HomeMy WebLinkAbout00 - Written CommentsReceived After Agenda Printed
April 11, 2023
Written Comments
April 11, 2023, City Council Agenda Comments
The following comments on items on the Newport Beach City Council agenda are submitted by:
Jim Mosher (iimmosher(cD-yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229)
Item 1. Minutes for the March 28, 2023 City Council Meeting
The passages shown in italics below are from the draft minutes with suggested corrections
shown in tr,*eeu underline format. The page numbers refer to Volume 65.
Page 517, next to last paragraph: "Ke y Kory Kramer, Eagle Four Partners, supported all
forms of new investment that elevate Newport Center to its highest potential, recognized the
Library Lecture Hall (Witte Hall) as a central part of Newport Beach's civic life and cultural
fabric, and thanked Council for their leadership and continued investment in the City."
Page 517, last paragraph: "Larry Tucker noted having received high bids for the Library
Lecture Hall (Witte Hall), various possible funding sources, a civic auditorium proposal, the
building benefits to the City with a portion of the expense funded by other means, and a long-
term asset prospeGtive perspective."
Page 518, first paragraph: "Jill Johnson -Tucker relayed that high labor costs are attr4butable
contributed to the Library Lecture Hall (Witte Hall) expense, shared alternatives and concerns
if the project does not move forward, and recognized the building as a civic auditorium with
many uses for community gatherings."
[note: It would be accurate to paraphrase Ms. Johnson -Tucker as saying "the unexpectedly
high expense was attributable to high labor costs," but not the other way around.]
Page 519, Item VIII paragraph: "Regarding Closed Session Item IV.B, City Attorney Harp
reported that a motion was made by Mayor Pro Tem O'Neill and seconded by Council Member
Kleiman to authorize the City to join the amicus brief in support of the Cosa Mesa litigation
matters listed on the agenda."
[comment: A review of the video confirms the minutes are correct: City Attorney Harp
identified the maker seconder of the closed session motion, but inadvertently forgot to
disclose its outcome in terms of vote yes or no.]
Page 519, Item XII, first bullet: "Attended the District 1 Orange County Council of
Governments (OCCOG) General Assembly meeting at the Nixon Library, a tour of the new
County offices, and meetings with commercial airline stakeholders and Fixed Base Operators
(FBOs) at John Wayne Airport (JWA)"
[note: Council member Kleiman said she attended the OCCOG General Assembly meeting
as the District 15 representative, but "District 15" was not part of the name of the
meeting.]
April 11, 2023, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 4
Item 3. Resolution No. 2023-17: Amendments to the Records
Retention Schedule
It is good to see Ms. Gladwell (the City's records retention consultant) has consented to having
her "copyrighted" City of Newport Beach, CA, Records Retention Schedule posted for review
with the agenda.
It would better if she consented to having it more prominently posted on the City website, which
I don't believe it currently is.
It would be even better if any future contracts with her made clear she doesn't have ownership
of publicly -funded public documents.
Item 4. Resolution No. 2023-18: Extending the Expiration Date of the
Ad Hoc Municipal Code and Policy Review Committee
I continue to find it unfortunate that in 2017 the Council (possibly without most knowing what
they were doing, since it was part of a much larger package — see Item 18 from August 8, 2017)
repealed its former Policy D-3 calling for an annual review of the currency of all Council policies.
The current effort, confined to deleting words and sunsetting provisions, does not seem to me
any substitute for that. For over the course of years, many policy passages need revision, not
deletion.
That said, before considering renewing the current effort until June 30, 2024, it would seem
reasonable to ask what progress, if any, has been made since September 13, 2022?
And what changes, if any, are needed to ensure the next fifteen months are any more
productive than the last seven?
Item 6. Slip Rental Agreement with Sailing Fascination to Berth at the
Balboa Yacht Basin, Located at 829 Harbor Island Drive
This sounds like a great activity, worthy of supporting with the reduced cost slip rental.
