HomeMy WebLinkAbout00 - Written CommentsReceived After Agenda Printed
June 25, 2024
Written Comments
June 25, 2024, City Council Agenda Comments
The following comments on items on the Newport Beach City Council agenda are submitted by:
Jim Mosher ( jimmosherCLDyahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229)
Item 1. Minutes for June 11, 2024 City Council Meeting
The passages shown in italics below are from the draft minutes with suggested corrections
shown in sWkeeu underline format. The page numbers refer to Volume 66.
Page 112, Item XI I, Kleiman, bullet 1: "Attended the Orange County Council of Governments
(OCCOG) and elected official's roundtable meetings, Newport -Mesa Unified School District
(NMUSD) Soccer Classic (#wnh-µy formerly known as the Pilot Cup), Distinguished Citizen
Program (DCP) award ceremony, Community Leadership Fair at Sherman Library and
Gardens, the Balboa Island Parade, and Fire Ops 101 training"
Page 112, Item XI I, Weigand, bullet 1: "Attended the Sister City trip to ekase Okazaki,
Japan, with Councilmember Grant"
Page 112, Item XI I, Grant, bullet 1: "Utilized a slide to review her trip to ekess Okazaki,
Japan, for the Sister City celebration"
Page 118, Item XVI, paragraph 1, sentence 1: "Adam Leverenz indicated that he has not
received a response to his email inquiry to the City Council if yacht clubs and the Lido Islsnef
Isle Community Association are exempt from the mooring permit fee increases."
Comments:
Page 113, Item XIII, paragraph 1: "Regarding Item 17 (General Plan Update Steering
Committee Bi-Monthly Update to the City Council), Mayor O'Neill stated that he does not
think that Council adopted the Arts Master Plan and asked that the Arts Subcommittee not
create new policies as part of the General Plan Update and instead go through the Arts
Commission to seek approval from Council." [see video]
Without further explanation (and clarification if the above sentiment is shared by a majority of
the Council), the admonition for the GPAC to not "create new policies" is a bit of a mystery.
The GPAC has no power to enact enforceable policies, but the primary purpose for which it
was created was to recommend changes to General Plan goals and policies. I believe that
has been interpreted to include the possibility of "creating" and recommending new General
Plan goals and policies for Council consideration. If the Council's intent is that the GPAC's
function be limited to suggesting minor revisions to existing General Plan goals and policies,
that needs to be more clearly communicated so GPAC members don't waste their time on
any broader effort. If the admonition was simply a reminder that before coming to the Council
some of the GPAC work product needs to be further reviewed by the boards and
commissions, to the extent required by Article VII of the City Charter or possibly to a greater
extent, then who will be coordinating that, and when, needs to be clarified, since neither the
June 25, 2024, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 6
authority nor the responsibility of the Steering Committee to perform this function is clear
from their enabling resolution.'
Page 113, Item XI II, paragraph 2, sentence 2: "He also indicated that it is Council's
responsibility to decide if the fee paid for candidate statements are subject to a refund or a
charge if the cost goes over the City Clerk's estimate"
For the Council's information, shortly after the June 11 meeting, I received a check for
$746.26, dated June 14, 2024, refunding the unused portion of my $1,500 deposit for
publication of a November 2022 candidate statement. In that three-way Council District 3
race, the statements appeared in the sample ballot in a quarter -page format, with one square
blank. To fit this format, they had to be trimmed to 200 words. In the two-way races that year,
the statements also appeared in quarter -page format, but since the lower half of those pages
was blank it is unclear there would have been an extra charge for printing 400 words.2 I
continue to have the impression many candidates struggle to meet the 200-word limit,
especially when they face demands for last-minute changes to what they have crafted.
Page 117, Item 14, paragraph 5: "Councilmember Blom described his involvement in the
budget process and how the Newport Beach Film Festival's grant amount was determined."
Item 14 was the staff recommendation for Community Programs and Special Event funding.
According to page 14-3 of the staff report, in addition to review and evaluation of applications
by a panel of five staff members, "Staff also met with three councilmembers to review the
recommendations." In the video, Councilmember Blom said he "sat on the subcommittee that
worked through these numbers and utilized the budget that we have."
While I agree with Councilmember Blom's assessment that events, as they become
successful, should be weaned from taxpayer support,3 the existence of these shadowy,
privately -appointed subcommittees is of continuing concern to me. The public is unaware
who created them or who is on them until a conclusion is presented (and in this case, still
doesn't know its members, since the staff report is silent on that). If the members were
appointed "off camera" by the Mayor, it is unclear where the authority to do that lies. And if
they were "appointed" by City staff, that not only seems a reversal of roles, but is troubling
because staff should not be treating some council members differently or giving them any
more influence than others.
