORDINANCES 1. Minutes for the May 25, 2021 Special Joint Meeting of the City Council and Finance Committee and the May 25, 2021 City Council Regular Meeting [100-2021] Waive reading of subject minutes, approve as amended, and order filed. 2. Reading of Ordinances Waive reading in full of all ordinances under consideration, and direct the City Clerk to read by title only. ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION Ordinance No. 2021-13: Amending Exhibit A of Section 3.36.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code Relating to Cost Recovery to Update Library Photocopying Fees a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and b) Waive full reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, introduce Ordinance No. 2021-13, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Amending Exhibit A to Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 3.36.030 Related to Cost Recovery, and pass to second reading on June 22, 2021. ORDINANCE FOR ADOPTION 4. Ordinance No. 2021-12 and Resolution No. 2021-47: Eliminating the Balboa Village Area Benefit District and Directing All Unprogrammed Funds Returned to the General Fund [100-2021] a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; Volume 65 - Page 63 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 b) Conduct second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2021-12, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Amending Section 12.44.029 (Area Benefit District Reserve) of Chapter 12.44 (Stopping, Standing and Parking Restrictions) of Title 12 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Newport Beach Municipal Code to Eliminate the Balboa Village Area Benefit District; and c) Adopt Resolution No. 2021-47, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Repealing City Council Resolution No. 2014-101 to Eliminate the Balboa Village Area Benefit District Fund and Direct All Unprogrammed Funds to be Returned to the General Fund. Council Member Brenner and Council Member Dixon voted "no" on Item 4. RESOLUTIONS FOR ADOPTION 5. Resolution No. 2021-48: Annual Measure M2 Eligibility Submittal [100-2021] a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; b) Adopt the Measure M2 Seven -Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP); c) Adopt Resolution No. 2021-48, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Concerning the Status and Update of the Circulation Element, Mitigation Fee Program, and Pavement Management Plan for the Measure M2 Program; and d) Direct staff to submit all necessary material to OCTA to satisfy the FY 2021-22 Measure M2 annual eligibility requirements. Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon recused himself on Item 5 due to business interest conflicts. Resolution No. 2021-49: Adoption of Fiscal Year 2021-22 Appropriations Limit [100-2021] a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and b) Adopt Resolution No. 2021-49, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Determining and Establishing an Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2021-22 in Accordance with Article XIIIB of the California Constitution and Government Code Section 7910, in the amount of $218,535,203. Resolution Nos. 2021-50 and 2021-51: Proposed Assessment District No. 124 (Central Balboa Island) — Approval of Preliminary Engineers Report and Notice of Intent to Form Underground Utility District [100-2021] a) Adopt Resolution No. 2021-50, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Declaring its Intention to take Proceedings Pursuant to the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913 and to Issue Bonds Pursuant to the Improvement Bond Act of 1915, and Make Certain Findings and Determinations in Connection Therewith, all Relating to the Formation of Assessment District No. 124; and b) Adopt Resolution No. 2021-51, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Preliminarily Approving the Assessment Engineer's Report and Fixing the Time and Place of the Public Hearing for Assessment District No. 124. Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon recused himself on Item 7 due to business interest conflicts. Council Member Blom recused himself on Item 7 due to real property interest conflicts. 8. Resolution No. 2021-52: Specifying Uses for FY 2021-22 RMRA Funding from the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 [100-2021] a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and Volume 65 - Page 64 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 b) Adopt Resolution No. 2021-52, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Adopting a List of Projects for Fiscal Year 2021-22 Funded by SB 1, The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017. CONTRACTS AND AGREEMENTS 9. Balboa Peninsula Crosswalks Improvements Project — Notice of Completion for Contract No. 7288-2 (19T11) [38/100-20211 a) Accept the completed work and authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion for the project; b) Authorize the City Clerk to release the Labor and Materials Bond 65 days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded in accordance with applicable portions of Civil Code; and c) Release Faithful Performance Bond one year after acceptance by the City Council. Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon recused himself on Item 9 due to business interest conflicts. 