HomeMy WebLinkAbout12 - Changes to the Finance Committee - CorrespondenceReceived After Agenda Printed
January 13, 2014
Item No. 12
January 13, 2015, Council Agenda Item 12 Comment
The following comment on the Newport Beach City Council agenda is submitted by:
Jim Mosher ( iimmosher(o),vahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949- 548 -6229)
Item 12. Resolution No. 2015 -5: Changes to the Finance Committee
As previously noted, this item appears to have been placed on the agenda in violation of, and
without waiving, Council Policy A -6. That said, I appreciate the thoughtful staff report, although
I'm surprised the Costa Mesa Finance Advisory Committee wasn't reviewed, and I don't agree
with the report's findings or recommendations.
I feel having as many eyes on, and reviewing, the City's financial documents and policies as
possible is highly desirable.
In recent years, Newport Beach had two highly knowledgeable financial experts on the Council
and benefited from their review and questioning of items at Finance Committee meetings.
However, I think the City would have benefited even more if the same issues had been
reviewed and questioned by other experts at the Finance Committee, and then subjected to a
second critical review by the full Council, including those two experts, seeing the item fresh at its
regular meetings.
The problems I have noticed with a Finance Committee containing three Council members (and
of such committees in general) include:
1. The remaining four Council members assume matters have been reviewed by the
Committee when they may not have been.
2. Even if matters were reviewed, the Committee can be used as a testing ground for
"beautifying" financial items before they go before the full Council.
3. The members not on the Committee are deprived of full participation in the City's
financial decisions because human nature defers to the "expert" recommendation of the
Committee, and they may even be embarrassed to ask the more obvious common
person's questions that the public may want asked and discussed.
4. Since most Council items can be adopted with just four votes, if the Committee has
reached agreement on an issue, no matter how controversial, only a single additional
vote needs to be obtained from the remaining four Council members in the more widely
observed debate before the full Council.
5. Although easily corrected, the existing Committee has met at afternoon hours when
many working people can't attend.
In view of the above, I would suggest the Council consider one of two options:
1. Creating a new, purely advisory and fully citizens Finance Commission.
2. Having no committee at all.
Under either of these options, the financial decisions requiring citizen involvement would all be
made by the full Council at a regular public meeting.
January 13, 2015, Council Agenda Item 12 Comment - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 2
Regarding the 30 -60 hours of staff time said to be required to prepare for the current Committee
meetings (page 12 -2 of the staff report), I seem to recall hearing that since most of the items
were passing through the Committee on their way to the Council, essentially the same amount
of staff time would have been needed without the intermediate step of presenting them to the
Committee.
Regarding the permissibility of having individual Council members appoint individual
representatives and how that relates to City Charter Article VII, I believe calling a "Commission"
a "Committee" to avoid compliance with the Charter (page 12 -3 of the staff report), although it
has been done before, is an empty and fallacious act.
The people created the Newport Beach City Council in Article IV, and in Article VII they gave
that council the power to create whatever citizens advisory groups they require by following the
very clear rules provided and calling them 'Boards" or "Commissions." It did not give them the
power to ignore the Charter by seeking advice from citizens "Commissions' called
"Committees." In fact, the recommendation is probably not even grammatically correct since the
usual understanding is that a `Board" or "Commission" is a body of "outsiders" appointed by a
governing body while a "Committee" is a sub -group of the appointing body itself (not involving
"outsiders ").
Finally, since the title page of the staff report says it was prepared and submitted by the City
Manager, I am baffled by the final paragraph before "Environmental Review" on page 12 -6 in
which the author asks the City Manager for his reaction to the report. Who is the author? That
said, I think the City Manager offered a wise and thoughtful response.