HomeMy WebLinkAbout21 - 05BA-009 - Smoking on Piers, Beaches & Other Public AreasCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item No. 21
August 24, 2004
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: General Services Department
David E. Niederhaus, Director, 949 - 644 -3055
dniederhaus @city. newport- beach.ca.us
City Attorney's Office
Daniel Ohl, Deputy City Attorney, 949 - 644 -3131
dohl(@citV.newport-beach.ca.us
SUBJECT: Smoking on Piers, Beaches and Other Public Areas
ISSUE:
Should the City approve a no smoking ordinance that pertains to public piers, wharfs,
floats, beaches, and certain other public areas?
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. Introduce Ordinance No. 2004 -_ (Attachment A), prohibiting smoking on all
public piers, beaches, beach walkways, floats, wharfs, and Inspiration and
Lookout Points, for first reading and pass to second reading on September 14,
2004.
2. Approve a budget amendment (Attachment K) in the amount of $19,000 to
provide for the purchase, installation, and maintenance of smoking ash
receptacles.
BACKGROUND:
Since the Fall of 2003, various environmental groups have advocated a no smoking ban
for City piers and beaches.
Due to the increased attention to this issue by other beach cities and the State
legislature, the Council earlier directed a discussion of a smoking ban on public piers
and beaches that took place at the May 25, 2004 Council study session. The City
Attorney's office prepared a comprehensive staff report for the study session that
Smoking on Piers and Beaches
August 24, 2004
Page 2
summarized the history and progress on smoking bans by various beach cities
(Attachment B).
After a lengthy discussion during which a number of new issues arose, the Council
directed a review of a no smoking proposal for public piers and beaches by the Parkas,
Beaches and Recreation (PB &R) Commission. The results of the discussion and
recommendations by the Commission were to be returned to the Council by staff within
120 days. The minutes of the Council study session are attached (Attachment C).
Staff prepared a list of issues associated with smoking on piers and beaches and
presented the attached staff report to the PB &R Commission on July 6, 2004
(Attachment D). After a lengthy discussion and numerous public comments, the
Commission unanimously supported a no smoking ordinance for piers and certain
beaches and requested additional information of staff and continued the item to their
August meeting. Minutes of the Commission meeting are attached (Attachment E).
On August 3, the PB &R Commission again confirmed their unanimous position on no
smoking on piers and certain beaches and other public areas, but asked staff to
research more attractive smoking debris receptacles and identify specific locations to
place the receptacles before the matter was returned to Council. The staff report and
minutes of the meeting are attached (Attachments F & G).
The following issues have been considered by the PB &R Commission and the staff
Should the City adopt a no smoking ordinance for public piers and /or beaches?
Should a no smoking ban be extended to areas adjacent to public beaches such as
the boardwalk, sidewalks, street ends, and public piers and floats in the bay?
What role would enforcement play in the reduction of smoking on piers, beaches,
and adjacent public areas?
What role, if any, should a public education program play in a no smoking ban?
Are current field maintenance activities and facilities sufficient to address litter
related to smoking?
Should smoking areas be designated to permit smokers access to piers and
beaches?
DISCUSSION:
The no smoking issue has public health, litter, and public education components. While
second hand smoke in an outdoor environment may not present a serious second hand
smoke hazard, it is still a threat and nuisance to those with health problems and
Smoking on Piers and Beaches
August 24, 2004
Page 3
allergies. The litter component is easier to address and is linked with the level of
enforcement. Public education may raise the awareness of the effects of smoking and
decrease litter.
City staff from the City Attorney's office and the Police and General Services
Departments have studied the issues and comments that surfaced at the Council and
PB &R meetings, particularly the health, enforcement, and litter issues. In addition, they
have documented what other beach cities have done or plan to do with smoking bans
on public beaches and piers. Finally, staff surveyed the piers and beachfront public
areas to define where smoking, or the litter from smoking, occurs, in order to offer
recommendations on specific steps to counter the effects of smoking on the general
public and the City.
Beach City Survey:
The City, with its numerous natural resources, particularly the beaches and the system
of public piers, wharfs, and floats, attracts a large number of people. However, like any
beach city, we must still address public behaviors or actions that degrade the natural
atmosphere of public areas. Staff has provided a matrix of past, current, or intended
actions of other California beach cities regarding a smoking ban (Attachment H).
As one can see by reviewing the attachment, the trend of beach communities is toward
banning smoking on public piers and /or beaches. In addition to a no smoking
ordinance, various levels of enforcement, public education, and alternative maintenance
activities associated with smoking litter are planned by various beach cities.
Current Smoking Bans:
Smoking currently is prohibited in the following areas in Newport Beach:
a) in restaurants and bars (State Code)
b) on or near playgrounds (State Code)
c) at entranceways to public buildings (State Code)
d) in City restrooms (City Code)
e) in City buildings and vehicles (City policy)
Enforcement:
Enforcement is only one element of a multi - pronged approach to reduce smoking on the
beaches. Should a no smoking ordinance be adopted, we anticipate it will be a period
of time until there is an increased awareness and corresponding shift in public attitudes.
During that phase, there will likely be an expectation from some members of the public
to see a higher level of enforcement than is practical. A smoking ban ordinance is
difficult to enforce in a beach type of environment. As with littering in such areas,
people are not likely to commit a violation when an enforcement officer is present. So
Smoking on Piers and Beaches
August 24, 2004
Page 4
until we see the anticipated shift in public attitudes, there may be increased frustration
on the part of some members of the public when they do not see an immediate police
response to their report of the offense. If the ban is adopted, police officers will only be
able to enforce such an ordinance during the normal course of their routine patrol
duties, just as they do now with other similar nuisance regulations. We would not
envision them being dispatched to such a reported offense, but only advised of its
occurrence so they could attempt to observe it while patrolling in the affected area.
Obviously, when police officers do engage in enforcement activities related to this
ordinance as part of their routine activities, those public safety resources are diverted
from other, perhaps more important duties. As it is now, police calls for service and
enforcement responsibilities directly impacting public safety will always have a priority
over non - emergency enforcement activities such as the enforcement of a no smoking
ordinance. Although staff and the PB &R Commission recommend adoption of the
ordinance because of the valuable message it sends, staff also recommends that we
not be directed to provide active enforcement of a no smoking ordinance.
Public Education:
Probably the most important aspect of a smoking ban is the value that it conveys in
raising public awareness of the problems and hazards associated with smoking.
Signage and passive enforcement to include warning smokers should be sufficient to
reduce the effects of public smoking, without incurring City costs for active enforcement
and a formal City public education program. Numerous public education venues
regarding smoking are promulgated by various regulatory agencies by various public
media and in most cases are paid for by tobacco companies. In addition, as noted by
the special interest groups, there is a groundswell of emphasis by public media on the
negative effects of smoking. The City should not be tasked to undertake yet another
public education mandate other than a no smoking ordinance with passive enforcement
and an increased litter abatement program.
Extent of Proposed Smoking Ban:
Originally, staff did not recommend a smoking ban that would apply to all beaches.
Attachment I provides aerial views of public beaches and bay and ocean piers and
floats where staff identified a smoking and litter problem, particularly at family oriented
locations, listed below. Staffs original recommendation on where smoking should be
prohibited was based on this list.
Balboa and Newport Piers
Public Floats and Piers in Harbor (10)
Oceanfront Beaches including Corona del Mar and Little Corona Beaches
Oceanfront Boardwalk
North and South Bayfront Boardwalk (Balboa Island)
East Bayfront Boardwalk (Little Balboa Island)
1 g`h Street Bay Beach
Smoking on Piers and Beaches
August 24, 2004
Page 5
Rhine Wharf
North Star Beach
Pirates Cove and China Cove Beaches
The Wedge
N Street Bay Beach
10`" Street Bay Beach
Marina Park Beach
Inspiration and Lookout Points
At its meeting of August 3, the PB &R Commission recommended a smoking ban on all
public piers, beaches, beach walkways, wharfs, floats, and Inspiration and Lookout
Points. This recommendation adds the Balboa Island, Lido Isle and 15th Street beaches
to the list above. Staff agrees with the Commission's recommendation, because
applying the ban to all beaches will make the City's rules more clear to the public and
easier to enforce.
Designated Smoking Areas:
In an effort to provide smokers an alternative to an ordinance violation, smoking areas
could be designated, such as locations at the pier plaza areas and public benches along
the various boardwalks. Designated smoking areas are not recommended on the public
piers due to fire hazards. Staff experience has been that smokers tend to occupy
certain benches at street ends along the boardwalk and the installation of smoking
receptacles and signage at those locations might be beneficial. One should expect in
most cases for adjacent property owners to protest designated smoking areas. Staff
developed a list of designated smoking areas for PB &R Commission review, but the
Commission was adamant on the denial of such a designation. The current staff
recommendation does not include designated smoking areas, primarily due to the high
probability of adjacent property owners' objections.
Smoking Ash Receptacles:
Both the PB &R Commission and staff also believe that the public will be more likely to
comply with the smoking ban, and litter on the beaches will be minimized, if the City
provides receptacles for cigarette or cigar butt disposal. The Commission viewed two
examples of receptacles, and asked staff to identify more attractive alternatives.
Photographs of ten varieties of receptacles are attached (Attachment J). Receptacles
will be strategically located along the oceanfront and bayfront, and at Lookout and
Inspiration Points. Diplomatically worded signage will encourage smoker cooperation
with the ban.
Costs:
The costs of a smoking ban in public areas are based primarily on the level of
enforcement of a ban and the level of litter abatement. If a high level of enforcement is
Smoking on Piers and Beaches
August 24, 2004
Page 6
directed by the Council, the personnel time taken to address smoking violations will also
detract from the normal role of public safety staff. Neither police, fire, nor lifeguard
personnel have sufficient resources to address a full time emphasis on banning
smoking on piers and beaches. Earlier testimony by police staff noted a probable 85%
public compliance rate if a no smoking ordinance was enacted with associated signage
and only passive enforcement.