10. Big Canyon Restoration Project — Phase 2A: Notice of Completion for Contract No. 8208- 2 (20X12) [38/100-2021] a) Accept the completed work and authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion for the project; b) Authorize the City Clerk to release the Labor and Materials Bond 65 days after the Notice of Completion has been recorded in accordance with applicable portions of Civil Code; and c) Release Faithful Performance Bond one year after acceptance by the City Council. 11. Geotechnical and Material Testing Services — Approval of On -Call Professional Services Agreements [38/100-20211 a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and b) Approve four separate on-call Professional Services Agreements with GMU Geotechnical Engineering (C-8087-3), Geocon West (C-7145-3), Leighton Consulting (C-8701-1) and Harrington Geotechnical Engineering (C-8702-1) for geotechnical and material testing services at a not -to -exceed amount of $300,000 per agreement, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreements. 12. Architectural Design Services — Approval of On -Call Professional Services Agreements [38/100-20211 a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and b) Approve four separate on-call Professional Services Agreements with BOA Architecture (C-8703-1), IDS Group (C-8704-1), Jeff Katz Architecture (C-8705-1), and PBK-WLC (C-8122-2) for architectural design services at a not -to -exceed amount of $300,000 per agreement, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the agreements. 13. Approval of Agreement for As -Needed Sports and Recreational Field Landscape Services (C-7997-1) [38/100-20211 a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and b) Approve a three (3) year agreement with two (2) automatic annual extensions, with Mariposa Landscapes, Inc. for as -needed landscape maintenance of Citywide recreational fields, for a total not -to -exceed of $1,250,000. MISCELLANEOUS 14. Planning Commission Agenda for the June 3, 2021 Meeting [100-20211 Receive and file. Volume 65 - Page 65 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 15. Board and Commission Scheduled Vacancies - Confirmation of Nominees [24/100-20211 a) Determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; b) Waive the portion of City Council Policy A-2 (Boards, Commissions & Committees) that recommends nominating two or more candidates for each vacancy, if an insufficient number of candidates are available; and c) Confirm the nominations made by the City Council Ad Hoc Appointments Committee: Board of Library Trustees [1 vacancy] Doug Coulter (incumbent) Ash Kumra Building and Fire Board of Appeals [2 vacancies] Charles Allen Kenneth Bondy City Arts Commission [3 vacancies] Gregory Cox Maureen Flanagan (incumbent) Barbara George Meghan McNulty Sara Salam Laurel Tippett Civil Service Board [1 vacancy] Paul Meyer Edgar Oglesby Harbor Commission [2 vacancies] Scott Cunningham (incumbent) Kevin Kramer Steve Scully (incumbent) Jordan Wachter Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission [2 vacancies] Randall Black Heather Ignatin (incumbent) Keira Kirby Cynthia Sender Sheela Voleti Planning Commission [2 vacancies] Lauren Kleiman (incumbent) Jonathan Langford Lee Lowrey (incumbent) Patrick McCann Debbie Stevens Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon, seconded by Council Member O'Neill, to approve the Consent Calendar; and noting the "no" votes by Council Members Brenner and Dixon to Item 4, the recusal by Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon to Items 5, 7 and 9, the recusal by Council Member Blom to Item 7, and the amendments to Item 1. The motion carried unanimously. XVI. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR - None XVII. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS Jim Mosher noted staffs difficulty in predicting the length of Study Sessions and the impacts of long meetings for Council Members, staff, and the public; and suggested scheduling Study Sessions in the early afternoon or scheduling Regular Meetings and Study Sessions on alternate weeks. Volume 65 - Page 66 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 XIX. CURRENT BUSINESS - taken out of order at the request of the Mayor 16. Resolution No. 2021-53: Resolution of Intention to Disestablish the Newport Beach Restaurant Association Business Improvement District and Fix the Time and Place of Public Hearing Council Member Blom recused himself due to business interest conflicts. Motion by Council Member Dixon seconded by Council Member Brenner, to retain the Newport Beach Restaurant Association (NBRA) Business Improvement District (BID), for one year, expiring June 30, 2022, to allow the NBRA BID to restructure in conformance with 1994 Law and to permit the BID to continue to receive member dues. Council Member Dixon recalled that the issue came about when Council Members did not support the continuation of the NBRA BID, noted there was no public hearing or public discussion, and stated that not allowing restaurants to utilize Visit Newport Beach for marketing and promotions following the pandemic seems punitive and unnecessary. Council Member Brenner expressed the opinion that Council has not adequately reviewed all the ramifications associated with dissolving the BID, the NBRA BID has not received the benefit of a year's notice and support from Council as the Corona del Mar BID received, citizens may have input, and providing the BID with additional time will not harm the City. Council Member O'Neill advised that voting against the BID is neither punitive nor cruel, he has verbally opposed the BID for three years