' The enabling resolutions limit the GPAC to making recommendations to the Steering Committee, but
provide no direction as to what the Steering Committee is to do with them.
2 The only race on the Newport Beach ballot using the full -column 400-word option that year seems to
have been the Board of Supervisors, with one candidate using it, and the other sticking with 200 words.
s The OC Marathon is a good example. For its first few years, it sought and received (if I remember
correctly) $50,000 annual funding from the City. But it now requires none and presumably even pays the
City for the disruption it causes.lt is unclear to me why the Film Festival continues to require a taxpayer
grant.
June 25, 2024, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 3 of 6
Even when a "Council Committee" is formally created by public action at a noticed meeting,
the Clerk struggles to keep track of who is on them and whether they are still active (the
roster and webpag rarely agreeing).
Item 4. Streetlight Foundation Inspection and Replacement — Notice of
Completion for Contract No. 9233-1 (23V02)
It is good to see "the unit pricing for removing and replacing grout caps only" was reduced "from
$6,500 to $3,000." Trying to discover what a "grout cap" is, I noticed at least one vendor
recommending they are a leading cause of streetlight pole failure and should be eliminated. Still
not understanding why they are designed in a way that requires $3,000 to remove and reinstall
them for inspection, would leaving them out be a better option?
Item 5. FY 2022-2023 Playground Refurbishment — Notice of
Completion for Contract No. 8953-1 (23P01)
As best I can tell, the text of the staff report provides no hint of what playground or playgrounds
were refurbished for $300,937.16. Although not referenced in the text, one would guess
"Attachment A" is related to the item, and it suggests the work was performed at a single
playground, at Peninsula Park.
This seems to be confirmed by the original contract award, as Item 6 on the Council's consent
calendar from last year (June 27, 2023).
Item 6. Approval of an On -Call Maintenance Services Agreement with
Bear Electrical Solutions for Streetlight Maintenance and Repairs
The existing contract with Bear for the same services, C-8598-1, appears to be valid through
August 12.
Are any of the existing rates better than the new ones? If so, which will apply until then?
In addition, the previous agreement assumed Bear would be performing quarterly nighttime
patrols to confirm all lights were functioning. The new agreement does not appear to include
that. Who will be performing that now?
Item 9. Inter -Agency Instructional Services Agreement with Rancho
Santiago Community College District
If I understand the staff report, the Santa Ana College Criminal Justice Academies are offering
to hire Newport Beach Police personnel as instructors, paying the City $3.00 per student per
hour.
It is certainly commendable that others see NBPD personnel as mentors with the expertise and
skills necessary to instruct others, most NBPD personnel were hired and are being paid (usually
very well) to perform services other than instruction.
June 25, 2024, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 4 of 6
The staff report is not clear as to who will be performing the instruction, and whether the
compensation to be paid to the City will equal or exceed their City -paid salaries, and even if it is,
whether the time is available to be doing this side job.
Moreover, the statement on page 9-2 that "Many of the POST courses already conducted by the
Police Department would become eligible for compensation under the Agreement at a rate of
$3.00 per student per hour," implies that NBPD personnel are currently performing this service
with no compensation to the City. Is that true? Or are they currently being compensated, but at a
lower rate?
Item 10. Contract Approval for Public Safety Helicopter Services
Between the Cities of Newport Beach and Huntington Beach
According to the minutes of the May 28, 2024, meeting, for study session Item SS3, the Police
Department is developing a drone program.
Is that expected to reduce the need for police helicopter services? And if so, by how much?
Item 14. Annual Appointments for Scheduled Board and Commission
Vacancies
Before making appointments, the full councils in many of our neighboring cities publicly
interview all their board and commission applicants. While that can be a little tedious, it seems a
better and more transparent process than having a committee privately screen the applicants
and the full council not publicly interview even their recommended candidates. Even without a
public interview process, it would seem respectful, at some point, to publicly list all the
applicants, not just the nominees, if for no other purpose than to let the public know who is still
being considered (or not).'