Estimated costs for a smoking ban with passive enforcement would be as follows:
a) Modification of pier and beach ordinance signs to include new smoking $ 2,000
ordinance (Decals on existing signage)
b) Purchase and installation of smoking ash receptacles (25 locations at $ 4,500
$180 each)
c) Annual cost to service receptacles and signage $12,500
Submitted by:
David E. Niederhaus
General Services Director
Attachments: (A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
(E)
(F)
(G)
(H)
(J)
(K)
Total $19,000
Submitted by:
I
Daniel Ohl
Deputy City Attorney
Ordinance No. 2004 -
Staff Report (City Attorney's Office) of May 25, 2004
Minutes of Council Study Session of May 25, 2004
PB &R Agenda Item dated July 6, 2004
Minutes of PB &R Meeting of July 6, 2004
PB &R Agenda Item dated August 3, 2004
Minutes of PB &R Meeting of August 3, 2004
Matrix of Beach Communities Smoking Bans
Aerial views of oceanfront, beaches, and piers
Smoking Receptacle Models
Proposed Budget Amendment
ORDINANCE NO. 2004-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING CHAPTER 11.08 OF TITLE
11 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE,
PERTAINING TO CONDUCT ON BEACHES AND PIERS
The City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, HEREBY ORDAINS as follows:
SECTION 1: Findings: The City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby finds
and declares that:
A. The beaches, municipal piers, public wharves, public floats and other public
property are unique and precious resources of the residents of Newport Beach
and its visitors. The City of Newport Beach is committed to keeping its beaches,
municipal piers, public floats and public wharves clean, safe, healthy and
pleasant for everyone.
B. Numerous studies have shown that secondhand smoke is a significant public
health hazard. The United States Environment Protection Agency (EPA) has
classified secondhand smoke as a group A carcinogen, the most dangerous
class of carcinogen. Smoking on beaches, piers and wharfs endangers children
and others by exposing them to secondhand smoke. Children who observe
smoking and tobacco use on public beaches, municipal piers, public floats and
public wharves may model the behavior.
C. The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates
that secondhand smoke causes 3,000 lung cancer deaths per year among adult
non - smokers in the United States. The EPA has concluded that secondhand
smoke causes coronary heart disease in non - smokers. Secondhand smoke is
especially hazardous to particular groups, including those with chronic health
problems, the elderly and children. The CDC has found that secondhand smoke
causes children to suffer from lower respiratory tract illness, such as bronchitis
and pneumonia, exacerbates childhood asthma, and increases the risk of acute
chronic middle ear infection in children.
D. Discarding cigarettes, cigarette butts, tobacco and used matches onto the ground
on City beaches, municipal piers, public floats, and public wharves is unsightly,
unclean and particularly hazardous to small children who handle and sometimes
ingest them. The City must collect tobacco litter on City beaches, municipal
piers, public floats and wharves or it will be collected by storm water and washed
directly into our ocean and bay waters in violation of the City's storm water
pollution prevention permit, and, to the detriment of ocean life and all ocean
users.
E. The City Council has determined that banning smoking and the improper
Page 1 of 3
Attachment A
disposal of tobacco products on City beaches, municipal piers, public floats and
public wharves is necessary to protect the health, safety, and welfare of Newport
Beach residents and visitors.
D. The municipal code does not currently prohibit smoking on City beaches,
municipal piers, public floats and public wharves.
SECTION 2: Chapter 11.08 of Title 11 of Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Section 11.08.080 Smoking on City Beaches, Municipal Piers, Public Floats and
Public Wharves
A. "Smoke" or "Smoking' shall mean the carrying or holding of a lighted pipe a
lighted cigarette or lighted cigarette of any kind, or any other lighted smoking
equipment, and a lighting of a pipe, cigar or cigarette, of any kind and inhaling,
emittinq, or exhaling the smoke of a pipe, cigar, or cigarette of any kind or arm
other smoking equipment.
B. No person shall smoke within the boundaries of any public oceanfront or bay
front beach, including public walkways and strands adjoining beach areas the
municipal piers, public floats public wharves Inspiration Point or Lookout Point
areas.
C. Disposal of Smoking Waste: No person shall dispose of any cigarette, cigar or
tobacco or any part of a cigarette or cigar, including cigarette and cigar butts and
ashes and used matches in any place where smoking is prohibited under this
Chapter, except in any specifically designated smoking waste receptacle.
D. A violation of this section is an infraction.
E. Punishment under this section shall not preclude punishment pursuant to Health
& Safety Code Section 13002, Penal Code Section 374.4, or any other law
prescribing act of littering. Nothing in this section shall preclude any person from
seeking any other remedies, penalties or procedures provided by law.
SECTION 3: That if any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance
is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the
validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council
hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each section, subsection,
clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one to more sections, sub-
sections, sentences, clauses and phrases be declared unconstitutional.
Page 2 of 3
SECTION 4: The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this
Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official
newspaper within fifteen (15) days after its adoption.
This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Newport Beach held on the day of , 2004, and adopted on
the day of , 2004, by the following vote, to -wit:
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS
NOES, COU NCI LMEMBERS
ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS
u EMU
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
F:\users\cat\shared\Ordinance\CigaretteButt\081204.doc
Page 3 of 3
•
•
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Study Session Agenda Item No. ss4
May 25, 2004
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Office of the City Attorney
Daniel K. Ohl, Deputy City Attorney, (949) 644 -3131
dohl(cDcity.newport- beach.ca.us
SUBJECT: Smoking on Beaches and Piers
Staff seeks direction from City Council from the following alternatives:
Prepare an ordinance to prohibit smoking on City beaches and /or piers, with either
passive or aggressive enforcement; or
Refer the issue to the Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission for further
study and public input; or
3. Gather additional information from other jurisdictions and report back at a later
date.
Staff has been asked to present a report on the implications of prohibiting smoking on
public beaches and /or piers. The report reviews possible benefits and implications of
implementing a smoking ban, including a review of what other cities have experienced.
The report also addresses input received from the Police Department and General
Services Department on enforcement issues, signage and public education requirements,
and estimated cost to implement such a ban.
BACKGROUND
At a November 2003 City Council meeting, Earth Resource members carried a plastic
bag containing an estimated 10,000 discarded cigarette butts which they claimed had
been collected during a cleanup at the Newport Pier. In April of 2004, high school
students also appeared at Council Chambers with discarded cigarette butts they had
collected.
Various organizations, including Earth Resource Foundation, Stop Tobacco Abuse from
Minors Pronto (STAMP), Orange County Tobacco Use Prevention Coalition have
participated in efforts to ban smoking in other jurisdictions. According the Earth Resource
Foundation, more than 450,000 people in the United States die each year from tobacco
related disease and more than 50,000 people in the United States die from second hand
smoke. In addition, litter from cigarette butts creates debris on the beaches and is one of
the commonly left litter items.
Attachment B
Smoking on Beaches
May 25, 2004
Page 2
According to the Office of the Governor of California, as of April 4, 2003, 16.6% of adults •
in California smoke, while estimates from the Orange County Health Agency for smoking
in Orange County are lower at 11 %. It is estimated that approximately 8 million visitors
come to Newport's beaches and piers each year, and, estimating that 30% of the
population are adults, an estimated, 264,000 people smoke each year on City beaches
and piers (8 million, x 30 %, x 11 %).
The number of cigarettes smoked on City beaches and piers creates a litter problem, in
addition to the health and environmental problems created by smoking and second hand
smoke. For example, on November 15, 2003, the Earth Resource Foundation claims
they picked up 10,000 cigarette butts with a 165 people the day after the beach had been
mechanically cleaned. This figure was significantly higher than what was recovered in
Huntington Beach (4,000), San Clemente (6,000), Laguna Beach (3,000) or Dana Point
(1,000).
SIMILAR BANS ON BEACHES OR PIERS
Solana Beach: On October 7, 2003 the Solana Beach City Council approved an
ordinance to ban smoking on their beaches and in their parks. Since this is a relatively
new ordinance, there has been insufficient time to evaluate the effectiveness of the
ordinance or enforcement issues. Enforcement was anticipated to be minimal or non-
existence, with a goal of obtaining compliance by a public education and signage.
Seat Beach: Seal Beach has a ban on smoking on the municipal pier. The impetus for is
the ordinance was to prevent fires on the pier. Enforcement is done by the police
department with supplemental enforcement by lifeguards. According to the Marine Safety
Chief, voluntary compliance has been high with signage on the piers stating that smoking
is prohibited.
Hanauma Bay, Hawaii: Hanauma Bay, a well known snorkel location on Oahu in Hawaii,
has instituted a smoke free beach program to protect sea turtles from ingesting cigarette
butts.
San Clemente: San Clemente has recently banned smoking on beaches and piers.
Santa Monica: Santa Monica has recently outlawed smoking at the beach.
Los Angeles: The City of Los Angeles is considering a proposal to prohibit smoking at
Venice, Cabrillo, Dockweiller and Will Rogers' beaches.
Huntington Beach: Huntington Beach is considering a ban on smoking.
Manhattan Beach: Manhattan Beach is considering smoke free beaches.
Laguna Beach: Laguna Beach is considering a ban as well.
Encinitas: Encinitas voted against banning smoking on the beach. •
Smoking on Beaches
May 25, 2004
Page 3
• According to Narsis Kabiri of the County of Orange Tobacco Use Prevention Program,
the following cities in California have smoking bans in parks and recreational areas:
Santa Monica (no smoking permitted in parks or beaches)
Beverly Hills (no smoking permitted in parks)
San Fernando (no smoking permitted in parks and recreation center)
Pasadena (no smoking permitted in parks, including golf course)
El Cajon (no smoking permitted in parks and recreational areas)
La Puente (no smoking permitted in public places)
Santa Cruz (beach, boardwalk is a non - smoking facility, considering banning on beaches)
IMPLICATIONS OF BANNING SMOKING
Positive:
May help promote a healthy, tobacco free lifestyle by public showing support and
general opposition to smoking.