and voted against it for two years, and his opposition is based on government policy, Council discussions, and subcommittee discussions. Council Member Dixon reported the subcommittee was moving in the direction of a transition, the legal constraint for the transition was the inability to utilize existing funds, discussions ceased when the pandemic caused restaurants to close, and prior to the Council action, a meeting with the City Attorney, staff, and Visit Newport Beach was arranged to talk about a path forward in advance of the June 30, 2021 deadline. City Attorney Harp related that a meeting was held to discuss forming a 1994 BID and the BID expressed the need for $40,000 to form the new entity. Everyone agreed that funds from the existing BID could not be used to form the new BID. City Attorney Harp stated that it is possible the NBRA Board may not have fully understood the path forward; however, the NBRA-understands now. He clarified that the two BIDs would be separate entities, and Council action on the existing BID does not impact the formation of a new BID. City Attorney Harp confirmed with Council Member Dixon that she was proposing a return of Item 7 from the May 11, 2021 agenda, which would adopt a Resolution of Intention to renew the Newport Beach Restaurant Association Business Improvement District, levy assessments in FY 2021-22, and fix a time and place for a public hearing. Amended motion by Council Member Dixon, seconded by Council Member Brenner, to bring back Item 7 from the May 11, 2021 City Council meeting. Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon stated a BID that requires the City to administer the process suggests that it is mandated and fees must be collected even if times are tough for restaurants, and dissolving the BID does not mean that they cannot use the name, continue to exist and work with other restaurants. He clarified that disestablishing the BID means the City will no longer administer the BID under a dated legal construct. In response to Council Member O'Neill's questions, City Attorney Harp advised that he met with Gary Sherwin and an attorney advising Mr. Sherwin. After discussing whether the existing BID Funds could be used to form a 1994 BID, everyone agreed that existing BID funds could not be used for this purpose. In response to Council Member O'Neill's inquiry, City Attorney Harp noted that Volume 65 - Page 67 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 this advice aligns with the advice given to the BIDs over the past three years. Council Member O'Neill indicated that the NBRA BID discussed the issue and decided not to convert to a 1994 BID. He stated that the BID is a government program that requires the payment of fees, and if the BID were voluntary, it would be a merchants' association. Council Member Dixon reiterated that during the meeting, a path forward was identified related to the disposition of existing funds, and the information was new and had never been discussed publicly, stated that approximately 90% of restaurants participate in the NBRA BID and its meetings, the community and restaurants support the BID, and only one or two restaurants have opposed the BID over the years. She supported the use of City resources at no cost to provide a framework for the BID to move forward for one year, after which the NBRA will be entirely independent. Phil Crowley, owner of Modo Mio, understood from the meetings that the existing BID was not able to convert to a 1994 BID primarily due to financial and organizational reasons, but a viable path forward has been found, and Visit Newport Beach and the BID Board are committed to moving forward as quickly as possible. He stated that the existing BID has been a successful public-private partnership with significant participation and significant events, and has not attempted to collect dues from a restaurant that cannot or does not want to pay. City Attorney Harp noted that the new information is the City potentially loaning the new organization $40,000 in order to help establish the 1994 BID, but the Council has not considered providing a loan. Doug McClain, Newport Beach & Company, pledged to make Council action happen, whether it is to form a 1994 BID or a merchants' association, and used slides to discuss annual consumer spending during Restaurant Week, Restaurant Month during the pandemic, and an upcoming job fair. In response to Mayor Avery's questions, Mr. McClain believed the NBRA is essential to the destination and helping restaurants with employees and marketing, pledged to ensure that a new organization thrives and moves forward within a year, and stated a loan from Newport Beach & Company is a possibility. Jim Walker, Bungalow Restaurant, distributed an NBRA brochure and indicated that this is the first time in 20 years that the BID has faced being erased, expressed the opinion that .the BID is being penalized for following instructions and doing its job, noted that the NBRA is better off now than it has ever been and requires no City funding or staff time, acknowledged that the City's legal department required language regarding payment in the brochure, indicated that the NBRA attempts to educate members about their membership, stated that the City Attorney and City staff told the BID that it could not convert to a 1994 BID and to cease further discussions, proclaimed that the City administers a 25% penalty fee while the NBRA waives the fee, and noted that restaurants that do not join the NBRA receive the same