One might note that although the staff report says "The program has graduated more than 1,000
students since its launch in 1996 and sailed with more than 36 students in 2022. In 2023, the
program is scheduled to offer sailing lessons three times per week and is expected to serve
approximately 40 students," the existing and proposed agreements say (Section 5, agenda
packet page 6-9) that in return for the reduced rent "Tenant agrees to provide boating safety
and sailing instructions to a minimum of forty (40) physically and/or intellectually disabled
individuals per year."
Based on recent history and the instruction model on page 6-42, that would seem difficult
requirement to meet. Operating only 10 months of the year, and providing a month -long
program, this would require four weekly time slots for students operating at all times. But page
6-42 indicates two of the four times are by appointment only, suggesting they aren't always
active.
Should the requirement be rephrased?
April 11, 2023, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 3 of 4
Item 7. Three Year Software License Agreement for Microsoft
This agreement is quite inscrutable to me.
The staff report says the cost is an increase, but does not appear to say how much of an
increase it is.
Item 8. Planning Commission Agenda for the April 6, 2023 Meeting
It appears no "action report" has been posted for this meeting, which I discovered at the last
minute had been cancelled due to the lack of a quorum of Commissioners showing up.
The subject of the meeting was to have been consideration of amendments to the City's
General Plan, Zoning Code and Planned Community texts to allow housing in areas where
airport noise currently prohibits it. As a member of the Council's General Plan Advisory
Committee, and specifically of its Noise Element subcommittee which had not reviewed the
proposed changes (or even met), I submitted comments.
Item 9. Request to Appropriate Ackerman Funds for the Purchase of a
New Projector for the Friends Meeting Room at the Central Library
With the Council not yet having made a decision about the fate of the Library Lecture Hall
proposal, should this item be deferred until there is a clearer picture of how the Friends Room
will be used in the future?
If, for some reason, the Lecture Hall plan did not proceed, might something different be wanted
for the Friends Room?
Item 10. Resolution No. 2023-19: Approving Side Letter Agreements
with the Labor Groups Representing City Employees, Approving a
Third Amendment to the Key and Management Compensation Plan,
and Adopting New Salary Schedules
The Council members have presumably discussed these agreements in closed session
meetings with their negotiators and may, therefore, have a better idea of what changes are
being made where. But for the public, with a very brief staff report and no redlines of what is
being proposed to review, it is presented as a puzzle.
The claim that the formerly separate agreement with the Police Chief' has been incorporated
into an amended Key and Management Compensation Plan is especially difficult to verify.
In particular, the contract (C-7098-4) with recently retired Police Chief Jon Lewis included some
provisions I thought might be unique to the office. Those included a $1,350 per year uniform
allowance, an annual physical and a City -provided vehicle.
' Links to the current contracts with the City Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk, Police Chief and Fire
Chief were once prominently placed on the City website on the "Financial Information" page or the Budget
& Salary Information page. Those links seem to have disappeared (or at least, been moved).
April 11, 2023, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 4 of 4
As a member of the public reading the documents being presented for review, the entitlement to
these benefits don't pop out to me in the amended Key and Management Compensation Plan
starting on agenda packet page 10-191.
1 don't know if that means they are going away or that they are provided for somewhere else.
I also thought merit raises for the Police Chief currently had to be publicly approved by the
Council by amending the Chief's separate contract. But it appears from the third provision under
"W' on page 10-192 that the Chief's base salary, like that of all other Executive Management
team members, will now, if this is approved, be subject to "movement at the discretion of the
City Manager'— without City Council review.
It is also unclear if Council's plan is for a separate, publicly -approved contract with the Fire Chief
to eventually disappear as well.
As to the specifics of the very few parts of the proposed 232-page resolution that I have read:
On page 10-4, third "Whereas" from the end, I suspect "Assistant Chief' was intended to
"Assistant Fire Chief."
On page 10-191, in two places, I am pretty sure "Chief may by modified by the City Council"
was intended to read "Chief may be modified by the City Council."
Finally, on page 10-235, 1 find an "Attachment B," which page 10-2 identifies as a "Costing
Summary." But the attachment itself does not explain what it is depicting, and it is hardly self-
explanatory.