2. May help reduce litter from cigarette butts on the beach, creating a more
aesthetically pleasing beach.
Negative:
• 1. May create enforcement expectations that staff, whether police, lifeguards or code
enforcements, cannot manage, given their current responsibilities and staffing
levels. The public may expect City staff personnel to actively enforce violations by
warnings or citations, and such expectations may not be met. Either additional
personnel will be needed or enforcement personnel will be diverted from other
activities. The need for additional personnel may be mitigated, to some extent, by
adopting a policy of limited enforcement.
2. May have unintended consequences by displacing smokers to other public areas
such as sidewalks, street ends and parking lots. Doing so may create additional
problems at locations closer to storm drain openings.
MUNICIPAL AND STATE CODES REGARDING SMOKING AND LITTERING
Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 11.08.050 provides that no person shall throw,
place, bury or otherwise dispose of non - combustible waste matter on any beach except in
trashcans. A fine of $100.00 is imposed for a first violation.
Newport Beach Municipal Code Section 6.25.020 prohibits smoking in public restrooms.
A fine of $100.00 is imposed for violation.
Smoking within 25 feet of a playground or a tot lot sandbox is prohibited by Health &
Safety Code 104495, with a fine of $250.00 for its violation.
• As of January 1, 2004, State law prohibits smoking inside an occupied public building,
and within 20 feet of a main exit, entrance or operable window of an occupied public
building.
Smoking on Beaches
May 25, 2004
Page 4
RIGHT TO SMOKE is
A question of whether or not this ban would be an infringement of a person's "right to
smoke" may be raised. However, smoking is not a protected right under the Federal or
State Constitution. The authority to ban smoking is expressly given in California
Assembly Bill 846 and Health and Safety Code Section 104495 which authorizes cities
and counties to implement smoking bans more stringent than what the state has
imposed.
PUBLIC EDUCATION
If a smoking ban is implemented, an aggressive public education and-signage program
will be necessary. Press Releases, notification to renters and property owners, and the
Chamber of Commerce may all assist with this. The General Services Department has
estimated the cost of additional signs on the beach at $15,000 to $25,000. It may also be
necessary to install cigarette butt receptacles at beach entrances, parking lots, bay
beaches and street ends. The estimated cost for such receptacles is unknown at
present, but estimated to be in excess of $10,000.00. Such receptacles will also have to
be cleaned periodically, most likely by hand, at additional costs.
BEACH CLEANING
Currently, the beaches are cleaned mechanically five times a week. During a three •
month period during the summer, mid June to the end of September, mechanical beach
cleaning occurs seven days a week. Some areas are very difficult to clean mechanically
due to their proximity to other items such as seawalls, sidewalks, and patios. In addition,
the adjoining areas are subject to street sweeping seven days a week, and litter picking
and hand sweeping seven days a week as well. Bay beaches and street ends are
cleaned by hand.
PARTNERSHIPS
To assist with the implementation of a smoking ban, partnerships with local organizations
such as the Surf rider Foundation, Earth Resource Foundation and /or other local groups
may be considered.
Prepared & Sub Uittel,
Daniel K. Ohl,
Deputy City Attorney
F: \users\cat\sh ared \d a \C C staffReports \S mo kingOn Beach. d cc
40
RECEIVED
CITY OF NEWPORT GEAEs
City Council Minutes
Study Session
May 25, 2004 - 4:00 p.m. INDEX
ROLL CALL
Present: Heffernan (arrived at 4:15 p.m.), Rosansky, Bromberg, Webb, Nichols
(arrived at 4:10 p.m.), Mayor Ridgeway
Absent: Adams (excused)
CURRENT BUSINESS
1. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. — None.
2. BUDGET — CIP PRESENTATIONS. (100 -2004)
City Manager Bludau stated that the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is
being reviewed at the current meeting to allow time prior to the adoption of the
budget to make any changes requested by the City Council.
Using a PowerPoint presentation, Public Works Director Badum displayed a bar
graph showing the CIP expenditure history from 1986 through 2005. He noted
• that there has been a slow, steady increase in expenditures over time with a
couple of spikes for projects such as the Arches Interchange, Bonita Canyon
Sports Park, MacArthur Boulevard widening and some of the oil spill projects in
Balboa Village. He briefly outlined the CIP process and stated that the
departments submitted requests totaling $20 million. Through a cooperative
effort with the department directors, the proposed projects were narrowed down
to a preliminary program totaling $16.7 million.
Public Works Director Badum displayed a list detailing the master project
schedule. He stated that there are various factors that need to be taken into
consideration when determining what can legitimately be accomplished in a
given fiscal year, and pointed out that the schedule helps to reduce the number
of rebudgets.
At the request of Mayor Ridgeway, Public Works Director Badum further
explained that the bar graphs to the right of the list show the staff members that
will be assigned to the projects, which is one of the factors taken into
consideration when determining the master schedule and what can be
accomplished.
Public Works Director Badum displayed a list of some of the CIP projects that
will rebudgeted in 2004.05. City Manager Bludau noted that the underground
utility projects are not a part of the CIP because they are not completed with
City funds. Public Works Director Badum added that for informational
purposes, the costs for engineering and design will be included in the budget
• even though the City would be reimbursed once a district is formed.
Council Member Rosansky asked if the money spent by the City for
Volume 56 - Page 914
Attachment C
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
May 25, 2004
INDEX
undergrounding on City property is included in the budget or the CIP. Public
Works Director Badum stated that it's not included in either because it's difficult
•
to predict what the City's share will be and the City doesn't have control over
what will be charged by the utility companies. Council Member Rosansky asked
how the expenses are handled. Public Works Director Badum stated that a
request for a budget amendment to appropriate the City's share is usually
included with the action before the City Council at the meeting where the ballot
count: is conducted. The information is provided in the Notice of Intent which is
typically provided 45 days prior to the public hearing. City Manager Bludau
added that the budget amendment transfers the money from the unappropriated
general fund.
Mayes Ridgeway asked where the money is assigned when the transfer is done.
Public Works Director Badum stated that separate funds are set up for each
district.
Council Member Webb stated that whether it's in the CIP or the budget depends
upon what is being constructed. He further stated that the amount that the City
puts forward is partially offset by the money that is received from the
assessment district. Public Works Director Badum added that staff is trying to
find a better way to present assessment districts in the budget and that it's
difficult to guess which ones will move forward and which ones won't.
Mayor Ridgeway stated that it's a large amount of money and should be
identified. City Manager Bludau noted that not all assessment districts have
City contributions. When there are City contributions, Mayor Ridgeway asked if
they go into the CIP or the general fund. Administrative Services Director
•
Danner stated that it's both and explained that it's a general fund contribution
to a capital project and is budgeted as a capital project. The budget amendment
transfers the money from unappropriated general fund reserves into the fund
established for that assessment district.
Continuing with his presentation, Public Works Director Badum stated that
with the CIP for 2004 -05, more money is being moved into the maintenance and
operating budgets. He explained that several CIP projects are actually
maintenance projects. He displayed a table showing the structure of the CIP
and stated that the document is organized by fund. He then displayed a
summary showing the projects transferred from the CIP to various department
operating budgets. City Manager Bludau noted that comparing the 2004 -05 CIP
to previous CIP's isn't a pure comparison because of the shift of funds from the
CIP to the general fund and operating budgets in 2004 -05.
In response to Council Member Webb's question, Public Works Director Badum
stated that the money being budgeted for street light conversions is for
individual conversions.
Public Works Director Badum displayed a summary showing the expenditures
by fund. He noted that some of the expenditures will increase because of the
addition of project rebudgets that can't be calculated until closer to the end of
the current fiscal year. Public Works Director Badum provided a list and a brief
description of some of the major projects being included in the 2004 -05 CIP.
•
City Manager Bludau suggested that the City Council take a critical look at the
Volume 56 - Page 915
•
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
May 25, 2004
INDEX
projects being proposed in the preliminary CIP, and consider if there are other
priorities for the available funding.
Public Works Director Badum continued listing some of the major projects in the
various funds, including the general fund, Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG), gas tax, tide & submerged land, contributions, and
transportation & circulation.
Council Member Webb referred to Item No. 7, Dover Drive Sidewalk Design, of
the regular meeting agenda and noted that it would be funded out of the
transportation & circulation fund. He asked if it was possible that construction
on the project could begin next year. Public Works Director Badum stated that
it wasn't included in the budget because staff didn't know how much money
would be required to get approval. He explained that the project is near a
wetlands area, which could change the cost significantly, but that it could be
included on the checklist, if desired. City Manager Bludau asked if the money
would be available. Public Works Director Badum stated that there is some
money in the transportation & circulation fund that is currently unappropriated.
Public Works Director Badum continued listing some of the major projects in the
building excise tax and Measure M funds.
Council Member Webb asked if any commitment had been received from the
Transportation Corridor Agency (TCA) on funding the bridge construction for
the Jamboree Road Widening. Public Works Director Badum stated that the
• TCA staff understands that they have a commitment, but have also stated that
they wouldn't have funding available until 2010. Council Member Webb stated
that the TCA needs to be reminded that the bridge construction is supposed to
be their number one add on project. Public Works Director Badum stated that
they have been reminded, but that other potential resources for funding are also
being looked at. City Manager Bludau asked what the anticipated cost of the
project is expected to be. Public Works Director Badum stated that it's expected
to be approximately $4 to $5 million. Council Member Webb recalled that it was
approximately $5 to $6 million. City Engineer Patapoff confirmed that it is
expected to cost over $5 million.
Public Works Director Badum provided a list of the assessment districts
currently under consideration and the estimated costs to the City. In the
category of miscellaneous projects, he listed the Bonita Canyon Sports Park
storage facilities.