benefits as members. He asked the Council to give the BID a year to make the change. Marin Howarth, BID board member and restaurant owner, noted the difficult year for restaurant owners, many board members and restauranteurs did not like the idea of a tax item on their bills when discussing a conversion to the 1994 Law, the tax could be $24,000 rather than the $600 member fee, the BID was formed for Restaurant Week and Restaurant Month, those will be lost with a conversion to a 1994 BID, being a City entity affects restauranteurs joining forces, and the City should not provide money for a separate entity to work outside the City. Council Member Brenner related that she neither supported nor opposed the continuation of the BID, timing seems to be the issue, and Council is considering waiving various policies to allow outdoor dining because restaurants have been through a strenuous time. She supported renewing the NBRA for one year because of the circumstances. Volume 65 - Page 68 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 In response to Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon's questions, City Attorney Harp reported assessments have not been sent out because Council did not approve a plan, and funds on -hand need to be distributed to the entities that contributed it. Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon stated he has a problem with the City enforcing member fees and does not understand why the BID needs the City if it does not want to enforce membership. He emphasized that nothing is stopping restaurants from forming an independent association. In response to Mayor Avery's questions, City Attorney Harp advised that a tie vote means the motion fails, if there is not a path to disestablish or reform the BID, the BID remains on the books as an entity, but assessments are not issued and the BID can spend remaining funds according to the previously approved plan. Council Member Duffield noted that no restaurant addressed the Council to share the opinion of the other side, a few restaurants have told him that they do not like the BID or Restaurant Week, Council is not receiving all the information, it is time to let the BID go, no business is exempt from the impacts of COVID-19, and there is no motivation for restaurants to address Council. He did not agree with the motion. With Council Member Blom recusing himself and Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon, Council Member Duffield, and Council Member O'Neill voting "no," the motion failed 3-3. Motion by Council Member O'Neill, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon, to a) determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; b) approve the Proposed Plan to Dispose of the Newport Beach Restaurant Association Business Improvement District's Assets; and c) adopt Resolution No. 2021-53, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Declaring Its Intention to Disestablish the Newport Beach Restaurant Association Business Improvement District and Fix the Time and Place of Public Hearing. With Council Member Blom recusing himself and Mayor Avery, Council Member Brenner, and Council Member Dixon voting "no," the motion failed 3-3. XVIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS 17. Ordinance No. 2021-14: Disestablishing the Corona del Mar Business Improvement District [100-20211 Council Member Brenner reported the Corona del Mar (CdM) Business Improvement District (BID) has been diligent in accomplishing its goals and has planned for and does not object to disestablishment, and thanked the BID members for all their hard work and time in beautifying the business district. Mayor Avery opened the public hearing. Hearing no testimony, he closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Blom, seconded by Council Member Brenner, to a) determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; and b) waive full reading, direct the City Clerk to read by title only, introduce Ordinance No. 2021-14, An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Repealing Ordinance No. 97-24, Ordinance No. 98-15, and Ordinance No. 99-I8, and Disestablishing the Corona del Mar Business Improvement District, and pass to second reading on June 22, 2021. The motion carried unanimously. Volume 65 - Page 69 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 18. Resolution Nos. 2021-54, 2021-55, and 2021-56: Public Hearing and Adoption of the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan and Water Shortage Contingency Plan [100-2021] Utilities Director Vukojevic utilized slides to discuss the City's reliability assessment, key findings of the Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), and recommended actions. Mayor Avery opened the public hearing. Hearing no testimony, he closed the public hearing. Council Member O'Neill encouraged anyone interested in water management to read the executive draft because it provides an overview of water sources and City efforts to ensure clean water flows freely, and thanked staff for their work on the UWMP. Motion by Council Member O'Neill, seconded by Mayor Avery, to a) determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; b) adopt Resolution No. 2021-54, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Adopting the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan; c) adopt Resolution No. 2021-55, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Adopting a Water Shortage Contingency Plan; d) adopt Resolution No. 2021-56, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Adopting an Addendum to the 2015 Urban Water Management Plan; and e) direct staff to fulfill the notification requirements set forth by the Water Code after the Urban Water Management Plan is adopted. Mayor Avery concurred with Council Member O'Neill's comments and noted that efficient management is critical during a drought. In response to Council Member Brenner's question, Utilities Director Vukojevic indicated the Plan covers irrigation of plants and trees; however, in the event of a severe drought or supply interruption, staff will request the implementation of restrictions. Utilities Director Vukojevic recognized Utilities Superintendent Catron for leading the preparation of the two reports. The motion carried unanimously. 