In the current list of screened nominees, the presence of only a single nominee for two vacant
seats of the Building and Fire Board of Appeals (incorrectly listed as the "Building and Fire
Code Board of Appeals") is particularly notable. I would guess (but don't know) this means that
only one application was received. This lack of interest could be because the body has
apparently not met for more than two years. The Council may wish to inquire why appeals to
this body are so rare, and also might consider assigning to it other duties, such as making
recommendations to the Council on proposed revisions or building and fire codes.
As to the remainder of the report, while I commend the new Deputy Clerk on competently
preparing it, I notice there are several nuances that are not disclosed in it:
1. Amy Waunch is listed as a nominee for two different boards and commissions (Civil
Service Board and Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission). Because City Council
Policy A-2 prohibits service on two standing committees at the same time, it is unclear if
Ms. Waunch were appointed to the first she would become ineligible for the second, or if
' This is especially important because the Clerk retains applications for two years, During that time, as
openings arise, applicants are asked if they remain interested. But at the end of the two years, the
applications are discarded without any reminder that the applicants need to reapply if they wish to
continue to be considered.
June 25, 2024, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 5 of 6
she could be appointed to both and have to choose between the two (creating an
unscheduled vacancy on the one she didn't choose).
2. Similarly, it is not mentioned that one of the applicants for the City Arts Commission,
Heather Ignatin, is a second -term incumbent on the Parks. Beaches & Recreation
Commission, with one year left to serve. Should she be appointed to the Arts
Commission, that would create an additional vacancy on PB&R. However, since the
latter would be unscheduled, it could not be filled at the present meeting, but would have
to await the required notice.
3. And similarly, Drew Teicheira, a nominee for PB&R, is the District 1 incumbent on the
City's standing Aviation Committee, and his appointment to PB&R would create a
vacancy on the latter.5
Whoever is appointed, even if they are not compensated appointees' for whom ethics training is
required by the state, it seems important they be informed of Policy A-2 and the Brown Act. In
that connection, I notice from the Clerk's Boards, Commissions and Committees page, that
there continues to be a BCC Handbook, but I know that as a 2022 appointee to the City's
General Plan Advisory Committee, I was not made aware of it. A more consistent "on -boarding"
process for successful applicants would seem desirable.
Item X. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS
City's November Ballot Measure
It is widely anticipated that as part of its 6th Cycle Housing Element Implementation program,
City staff will be asking the Council, at its July 23, 2024, meeting, to (1) override the Airport Land
Use Commission's objections to allowing new housing close to John Wayne Airport, (2) certify
an EIR, and (3) place a measure on the November 5, ballot for voters to ratify amendments to
the City's General Plan in accordance with the requirements of City Charter Section 423
("Greenlight").
I again urge the Council to hold a study session on its options regarding the ballot measure
before being forced to make a last-minute decision about it on July 23.
I have previously suggested Section 423 might allow the Council to avoid the ballot measure.
But that would be possible only if the Council limited its action to one the state requires to be
taken independent of the results of a vote. And at this point, it is unclear what, if anything, the
state has ordered Newport Beach to do, other than its expectation Newport Beach would hold a
vote, as promised on page 4-3 of the certified Housing Element in "March 2024," after which, if
the vote failed, it would revise the Housing Element and schedule a second vote.
5 The May 13, 2024, Aviation Committee agenda indicated there is already a District 3 vacancy, as well as
a longstanding one for a Newport Coast Representative, but for unknown reasons, a notice of the District
3 vacancy has never (to the best of my knowledge) been posted.
' My understanding is the only compensated Council appointees are the Planning Commissioners, who
receive $60 per meeting for a maximum of two meetings a month, an amount set decades ago, and never
adjusted.
June 25, 2024, City Council agenda comments - Jim Mosher Page 6 of 6
Staff has a sense of urgency because of a February 12, 2025, deadline to complete rezoning,'
but at the present time, it is quite unclear what the wording would be of the ballot measure staff
would ask the Council to approve. This is, in part, because Charter Section 423 is structured
around setting voter -approved growth limits for 51 geographically -mapped "statistical areas," yet
staff's proposal so far sets only five limits on five geographically amorphous "focus areas" even
though all but one already encompass multiple statistical areas (17 in total) and could involve
more. I have seen no proposal for how the five focus area limits would be divided among the 17
statistical areas, yet without a precise and individual housing limit proposed for each statistical
area, Greenlight approval and future tracking against that limit would not be possible.
The resolution of this, and many other potential options for the ballot measure, does not seem
like the sort of thing that should be unveiled with just five days for review before action.
The consequences of missing that deadline is one of the many things that would need to be clarified at
the study session.