In response to Mayor Ridgeway's question, Public Works Director Badum stated
that the storage facilities would be paid for from the interest earnings of the
park's bond proceeds. Additionally, he listed Fire Station #7 as a miscellaneous
project, and stated that the land acquisition process still needs to be resolved.
Council Member Rosansky asked if the figure of $2,750,000 for the fire station
was just for construction, or if it included the land acquisition. After a brief
discussion, Public Works Director Badum stated that the figure is just for land
acquisition and that a more accurate figure would be determined towards the
end of the current fiscal year.
• Public Works Director Badum continued listing major projects in the various
Volume 56 - Page 916
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
May 25, 2004
tunds, including the water enterprise and wastewater enterprise tunds.
Council Member Webb asked which pipelines were included in the pipeline
master plan. City Engineer Patapoff stated that the two main transmission
lines include those at Irvine Avenue, south of Bristol, and at Irvine Avenue and
Dover Drive.
Public Works Director Badum stated that other projects of note in the CIP
include the Mariners Branch Library, Newport Coast Elementary Loop Road
and Newport Coast Community Center.
Council Member Webb asked if the shortage for the Mariners Library totaled
$300,000 to $400,000. Public Works Director Badum responded in the
affirmative and stated that it's a result of the increase in the price of steel and
other construction materials.
Mayor Ridgeway asked when the project was expected to go to bid. Public
Works Director Badum stated that it would be shortly and that construction
should commence in August of 2004. The grand opening is expected to occur in
July 2005.
Council Member Webb asked how the tennis court project is being handled.
Public Works Director Badum stated that the tennis court project is being
combined with the library in order to obtain a better price.
Council Member Heffernan asked how much the school district is contributing to
the loop road project. Public Works Director Badum stated that the entire
project is being financed from the interest earning proceeds from the bond sell.
The school district will maintain and operate the road once it is in place.
Mayor Ridgeway noted that before the final CIP budget is adopted, the City
Council will have the opportunity to incorporate any additional requests. He
reminded the council members to think about what capital projects are needed
in their districts. City Manager Bludau stated that the council members are
encouraged to notify him of any desired projects as soon as possible to allow staff
the time to determine solid cost estimates. Mayor Ridgeway stated that he has
already talked to staff about the design drawings for the West Bay streets.
Council Member Bromberg stated that he has also been working with staff on
some projects on Balboa Island, and agreed that it's important to present the
ideas as early as possible to determine what will be feasible.
3. TOP STAFF PRIORITIES FOR 2003/04 STATUS REPORT.
Using a PowerPoint presentation, City Manager Bludau stated that the first
priority of staff in the 2003 -04 fiscal year was to certify the land use and the
implementation plans, which are both a part of the Local Coastal Program
(LCP), and present them to the Coastal Commission for initial review. He
reported that the City Council would consider the land use plan at the regular
meeting, Item No. 21. He stated that the remainder of the LCP would be built
around the land use plan, and that final certification of the entire LCP is
expected to occur by the end of the 2004 -05 fiscal year.
Volume 56 - Page 917
INDEX
(100 -2004)
•
•
•
•
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
May 25, 2004
1 B/.
Mayor Kidgeway noted that a late nne of Z�t,uuu per month has been paid by the
City since June of 2003.
City Manager Bludau stated that staffs second priority was the implementation
of a code and water quality enforcement program. He stated that this was
accomplished and he displayed some of the statistics from the division. He
specifically noted that approximately 95% of the notices of violations and 72% of
the administrative citations that were issued in the current fiscal year were
water quality related, and that education was a large part of the program. City
Manager Bludau stated that the County looks at Newport Beach as a model in
the area of water quality enforcement.
Council Member Nichols asked how much water quality code enforcement is
costing the City. City Manager Bludau stated that it's listed separately in the
budget and totals approximately $521,000. He added that $1.5 million in new
grants were awarded for water quality projects and studies in the 2003 -04 fiscal
year.
Staffs third priority was to complete the baseline data and analysis for the
general plan update and the evaluation of the land use plan. He reported that
the City is on track with this priority. The fourth staff priority was to
temporarily reconfigure the Mariners Park playfield and complete design
development for the new Mariners Library. He reported the progress that has
been made, as also discussed during the CIP presentation, and stated that the
park playfield final reconfiguration and the opening of the new library is
• anticipated to take place in the fall of 2005. The fifth priority, start and
complete design of the Santa Ana Heights fire station, has not happened. City
Manager Bludau explained that the City was delayed by site selection and
acquisition.
City Manager Bludau stated that staffs sixth priority was to complete the
annexation of West Santa Ana Heights /Country Club/Mesa Drive areas and
create a redevelopment agency. He reported that this did not happen and that
no application has been submitted. He listed the reasons for this and stated that
staff intends to bring an annexation application to the City Council before July
of 2004. City Manager Bludau stated that very little progress was made on
staffs seventh priority, the City Hall replacement project and addressing the
long term space needs. He explained that this was due to a conflict of interest
issue and the uncertainty surrounding the City's long term ability to do some
financial planning. He stated that master planning efforts will begin, however.
Staffs eighth priority was to negotiate cable TV franchise agreements with Cox
and Adelphia. He reported that the first readings of the cable communications
franchise and right -of -way ordinance took place at the City Council meeting on
May 11, 2004. Once the franchise ordinance is in effect, the franchise agreement
negotiations will take place. City Manager Bludau stated that the ninth priority
of staff was to develop a standardized evaluation process assessing the need for
a standardized form and training the organization in the new form and
evaluation process. He reported that the new form has been developed and
instructions are currently being prepared.
• In response to Council Member Nichols' question, City Manager Bludau
explained that the form is a written evaluation form for the annual performance
Volume 56 - Page 918
City ofNew;aort Beach
Study Session Minutes
May 25, 2004
INDKK
evaluation of the City's employees. He added that it was determined that a
more standardized form was desired.
•
City Manager Bludau stated that staffs tenth priority was to continue the
emphasis on disaster preparedness focusing on the Emergency Operations
Center (EOC) process, development and training. He reported that progress was
limited due to the maternity leave and then resignation of the City's Emergency
Services Coordinator. A recruitment for the position is currently underway.
City Manager Bludau reported that a complete update of the City's Emergency
Management Plan was completed and distributed. Progress was also made in
working with the various committees that focus on the roles that the different
departments would play in an emergency. This process is ongoing.
Council Member Webb asked how the City Council is involved in the training
process. City Manager Bludau stated that, to date, they have not been. Council
Member Webb expressed his opinion that the City Council should be involved.
City Manager Bludau stated that two years ago, a Study Session item dealt with
the issue and that the City Council has been invited to observe the disaster
preparedness exercises that have been conducted.
Mayor Ridgeway added that when it was discussed at the Study Session, it was
agreed that the safety personnel, fire and police, effectively take over in an
emergency_
Council Member Webb stated that it might be appropriate for the City Council to
participate in some of the training programs. Fire Chief Riley stated that under
the current Emergency Management Plan, which was adopted by the City
•
Council, the City Council's role is to continue doing what they already do, which
includes promulgating rules and regulations, and making authoritarian
decisions on major policy issues. The actual emergency operation activities are
empowered to the City Manager and the support departments. Depending on
the type of emergency, it is usually the Police Chief, Fire Chief, Public Works
Director or General Services Director who would become the key person to
manage the City resources in response to an emergency. Fire Chief Riley stated
that regarding training, Citywide management training is conducted as well as
specific training by function. He stated that the Department Operating Centers
(DOC's) and their link to the EOC have been the focus. He suggested that staff
could keep the City Council informed of training exercises and that the City
Council could observe any of these that they desire. He further suggested that
the City Council could plan to participate in the upcoming Citywide drill on
September 9, 2004.
Council Member Heffernan asked what the chain of command would be in an
emergency. Fire Chief Riley stated that typically the Police Watch Commander
or the Fire Battalion Chief would call for the activation of the EOC. All key
EOC response personnel would be notified to respond and the situation would be
assessed. if it is determined that a local emergency overwhelms the City's
resources, the City Manager would declare a local emergency and the City
Council would be asked to ratify that decision. He stated that this would be the
most important role of the City Council because it enables the City to apply to
the Slate for a State declaration of a local emergency, which is then passed on to
the Federal government for a Federal declaration of a local emergency. Fire
Chief Riley explained that this process allows the City to obtain State and
•
Volume 56 - Page 919
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
May 25, 2004
• Federal funding, and additional resources. The City Council would also be
needed to make some major policy decisions. Council Member Heffernan asked
who determines what situations are handled first- Fire Chief Riley stated that
the City Manager would be the Director of Emergency Operations and would
make those decisions.
Council Member Bromberg asked if the City Council could change the
procedures or if they were set by State mandate. Fire Chief Riley stated that
the procedures are established in the City's Emergency Management Plan,
which can be amended by the City Council. City Manager Bludau stated when
discussing emergency response, it needs to be remembered that different people
may be playing different roles. Fire Chief Riley agreed and added that the
duties of the positions of the EOC are included in the supplies located at the
EOC and that the first task of anyone responding to the EOC is to become
familiar with their role. It may take two hours to get the entire EOC in place.
Council Member Bromberg requested that a clarification be provided on what
the City Council's role is and what decisions they would make in the event of an
emergency. City Attorney Burnham stated that there is an ordinance that
requires that the City Council adopt and periodically review the emergency
operations plan. The City Council is not involved in the actual administration of
the plan.
Mayor Ridgeway stated that he observed an emergency drill earlier in the day
and didn't know where the chain of command began. Fire Chief Riley stated
that the drill was a part of the "Every Fifteen Minutes" education program, and
• demonstrated the City's response to a two - vehicle collision involving kids and
alcohol. He stated that the first arriving officer on the scene becomes the
incident commander until relieved by someone of higher authority. In this
situation, the activities of the police and fire departments are coordinated under
a joint command due to the criminal nature of the event combined with the
safety issues. Mayor Ridgeway complimented the City's efforts on disaster
preparedness.