19. Resolution No. 2021-57: Fiscal Year 2021-22 Budget Adoption; City Budget Hearing; Recommendations from the Finance Committee; and Proposed Budget Revision Items [100-2021] Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon received clarification from City Attorney Harp regarding recusals. Finance Director Catlett utilized a presentation to review key budget messages, proposed budget revisions, revised General Fund (GF) sources and uses, position classifications and salary ranges, the proposed budget amendment, and Finance Committee and staff recommendations. i In response to Council Member Brenner's questions, staff reported the previous Council discussion added $112,000 to the budget for additional trash receptacles, portering service, additional cleaning and trash pickups in the evening; staff will continue to accommodate needs as they arise; pressure washing is a focus; complaints are taken seriously and responded to; staff is working to stabilize resources; and complaints about dirty sidewalks should be reported to the Public Works Department at 949-644-3311. Volume 65 - Page 70 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 Council Member Blom commended staffs preparation of the budget and the Finance Committee's detailed review, and indicated balancing the budget is always important, with a budget of approximately $300 million, $32,000 is not a variance, many cuts have been proposed to balance the budget, residents and visitors demand a certain level of service, Council wants to provide as many services as possible, but bigger projects and Capital Improvement Program projects have to take priority, business owners are responsible for cleaning sidewalks, staffing levels have not decreased due to a hiring freeze, public safety has done a great job with somewhat limited resources, Council has looked at bringing dollars back into the City in order to fund unexpected needs, and every problem does not start and stop at the dais. Council Member Dixon noted the challenge of finding funds for unexpected needs, utilized slides to demonstrate dirty sidewalks and trash, stated that business owners are not going to clean sidewalks daily, the Public Works budget needs a line item to keep the community clean, the state of the community is embarrassing, requested a line item to increase the budget for power washing because the current schedule is not sufficient, and hoped the City Manager could find a creative way to keep sidewalks clean. Council Member Duffield was not aware of another city that is inundated with 250,000 to 300,000 people on a regular basis throughout the summer and related that visitors do not spend a lot of money in the City to help pay for services, regular cleaning is expensive and often cost prohibitive, the City purchases machinery to remove trash from sand on the beaches, finding money to pay for these things is tough, these problems are not new, taxing businesses to pay for problems created by visitors is difficult, and staff is doing a good job in trying to address these issues. Council Member O'Neill recalled the 2020 Finance Committee discussions of a regular budget and one month later having to regroup and reduce expenses, and advised that staff were not furloughed and continued to provide services, revenues are healthier than the prior year but still below normal levels, costs will increase due to new programs and requirements, continued investments in capital improvements will make the City second to none, property values are rising because people want to move to Newport Beach, Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenue will rebound, the City will continue to support the hospitality industry and the business community, slightly less than 30% of the GF supports public safety, and continuing to pay down the pension liability matters to the long- term health of the City. He thanked the Finance Committee, staff, and Council Members for all their efforts in developing a balanced budget. Council Member Brenner stated that expressing concern regarding the solving of additional problems does not diminish Council's appreciation for how hard staff and the Finance Committee work. Council Member Dixon indicated sidewalks are a small part of the overall well-managed community, and comments about sidewalks do not diminish the excellent work performed by City staff. Council Member Muldoon opposed the proposed full-time positions. Mayor Avery opened the public hearing. Abra Gasser advised that 15-20 people jump from the 38th Street bridge almost daily, discussed liability for injuries, suggested installing bird wire on the railing and video cameras, and noted that a solution to bridge jumping was needed. Gary Cruz urged Council to staff the Newport Island bridge with a paid Lifeguard or a volunteer, and noted the Lifeguard posted on the bridge in 2020 was effective, the road onto Newport Island is quite a mess with construction traffic, pedestrians, parked vehicles, and spectators, and the residents are not the ones jumping from the bridge into the dirty water. An unidentified speaker stated bridge jumping has become a social media sensation and is a serious liability issue for the City. Volume 65 - Page 71 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 Gina Cruz indicated that signage prohibiting bridge jumping from the Newport Island bridge was missing for a week, this is a safety issue, bridge jumpers are dared to jump at low tide and when paddleboards are beneath the bridge, and signage warning of the dangers of bridge jumping may be effective. Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon liked the suggestion for signage warning of shallow water and language shielding the City from liability. Council Member Brenner proposed signage indicating a sewer pipe is located beneath the bridge or something to help people understand that is not a good place for swimming. Council Member Duffield advised that tidal activity cleans the water and the water quality is exceptional compared to other parts of the Bay. In response to Council Member Dixon's question, City Manager Leung reported that staff is exploring the use of volunteers. Council Member Dixon believed CERT volunteers posted on bridges would be helpful. Hearing no further testimony, Mayor Avery closed the public hearing. Mayor Avery related that being a member of the Finance Committee was instructional and an honor and commended Council Member O'Neill's leadership on the Finance Committee and staff's view towards saving money. Motion by Council Member O'Neill, seconded by Council Member Blom, to a) determine this action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines because this action will not result in a physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly; b) approve the proposed budget revisions implementing the direction received from the City Council at the May 25, 2021 meeting and consider the Finance Committee's budget recommendations; c) r approve the City Manager's recommended list of City position classifications and their salary ranges as required by the California Public Employees' Retirement System (Ca1PERS) and in accordance with 2 CCR § 570.5 (a)(1); d) approve Budget Amendment No. 21-045 implementing the restoration of budget reductions for the Fiscal Year 2020-21 budget as discussed with the City Council at the May 25, 2021 Study Session; and e) adopt Resolution No. 2021-57, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Adopting the Budget for the 2021-22 Fiscal Year, as amended. With Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon voting "no," the motion carried 6-1. 20. Resolution No. 2021-58: An Extension of Emergency Temporary Use Permits Issued to Businesses Due to State COVID-19 Restrictions (PA2020-069) [100-2021] Council Member Blom recused himself due to business interest conflicts. Community Development Director Jurjis and Senior Planner Nova utilized a presentation to discuss the authorized locations for existing emergency temporary use permits, a path toward permanent outdoor dining, the proposed 90 -day extension of the program, parking challenges, land use and parking rates, the limited term permit process and fee waiver, and.recommended actions. In response to Council Member Brenner's questions, Community Development Director Jurjis reported properties within 300 feet of the applicant business would be noticed, the public may participate in the Zoning Administrator hearings and/or provide written comments, the Zoning Administrator can deny an application or forward it to the Planning Commission if the business is a nuisance, hours of operation will be reviewed and set on a case-by-case basis, staff and the Zoning Administrator will adjust conditions of approval for businesses located next to residences, fines may be imposed through enforcement, and the permit may be revoked. Council Member Brenner noted that neighbors have expressed complaints regarding some businesses, but added that there are other businesses that are responsive to the residents and responsible. Volume 65 - Page 72 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 In response to Council Member Dixon's question, Community Development Director Jurjis advised that, if Council adopts the resolution, staff will notify all permitholders to maintain and clean their use of the public right-of-way or sidewalk. Council Member O'Neill supported staff's recommendation. In response to Council Member Brenner's question, Community Development Director Jurjis indicated dining facilities cannot block access to the sidewalk and must maintain a minimum four -foot clearance. Mayor Avery opened the public hearing. Jeff Shields, attorney representing Jill Markowicz, opposed the resolution as currently written, noted Ms. Markowicz has complained and citations have been issued and ignored, and suggested amending the resolution to include the protective language. Hearing no further testimony, Mayor Avery closed the public hearing. Motion by Council Member Brenner, seconded by Council Member Dixon, to a) find this project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 of the CEQA Guidelines under Class 1 (Existing Facilities), because this project has no potential to have a significant effect on the