Council Member Bromberg agreed that the City is very well o££. He stated that
at a future meeting, it needs to be determined what the City Councils role
would be in a catastrophic event.
Council Member Webb stated that it would be appropriate for the City Council
to observe the drill in September and become more aware of its role.
In response to Mayor Ridgeway's question, City Manager Bludau stated that
some of the 2003 -04 staff priorities would probably be included in the 2004 -05
priorities and that he would present these to the City Council in August 2004.
4. SMOKING ON BEACHES AND PIERS.
Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that San Clemente recently instituted a ban on
smoking, and is in the process of installing their signs and beginning
enforcement. He stated that he has talked to several other jurisdictions and has
learned that the ordinances have not been in effect long enough for them to
determine how effective they will be.
• Mayor Ridgeway asked if information was gathered from the jurisdictions on
Volume 56 - Page 920
INDEX
(100 -2004)
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
May 25, 2004
INDIDI
proposed enforcement. Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that San Clemente
plans to do passive enforcement, install signs and conduct public education, and
•
that violators would be informed of the code. If they fail or refuse to abide by
the regulation, they would be cited. Mayor Ridgeway asked if the ordinances are
subject to Coastal Commission review. Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that he
had not heard of such a requirement. City Attorney Burnham stated that he did
not feel that the Coastal Commission would have any jurisdiction.
Council Member Bromberg asked how Newport Beach compares to other
jurisdictions in terms of the number of visitors to the beach. Deputy City
Attorney Ohl stated that with the exception of a couple of cities, Newport Beach
has the highest number of visitors. He reported that the annual visits to
Newport Beach totals approximately 8 to 8 % million.
Council Member Heffernan asked if there was an understanding as to why some
of the jurisdictions banned smoking on either the beaches or the piers and others
banned it on both. Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that Seal Beach banned
smoking on the piers only and that it may have been the result of experiencing a
pier fire a number of years ago. The other jurisdictions didn't express a problem
with the piers, but included them because they were a part of the beach.
Council Member Heffernan noted that Solana Beach has had the ban in effect
the longest of any of the jurisdictions. Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that he
was unable to speak with anyone from that city. Council Member Heffernan
asked if there were any court rulings on the matter. Deputy City Attorney Ohl
stated that his research has not found that the State and Federal constitution
guarantees the right to smoke. Council Member Heffernan asked if the findings
of the ordinances that have been adopted focused on the smoking aspect or the
•
trash aspect. Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that the initial focus has been on
the litter aspect and then secondly, the health aspect.
Mayor Ridgeway asked if any of the jurisdictions created areas for smoking.
Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that San Clemente created an exemption for a
restaurant at the base of the pier.
General Services Director Niederhaus stated that one of the City's three beach
cleaners was modified with a fine screen that could pick up cigarette butts. He
stated that the problem is that it also picks up natural rocks and seashells. He
added that smokers also tend to congregate near benches and that the butts in
these locations have to be extracted manually. General Services Director
Niederhaus displayed an example of the new sign that might be created if a ban
is adopted. He noted that a decal can be applied to the existing signs, which will
save considerable money.
Council Member Rosansky asked how much the signs would cost to change.
General Services Director Niederhaus stated that it would cost less than $5,000.
He added that without enforcement, no headway will be made with the litter
issue.
Mayor Ridgeway asked if the other jurisdictions included sidewalks and parking
areas adjacent to the beaches. Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that in San
Clemente, the ban does not apply to those areas and that they plan to install
cigarette receptacles in the areas. In response to Mayor Ridgeway s question,
General Services Director Niederhaus stated that his employees do utilize
•
Volume 56 - Page 921
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
May 25, 2004
INDEX
• handheld screens in the smaller areas, but that the manpower is usually not
available to perform the function. Mayor Ridgeway confirmed that the General
Services Department feels that they are effective on the main beach. General
Services Director Niederhaus added that it's difficult to get to the areas where
the mechanized equipment can't be used.
Stephanie Barger, Earth Resource Foundation, stated that it is fully
documented that there is no constitutional right to smoke. She stated that she
also has information about what the other jurisdictions are doing, and noted
that Seal Beach banned smoking on the piers quite a few years ago due to the
fire hazard. Legislation is currently underway to ban smoking on State beaches.
Ms. Barger stated that her group is also working on making the violation result
in an administrative citation instead of being considered a misdemeanor, so that
the court system won't be clogged. She stated that tobacco is the number one
drug and the number one cause of death in the country. She stated that the
beaches are a play area for children. In closing, Ms. Barger stated that the
smoke free beach issue should be looked at like the regulations for the
environmentally sensitive areas and that the signs will be effective. She asked
the City Council to put the environment and the health of children at the
forefront.
Council Member Bromberg asked Ms. Barger if she would have an expectation
in the future that the City would expend resources to enforce the ban.
Ms. Barger stated that unless people know they're going to get a ticket, they will
ignore the law. She stated that smoking is obvious and that the issue has
• received a lot of publicity, so people know it's coming. Any law should be
enforced and she noted the success of enforcement at Hunama Bay. She
additionally noted that if the City is willing to expend resources to write parking
citations, they should also be willing to expend resources for this issue.
Mayor Ridgeway noted that Hunama Bay is very small, whereas Newport Beach
has 11 miles of beaches.
City Manager Bludau asked Ms. Barger if she was aware of how the
enforcement issue is being addressed in the proposed legislation to ban smoking
on State beaches. Ms. Barger stated that the legislation was just introduced
earlier in the day, but that she would follow -up on the issue and report back to
the City.
Jim Walker, Director of Stop Tobacco Abuse from Minors Pronto (STAMP),
reported that there's a $250 fine that can be placed on any infraction for
smoking on beaches. He stated that this would not be necessary very often and
that the ban is expected to be complied with. He explained that over 60% of
smokers want to quit and are supportive of a ban. Mr. Walker stated that
substantial compliance will reduce trash and the risk of structure fires, and that
95% of the people will comply with the law. He stated that he sees the smoke
free beach phenomenon sweeping through the country, that it's a health issue
and that it's inappropriate to smoke around other people.
Scott Moreland, Newport Harbor High School teacher, stated that several of the
people in attendance at the current meeting are his students and that they've
• been appalled by what they've found in the beach cleanups that they've
conducted. He stated that one of his classes is a surfing class and the students
Volume 56 - Page 922
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
May 25, 2004
INDEX
have seen cigarette butts in the water. Additionally, there are pockets •
throughout the beach where the City's beach cleaners can't reach. Mr. Moreland
stated that people visit Newport Beach and expect to have pristine beaches. He
stated that cigarettes are a problem and the matter needs to be addressed.
Ellie Burbenbeck, President of the Earth Resources Foundation Club at Newport
Harbor High School, noted that various other public facilities have also gone
smoke free, such as Disneyland, Irvine Spectrum and Angel Stadium. She felt
that it could also be done on the beaches in Newport Beach. She reported that
in November of 2003, her club conducted a beach cleanup just a few days after
the beach was cleaned by the City and that they picked up over 13,000 cigarette
butts. She stated that the ban is necessary.
Council Member Webb suggested the process to adopt an ordinance begin. He
stated that his concern is for both the smoking and the trash. He stated that he
doesn't want to be forced to breathe others smoke and feels that it also creates a
trash problem.
Council Member Rosanksy stated that he doesn't see the issue as just a litter
problem. He asked how the Police Department enforces the other activities that
are prohibited on the beach. Police Chief McDonell stated that they are enforced
based on calls for service, observation and discretion. He stated that its a
matter of priorities, and that enforcing no smoking on the beach would not be a
high priority. Council Member Rosansky confirmed with Police Chief McDonell
that there is a police presence on the beach and that some enforcement would
occur. Police Chief McDonell stated that it's important to understand that the
public often gets frustrated when a law is adopted and there isn't adequate •
enforcement. He stated that there's a difference with the ban on smoking in
bars because there's an incentive for the bar owner to maintain compliance.
Mayor Ridgeway asked if a smoking ban would create too high of an expectation.
Police Chief McDonell stated that it would create frustration on the part of those
that want to see it more heavily enforced.
Council Member Rosansky asked the Police Chief if he felt that people were
generally law abiding. Police Chief McDonell stated that there is generally an
85% compliance rate with any law. Council Member Rosansky concluded that
without enforcement, there is the potential then to reduce 85% of the smoking
and the litter associated with it.
Mayor Ridgeway noted the signs at the base of the Balboa Pier, which state that
3 -wheel and 4 -wheel bicycles on prohibited on the boardwalk. He stated that the
police do not enforce it. Police Chief McDonell stated that it's a matter of
priorities. City Manager Bludau asked if the Police Chief would expect his
officers to respond to every call for service. Police Chief McDonell stated that he
expects his officers to do their routine patrol and that responding to every report
of cigarette smoking would not be a priority.
Council Member Bromberg asked the Fire Chief his opinion on the lifeguards
enforcing the ban. Fire Chief Riley stated that it would be highly contradictory
to the directive given to the lifeguards, which is to keep their eyes on the water.
He stated that they are public safety professionals and it would not. be an •
appropriate use of City resources.
Volume 56 - Page 923
City of Newport Beach
Study Session Minutes
May 25, 2004
INDEX
• Council Member Rosansky asked if the lifeguards currently enforce any of the
activities that are prohibited on the beach. Fire Chief Riley responded in the
negative and stated that the exception is the blackball ordinance, which is a no
surfing ordinance in effect during certain times of the year on certain areas of
the beach. He stated that compliance is sought and if the lifeguard is not
effective, the police are called for enforcement. Regarding smoking on the piers,
Fire Chief Riley stated that it's not an issue in Newport Beach because the piers
are concrete.
Mayor Ridgeway stated that he doesn't like scofflaws and the expectations of
enforcement.
Council Member Nichols asked if there are any restrictions on the City enforcing
a smoking ban on a State beach.
Mayor Ridgeway responded in the negative.
Council Member Nichols stated that there is no good evidence that secondary
smoke causes deaths. It is even less relevant when done outdoors.
Council Member Heffernan expressed his support of a ban for both the issues of
smoking and trash. He stated that staff should be directed to draft an
ordinance, and that enforcement shouldn't be an issue. It will be self policing
and is a statement made by the City.
is Mayor Ridgeway suggested that the matter be looked at by the Parks, Beaches
& Recreation Commission, noting that there are several issues that still need to
be addressed.
Council Member Heffernan stated that he doesn't want to see the matter get
bogged down and that the City Council should still have the final say.
Council Member Bromberg stated that the idea of having a ban is a good idea for
the both health and litter reasons. He stated that he also doesn't like scofflaws
either and that his primary concern is enforcement. Council Member Bromberg
noted Ms. Barger's expectation that the law would be enforced. Council Member
Bromberg agreed that it would be a good idea to have the Parks, Beaches &
Recreation Commission look at the matter further. He stated that there must
also be an understanding that any ban would involve voluntary enforcement.
City Manager Bludau noted that the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission
doesn't meet again until July 6, 2004, but that the City Council could set the
timeframe for when the matter would be addressed and return to the City
Council.
Mayor Ridgeway suggested that the matter return to the City Council in ninety
days.
Council Member Heffernan noted that this would given the Parks, Beaches &
Recreation Commission an opportunity to study how the newly- enacted bans are
• working in the other cities.
Volume 56 - Page 924
City of New port Beach
Study Session Minutes
May 25, 2004
INDEX
City Manager Bludau suggested that it could return to the City Council in 120
days.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - None.
ADJOURNMENT - at 6:15 p.m.
The agenda for the Study Session was posted on May 18, 2004, at 2:15 p.m on
the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach
Administration Building.
0-9-*tt A��
Recording Secretary
Mayor
Q°RT eei
City Clerk
p
CALF c
Volume 56 - Page 925
•
J
•
•
•
SEW PART
WON
PB&R Commission Agenda
I*1cm No. «_
July 6, 2004
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT
Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission
General Services Director
Smokin.- on Piers and Benches
°eeommmmendat:ons
Support a no smoking ordinance that pertains to public piers, beaches, and certain other public
areas.
Designate certain areas for smokers on beaches and adjacent public areas. Equip designated
areas with smoking urns and support funding for the maintenance of the urns.
Issues
Should the City adopt a no smoking ordinance for public piers and/or beaches?
Should a no smoking ban be extended to areas adjacent to public beaches such as the
boardwalk, sidewalks, street ends, and public piers and Scats in the bay'?
What role would enforcement play in the reduction of smoking on piers, beaches, and
adjacent public areas?
What role, if any, should a public education program play in a no smoking ban?
Are current field maintenance activities and facilities sufficient to address litter related to
smokin.0
Should smoking areas be designated to permit smokers access to piers and beaches?
Background
Since the fall of 2003, various environmental groups have advocated a no smoking ban for City
piers and beaches.
Attachment D
Due to the increased attention to this issue by other beach cities and the State legislature, the
Council earlier directed a discussion of a smoking ban on public piers and beaches that took
place at the May 25, 2004 Council study session. is
The City Attorney's office prepared a comprehensive staff report that summarized the history
and progress on smoking bans by various beach cities (Attachment A).
After a lengthy discussion in which a number of new questions arose, the Council directed a
review of a no smoking proposal for public piers and beaches by the Parks, Beaches and
Recreation (PB &R) Commission. The results of the discussion and recommendations by the
Commission are to be returned to the Council by staff within 120 days. The minutes of the
Council study session are attached (Attachment B).
Discussion
City staff from the City Attorney's office and the Police and General Services Departments have
studied the issues and comments that surfaced at the Council study session, particularly the
health and litter issues. In addition, they have documented what other beach cities have or plan
to do with smoking bans on public beaches and piers. Finally, staff surveyed the piers and
beachfront public areas to define where smoking, or the litter from smoking is located, in order
to offer recommendations on specific steps to counter the effects of smoking on the general
public and the City.
Beach Citv Survev
The City, with its numerous natural resources, particularly the beaches and the system of public •
piers and floats, attracts a large percentage of the general public. However, like any beach city,
we must still address public behaviors or actions that degrade the natural atmosphere of public
areas. Staff has provided a matrix of past, current, or intended actions of other California beach
cities regarding a smoking ban ( Attachment Q.
As one can see by reviewing Attachment C, the trend of beach communities is toward banning
smoking on public piers and/or beaches. In addition to a no smoking ordinance, various levels of
enforcement, public education, and alternative maintenance activities associated with smoking-
litter are planned by beach cities.
Potential No Smoking Areas
Staff has developed a map of the City which identifies the two ocean piers, the ocean, beaches,
the bay beaches, the public pier and float system in the harbor, as well as numerous public
beaches on the islands and in the Upper Newport Bay (Attachment D). In addition, we have
provided a listing of public piers and floats, bay beaches_ ocean vista points, and bench locations.
We have also identified the areas of the greatest litter associated with smoking, such as public
piers and floats, bay beaches, and ocean or bayfront bench locations (Attachment E).
No Smoking Ordinance
The ultimate goal of a smoking ban ordinance is to reduce smoking- related litter on the beaches •
by increasing public awareness of the issue. The underlying theory is since people who smoke
-2-
on the beach have no means of lawfully disposing of their cigarette waste, a smoking prohibition,
with an increased public awareness of the prohibition and its related issues, will reduce the
frequency of cigarette- related litter. A key element for this assessment is the objective of
diminishing the frequency of the violation. The violation, whether it is a smoking or littering
ban, will not be eliminated but will occur less often. As with litter control models, the successful
smoking ban ordinance should combine public education, enforcement, providing appropriate
disposal receptacles, and maintenance. Through such a collective effort we should experience,
over time, a reduction in the amount of cigarette- related litter.
After a survey of public areas and hearing testimony of the public at the Council study session,
staff is favoring a no smoking ordinance for the public piers and floats (ocean and bay) and
certain portions of public beaches or adjacent public areas. At this time, we are not advocating a
smoking ban at all public outdoor areas.
Current Smoking Bans
Smoking is prohibited:
a) in restaurants and bars (State code)
b) on or near playgrounds (State code)
c) at entranceways to public buildings (State code)
d) in City restrooms (City code)
e) in City buildings and vehicles (City policy)
• Interest Groups
As noted in the Deputy City Attorney's study session report (Attachment A), a number of
organizations adamantly advocate a smoking ban on public piers and beaches. While it is
inconclusive and probably unlikely that second hand smoke on piers or beaches results in
tobacco related disease, smoking in public places is still found to be ohjertionable by the
majority of the general public. The Commission can expect a significant amount of public
comments from special interest groups regarding a smoking ban, including their current and
future roles in public education and litter removal.
Litter
The special interest groups who wish to see the City approve a smoking ban on the piers and
beaches also have focused on the amount of litter created by indiscriminate littering by smokers.
Beach maintenance staff focused on the cigarette butt litter issue late last year by modifying a
beach cleaner with a special filter screen capable of retrieving cigarette butts from ocean beach
sand. While the cleaner was highly effective in removing the cigarette butts from beach sand,
the downside was that much of natural beach materials (shells and gravel) that facilitate traction
for City beach vehicles was also removed.
Some of the special interest groups identify public smoking as the main source of cigarette or
• cigar butt liter or piers and beaches. Staff opines from considerable experience that smoki --
butt litter on the beach emanates primarily from the flotsam that drifts southward from the upper
Santa Ana River watershed to Newport beaches. In addition, much of the bayfront butt litter is
3-
also linked to the upper San Diego Creek watershed, and in some cases the boating public. If
staffs opinian is true, then a smoking ban on piers and beaches may only have a minimal effect
on the amount of litter caused by beach visitors. •
Litter Programs
Ln addition to the City full time pier and beach maintenance programs, there are the following
additional C :.ty litterprograms:
a) Adopt -A -Beach Program —Authorized by a recently revised Council policy, this program
is now managed for the City by a no smoking advocate, Stephanie Barger of Earth
Resources. After a recent kick -off event, over 50 citizens have volunteered to clean
public beaches with City provided kits.
b) Summer Beach Litter Program (Grant) — For the third consecutive summer, the City has
been the recipient of over 522,000 from the State to fund a beach litter program
associated with recycling interests. The funds will be used to hire laborers to pick up
litter on the beach and adjacent areas.
c) Youth Employment Program (YEP) — An annual summer program (June to later August)
wherein three to seven students are hired to collect litter on beaches and piers.
Limits of Proposed Smoking Ban
Attachment D provides an aerial view of public beaches and bay and ocean piers and floats. •
Attachment E` provides a listing of special public areas associated with ocean or bay fronts. Staff
has developed the following list of areas using the two attached resources where staff is
recommending that smoking should be prohibited:
Balboa and Newport Piers
Public: Floats and Piers in Harbor (10)
Oceanfront Beaches including Corona del Mar and Little Corona Beaches
Oceanfront Boardwalk
North and South Bayfront (Balboa Island)
East Bayfront (Little Balboa Island)
1S`" Bay Beach
Rhine Wharf
North Star Beach
Pirates Cove and China Cove Beaches
The Wedge
N Street Bay Beach
10`h Street Bay Beach
Marina Park Beach
Inspiration and Lookout Points
Designated Smoking Areas
In an effort to provide smokers an alternative to an ordinance violation, smoking areas should he •
designated, such as locations at the pier plaza areas and public benches along the various
-4-
boardwalks. Designated smoking areas are not recommended on the public piers clue to fire
hazards. Staff experience has been that smokers tend to occupy certain benches at street ends
• along the boardwalk and the installation of smoking urns and signage at those locations would be
beneficial. One should expect in some cases for adjacent property owners to protest designated
smoking areas. Staff would develop a list of designated smoking areas for Council approval.