environment; and b) adopt amended Resolution No. 2021-58, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Authorizing an Extension of Emergency Temporary Use Permits Issued to Commercial and Institutional Uses for the Use of Private Property, Parking Lots, Sidewalks, and Public Property in the City of Newport Beach (PA2020-069). In response to Council Member O'Neill's question, City Attorney Harp clarified that existing permits will be extended automatically, the protections are already contained in the Newport Beach Municipal Code and, if revised, the language should be included in Section 2. Community Development Director Jurjis added that the resolution extends the existing permits to September 6, 2021 without review; however, after September 6, 2021, businesses will have to submit a new permit application for review by staff. In response to Council Member Brenner's questions, staff indicated that the Police Department and code enforcement are addressing noise complaints, two businesses have been allowed to come into compliance, complaints are addressed on a reactive basis, generally businesses are required to move indoors at 9:00 p.m. or 10:00 p.m., and noise complaints should be made after those hours. With Council Member Blom recusing himself, the motion carried 6-0. XIX. CURRENT BUSINESS 21. Resolution No. 2021-59: Underground Utility Assessment District No. 113 (West Balboa Island) — Award of Contract No. 7979-1 and Authorization of Limited Obligation Improvement Bonds [38/100-2021] Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon recused himself due to potential business interest conflicts. Motion by Council Member Duffield, seconded by Council Member Brenner, to a) acknowledge this project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Class 2 Section 15302 (d) (conversion of overhead electrical utility distribution lines where the surface is restored to the condition existing prior to the undergrounding) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it will not have an adverse effect on the environment; b) approve the project plans and specifications; c) award Contract No. 7979-1 to Hot Line Construction, Inc. for the bid amount of $4,308,179.00 for Underground Volume 65 - Page 73 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 Utility Assessment District No. 113, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the contract; d) establish a contingency of $430,000.00 (approximately 10% of total bid) to cover the cost of unforeseen work not included in the original contract; e) approve Amendment to Professional Services Agreement No. 7547-1 with NV5 of Irvine, CA for an additional not -to -exceed fee of $233,295.00 for Construction Administration and Residential Permit Support Services; and f) adopt Resolution No. 2021-59, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, Authorizing and Providing for the Issuance of Bonds Pursuant to the Provisions of the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 for City of Newport Beach Assessment District No. 113 and Approving Certain Documents and Authorizing Certain Actions in Connection Therewith. With Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon recusing himself, the motion carried 6-0. 22. Appointment to the Visit Newport Beach, Inc. Executive Committee [241100-2021] City Clerk Brown read the ballot votes as follows: Scott Calder - Brenner Jim Mosher - Blom Sharon Wood - Avery, Dixon, Muldoon, O'Neill City Clerk Brown announced that Sharon Wood received four votes, so it would be appropriate to waive the portion of City Council Policy A-2 regarding service on only one Board, Commission or Committee. Motion by Council Member O'Neill, seconded by Council Member Brenner, to waive City Council Policy A-2 relative to serving on only one Board, Commission or Committee at a time since Sharon Wood currently sits on the Civil Service Board. The motion carried unanimously. 23. Coronavirus (COVID-19) Update [100-2021] City Manager Leung and Fire Chief Boyles utilized a presentation to discuss the County and State status, reopening, Cal/OSHA recommendations, Library services, vaccination doses administered and rates, and vaccinations for the homeless. In response to Council Member O'Neill's question, City Manager Leung reported staff can explore lifting the local state of emergency and present an item at the next meeting, and the Governor's emergency declaration will continue. Council Member O'Neill supported a Council discussion at the next meeting. Council Member Blom believed relinquishing the state of emergency is appropriate and supported a discussion. In response to Council Member Brenner's question, City Manager Leung advised that Council probably does not need to lift the state of emergency to allow outdoor parades. Mayor Pro Tem Muldoon stated he was not aware of any benefits to continuing the state of emergency. With Council Member Dixon absent, there was a unanimous straw vote to discuss eliminating the emergency declaration at the next meeting. XX. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION - None XXI. ADJOURNMENT - Adjourned at 9:28 p.m. in memory of Jean Wegener Volume 65 - Page 74 City of Newport Beach Study Session and Regular Meeting June 8, 2021 The agenda was posted on the City's website and on the City Hall electronic bulletin board located in the entrance of the City Council Chambers at 100 Civic Center Drive on June 3, 2021, at 4:00 p.m. r Leilani I. Brown City Clerk }M _�..Q"Ilk P �LIfi0RN/ Volume 65 - Page 75