Photographs of two varieties of urns for cigarette or cigar butt disposal are attached (Attachment
F). Examples of the urns will be displayed at the Commission meeting.
Enforcement
Enforcement is only one element of a multi - pronged approach to reduce litter on the beaches.
Should a no smoking ordinance be adopted, we anticipate it will be a period of time until there is
an increased awareness and corresponding shift in public attitudes. During that phase, there will
likely be an expectation from some members of the public to see a higher level of compliance
than what is practical. A smoking ban ordinance is difficult to enforce in a beach type of
environment. As with littering in such areas, people are not likely to corrnnit a violation when an
enforcement officer is present. So until we see the anticipated shift in public attitudes, there may
be increased frustration on the part of some of those same members of the public when they do
not see an immediate police response to their report of the offense. If the ban is adopted, police
officers will only be able to enforce such an ordinance during the normal course of their routine
patrol duties, just as they do now with other similar nuisance regulations. We would not
envision them to be dispatched to such a reported offense, but only advised of its occurrence so
they could attempt to observe it while patrolling in the affected area. Obviously, when police
officers do engage in enforcement activities related to this ordinance as part of their routine
• activities, those public safety resources are diverted from other, perhaps more important duties.
As it is now, police calls for service and enforcement responsibilities directly impacting public
safety will always have a priority over non - emergency enforcement activities such as the
enforcement of a no smoking ordinance.
Pubfic Education
Probably the most important aspect of a no smoking ban is the value that it conveys in raising
public awareness of the problems and hazards associated with smoking. Signage, passive
enforcement, and designated smoking areas may do more to negate the effects of public smoking
than active enforcement and a formal City public education program and at considerable less
cost. Numerous public education venues regarding smoking are promulgated by various
regulatory agencies by various public media and in most cases are paid for by tobacco
companies. In addition, as noted by the special interest groups, there is a groundswell of
emphasis by public media on the negative effects of smoking. The City should not be tasked to
undertake yet another regulatory or public education mandate other than a no smoking ordinance
with passive enforcement and an increased litter abatement program.
Costs
The costs of a smoking ban in public areas is based primarily on the level of enforcement of a
ban and the level of litter abatement. If a high level of enforcement is directed by the Council.
• the overtime, costs to address smoking violations will also detract from the normal role o`pub`
safety. Neither police, fire, nor lifeguard personnel have sufficient resources to address a full
-5-
time emphasis on banning smoking on piers and beaches. Earlier testimony by police staff noted
a probable 85% public compliance rate if a no smoking ordinance was enacted.
Estimated auxiliary costs for a smoking ban with passive enforcement would be as follows:
a) Modification of pier and beach ordinance signs to include new smoking S 5,000
ordinance
b) Purchase and installation of smokers' urns for butt disposal S 4,500
(S90 x 50 locations)
c) Annual cost to service smokers' tuns and signage S 12,500
d) Signage for designated smoker areas S 1,000
Total $23,000
.Ci w-mart/
In this report, staff has provided further background information related to a smoking ban and as
it might apply to the City public piers and beach areas. The goal of any no smoking ordinance
should be to raise public awareness of health and litter issues. Our recommendation is that the
Commission support a no smoking ordinance that would apply to certain public areas (as noted
above) to the Council as well as passive enforcement of the ordinance, designated smoking areas
with signage and urns, and future consideration of an enhanced City litter abatement program
that focuses on discarded cigarette or cigar butts if the various current litter programs do not
reduce the problem.
Very respectfully,
David E. Niederhaus
Attachments: (A) City Council Study Session Agenda Item SS -4 dated May 25, 2004
(B) City Council Study Session Minutes dated May 25, 2004
(C) Matrix of Beach Cities No Smoking Intentions /Actions (June 2004)
(D) City Map Depicting Public Piers/Beaches/Etc. (June 2004)
(E) Listing of City Piers and Floats, Benches, and Bay Beaches (June 2004)
(F) Photographs of Smoker's Urns
-6-
E
is
•
E
•
U
v
m
a
fD
fD
N
Cn
[D
Z
O
L (D
C N
J
[D �p
N -O
G ^ ^,
G9
U
' ^,
G^
G ^,
r
r
r
T
X71
ON
N
>
>
>
>
NO
(
n.
w
C7
3
Cr
D
D
:a
D
.
N
CC)
w
o
w
3
w
N
(D
Co
o
N
-
D
M
D
3
D
N
(D
CD
O
0'
N
W
CD
iD
3
N
O
_�
N
3
3
`G
�
O
3
I
H
O.
O
x
x
x
d
W
d
7
C
O
C
O.
a
�
x
H
W
d
x
x
x
x
m
a
x
x
W
v
m
W
x
N
_
a
W
`ry
61
d
W
W
.O
N
C7
W
m
(D
N
N
X
CL
O
[p'
N
3
�
N
v
O
►J
U
Attachment C
LISTING OF CITY PIERS AND FLOATS, BENCHES, AND BAY BEACHES
(June 2004)
PIERS •
Newport Pier — (2 donated benches, 40 wooden benches built in place)
Balboa Pier -- (8 donated benches, 15 wooden benches built in place)
PUBLIC FLOATS
Newport Peninsula
M Street & E. Balboa Blvd. (2 wooden benches built in place)
Washington St. & Edgewater Ave.
Fernando St. & Edgewater Ave. (2 wooden benches built) in place
15'h St. & Bav Ave.
19th St. & Bay Ave.
Balboa Island
Sapphire & N. Bayfront
Emerald & N. Bayfront
Opal & S. Bayfront •
Coral & S. Bayfront
Park Ave. & E. Bayfront
*All public floats on Balboa Island have two wooden benches built in place at top of gangway
BENCH LOCATIONS OCEANFRONT
Grant Street
36'h Street
34'h Street
32 "d Street
30'h Street
281h Street
26`h Street
15`h Street
81h Street
7'h Street
6`h Street
C Street
West Jett Park
BENCH LOCATIONS BAYFRONT BEACHES
K Street J Street H Street
Palm Street Adams Street Cypress Street
Buena Vista Blvd 71h Street 8'" Street
10'h Street 15'h Street Newport Island Park
Channel Park
*All bay fi-ort street ends on Balboa island have benches •
Attachment E
r7 ,
d Ptrice ._ . W44
1- %;
PHOTO OF ALTERNATIVE DEBRIS URN
Smokers' Cease -Fire $65.00 ea
268047 3915" h x 1715" &a. 15lbs. +
sryipp;p.a
Attachment F
•
E
•
CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH
Parks, Beaches Ft Recreation Commission
Regular Meeting
• July 6, 2004 - 7pm
Convened 7:09pm
ROLL CALL
Present:
Debra Allen
Tim Brown
Bill Garrett
Greg Ruzicka
Val Skoro
Tom Tobin
Roy Englebrecht (arrived at 7:17pm)
Staff: Marie Knight, Recreation li Senior Services Director
David Niederhaus, General Services Director
Teri Craig, Administrative Assistant
Chair Allen thanked the commission for electing her as chair twice and thanked Dave
Niederhaus and his staff, especially Marcy Lomeli and John Conway, noting the battle with
the tree issues and some very long hearings and a lot of hard work especially on tree issues.
The Council adopted the new G•1 Policy and noted that it never would have been done
without Dave and his staff. She also thanked Marie and her staff, Andrea and Teri, noting that
staff had held her hand through the whole two year process and thanked Teri stating people
•
just do not realize how much work staff does behind the scenes, which is how the Commission
is able to sound knowledgeable as so much of it is done for the Commission within the staff
reports, and phone calls that are answered. She went on to say how good Marie has made her
look with all speeches that she has written.
ELECTION OF OFFICERS
Chair Allen opened the nominations for Chair for FY 2004/05.
Motion by Commissioner Ruzicka to elect Commissioner Tobin as Chair.
Hearing no other nominations, Chair Allen closed the nominations for Chair
Ayes: Allen, Brown, Garrett, Ruzicka, Skoro
Absent Englebrecht
Abstain: Tobin
Chair Tobin opened the nominations for Vice Chair for FY 2004/05.
Motion by Chair Tobin to elect Commissioner Ruzicka as Vice Chair.
Hearing no other nominations, Chair Tobin closed the nominations for Vice Chair
• Ayes: Allen, Brown, Garrett, Ruzicka, Skoro
Absent Englebrecht
Abstain: Ruzicka
Attachment E
Parks, Beaches @ Recreation Commission
Regular Meeting
July 6, 2004
Page 2
COMMISSIONER ENGLEBRECHT ARRIVED AT 7:13PM
Commissioner Ruzicka thanked Commissioner Allen for her leadership and hard work over the
last two years.
Chair Tobin stated that Commissioner Allen would be a hard act to follow.
f�
DIRECTOR'S COMMENTS
Director Knight stated this last week was the Annual 4 "' of July Bicycle Parade and Picnic
Celebration at Mariners Park and thanked past Chair Allen for coming out and riding in the
parade and representing the Commission. She stated that there was a greater turn out then
last year and that the event is done in conjunction with the.Mariners Foundation, which staff
works closely with. She went on to say that staff had survived the first week of summer
programs with day camps up and running, and both pools open this summer for swim
programs. At the end of the first full week of summer more revenue has been taken in then
alt of last year for the summer season. She stated that there are two coordinator positions
open; one at OASIS and one for the contract classes and aquatics program; Jan Koriath has
moved to Seattle and Chris Peart is moving to Denver. She stated that the position at OASIS
has been filled and the new Coordinator will begin next week; however, after interviewing for
the Recreation Classes /Aquatics position it was decided that staff would wait until the end of
summer and re- interview, hoping to get a better pool of applicants. Director Knight went on
to say that the Commission may see a familiar face out at the pools as Jim Skahan has been •
hired as a temporary coordinator and will help in the supervision of the pool staff and as
liaison with field staff.
Commissioner Englebrecht asked if this was the first summer for the Park Patrol.
Director Knight stated yes, that they had started in October of last year and that staff will be
bringing a report at the September meeting.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Dona Colombero read the following on the fire rings on the peninsula:
That after the high tide, full moon, wind and large sea flooding near the Balboa
pier last month, residents were made painfully aware of the dangerous
condition being created by the present treatment of the fire rings here. That in
front of my house, where the water comes up the sidewalk there is still an area
of grey sand marking the exact course of the flood. Watering down and
shoveling some of the debris from the rings into a waiting truck, then
eventually raking the rest (including charcoal ashes and partially burned pallets)
into the existing sand to be sifted and distributed up and down the ocean front
is creating an escalating danger to all. Withthin the fire rings there are many
things that are not meant to be there such as nails, coat hangers, broken glass
and possible toxic materials. Every day the sports leagues, the Jr. Lifeguards •
and city sponsored programs and basically all visitors have no knowledge of
these hazards and they expect to be able to use all the facilities without
danger.
•
Parks, Beaches Et Recreation Commission
Regular Meeting
July 6, 2004
Page 3
She asked the Commission to undertake a study of the condition, perhaps enlisting experts in
the debris field and make a report with alternative plans for the removal of the fire pits.
Commissioner Ruzicka asked staff if there was some kind of state law that mandates that we
have those fire rings and that it is virtually out of our hands.
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. item Pulled by Commissioner Allen
2. item pulled by staff
3. Item Qulied by Commissioner Skoro
4. Bench Donation. Accept donation from Mary Kilfoy of one bench to be installed at the Newport Pier.
1. Minutes of the June 1. 2004 regular meeting. Commissioner Allen stated that she had
pulled this item as it would need to be recorded that she would be abstaining from voting on
the minutes as she had been absent.
Motion by Chair Tobin to approve the June 1, 2004 minutes. Motion carried as follows:
Ayes: Brown, Englebrecht Garrett, Ruzicka, Skoro, Tobin
Abstain: Allen
3. Recreation Ix Senior Services Activity Report. Commissioner Skoro asked what the
• schedule was for the park patrol.
Director Knight stated that the general schedule is anywhere between 4 -9pm during the week,
Fridays, 4-11 pm and weekends vary but that there is usually one on duty during the morning
and the other starting later in the afternoon. She stated that these hours are not posted but
we are generally covered during the evening during the weekdays and during the day to dusk
on the weekends.
Commissioner Skoro stated that he had heard from several people on Ocean Boulevard as it is
a very hard area to hand and that people it needs attention.
Director Knight stated that generally what staff is finding on Ocean Boulevard is that activity
increases around sunset and into the evening and that it is part of their patrols regular beat
and that they have noticed an increase in activity and they are out there on a regular basis.
Commissioner Ruzicka thanked staff for the revised park patrol report.
Director Knight reminded the Commission that this report is from May and would not reflect
the beginning of the summer as we are always two months behind in reporting.
2. Park 8t Tree Division Activity Report. Director Niederhaus stated that the City will be
receiving a half million dollars from the Coastal Conservancy for the design of the 55 acre Big
• Canyon Nature Park which is the same group that helped with the native plantings at
Castaways and with help staff will be able to build that park with further grant money. He
went on to say that the May Beach Maintenance report had been included to the Commission's
review and that it was the most current copy. Director Niederhaus noted that some minor
Parks, Beaches 8 Recreation Commission
Regular Meeting
July 6, 2004
Page 4
vandalism had been done at the Bonita Canyon Sports Park during the 4'h of July weekend with •
the exception of minor graffiti in the restrooms.
Commissioner Garrett thanked staff for the inclusion of the Beach Maintenance report.
Discussion ensued regarding the graffiti and the possibility of cameras within the parks.
Motion by Chair Tobin to receive and approve Items 2 through 4 of the Consent Calendar. Motion
carried by acclamation.
CONTINUING BUSINESS
5. Smokine on Piers and Beaches - Director Niederhaus introduced Deputy City Attorney Dan
Ohl and two representatives from the Police Department who are available to comment on
the enforcement issue and Mr. Ohl is here for the legal side. He stated that since the
report has been prepared, no correspondence has been received and noted that this was a
little unusual for an item as controversial as this, however, staff have been in contact
with the individuals that spoke at the Council meeting and invited them and shared the
staff report with them, and there have been some inquiries from the media. He reviewed
the important issues of the staff report with the Commission and noted that the report. is
specifically for prohibiting smoking on public piers and beaches as this is what the Council
directed the Commission and staff to look at. He stated that staff is making two •
recommendations:
• To support a no smoking ordinance that pertains to public piers, beaches and
certain other public areas.
• Designate certain areas for smokers on beaches and adjacent public areas. Equip
designated areas with smoking urns and support funding for the maintenance of
the urns.
He stated that a question had come up on whether these recommendations were
individual or collective and stated that staff is recommending both. He stated that the
first is a no smoking ordinance and the other is to designate certain areas in a fairness
issue for smokers as well as to have a place for them to legally abandon their smoking
materials staff felt is was necessary to identify places they frequent and then provide
smoking urns and some maintenance of that area. He reviewed the issues of the staff
report with the commission. He stated that if there were other issues that the Commission
wanted to add that staff would be happy to do that. Director Niederhaus stated that this
whole issue began in the fall of 2003 with litter clean ups and when different groups
began to notice the high number of cigarette butts on the beach and the issue was
brought to Council on May 25, 2004 at which time they studied the report by Mr. Ohl and
decided that this item should be forwarded to the Commission for study and staff is
required to return to Council in 120 days. He stated that one of the first things that was
done was to update the beach survey and looked at like cities and others that have
initiated some kind of no smoking ordinance. Director Niederhaus stated that staff then •
looked at potential no smoking areas, and what area that smoking should be prohibited,
and of course the two main ocean piers came to mind and staff then looked at the pier
and beach amenities such as benches where staff has noticed that there is always smoking
debris left there. He went on to say that a no smoking ordinance has not been developed
Parks, Beaches Et Recreation Commission
Regular Meeting
July 6, 2004
Page 5
isbut staff has copies from other cities and a copy of the Assembly Bill that would prohibit
smoking on state beaches. He stated that this is something that needs to be done and that
the prohibited areas should be narrowed down. He stated that in areas where smoking is
already prohibited, such as restaurants and bars by state code, and are on or near
playgrounds. Also you will notice that there are signs at the entrance that state that you
must stay 20 feet away from the opening when smoking. He stated in City vehicles and
buildings. He stated that there are three interest groups here tonight. He went on to say
that staff also focused on the auxiliary issue of litter.
Director Niederhaus stated that adjacent homeowners of any designated smoking area
might have problems because of the smoke or people congregating there. He stated that
they are treading very softly on that issue, and went on to say that the big issue is
enforcement and stated that he would like to give credit to CPT Newman that wrote the
paragraph on enforcement and emphasize that a smoking ban ordinance is difficult to
enforce in a beach type environment and if the ban is adopted, police officers will only
cite during the normal course of their routine patrol just as they do now with other
nuisance issues.
Chair Allen stated that she had some concerns that the businesses around the piers had
not been notified of the issue and that it would be helpful to get feedback from them
before a recommendation is sent back to Council.
• Commissioner Brown stated that he fully supports a no smoking ordinance but that it
would be helpful to hear from the residents that live adjacent to the designated areas
listed in the staff report. He asked if it was essential to designate smoking areas and if so
wouldn't we want input from those residents/ businesses that live close to those areas and
if the Commission recommended approval would those designated areas listed in the
report be the ones that would be forwarded to City Council.
Director Niederhaus stated that areas have not been specifically designated and as you
can see there are 90 of them listed. Staff has been looking at the 12 -14 bench areas along
the boardwalk and staff has not contacted the Balboa BID or West Newport, Central
Balboa Homeowners' Associations or the BPPA, and thought that this was just a
preliminary discussion as staff was unclear if the Commission would refer the issue to the
Beach Committee for further study and staff did not want to be so specific in the first go
round, but would like to be reasonable to smokers as well.
Chair Tobin asked if there were options of the design of the urns other than what has been
provided.
Commissioner Skoro asked if there was feedback from other cities relative to comparing
absolute enforcement of the ban into passive enforcement, and has it actually deterred
smoking?
• Director Niederhaus stated that staff has talked to San Clemente but would refer this to
Mr. Ohl.
Parks, Beaches Et Recreation Commission
Regular Meeting
July 6, 2004
Page 6
Commissioner Skoro asked Director Niederhaus of the Assembly Bill status and what •
beaches would it effect if passed.
Director Niederhaus stated that the Assembly Bill had been distributed and would get the
timeline in a few minutes
Commissioner Skoro asked if there was any feedback on the legal issue of the no smoking
ban.
Deputy City Attorney Ohl stated that research has been done in conjunction with this issue
and contacted other jurisdictions, no one has been able to come up with a case or a
statute anywhere that states that anyone has a constitutional right right to smoke. He
stated that every jurisdiction that he has talked to regarding enforcement will be using
passive enforcement and that no one knows how this will work. The only exception to that
is Santa Monica as they have indicated that they will be aggressively enforcing the issue.
Commissioner Englebrecht asked Mr. Ohl if he believes that the burr might just be the
designated smoking areas or had staff any information of what other cities had done with
designating smoking areas.
Mr. Ohl stated that San Clemente has an area at the base of the pier adjacent to a
restaurant much like what Commissioner Allen made reference to, but other than that is •
unaware of designated areas where people are allowed to smoke but rather designated
areas where they are not allowed to smoke. He stated that if we displace them off the
beach, that smokers are going to go elsewhere.
Commissioner Englebrecht stated that he would like to know what cities have designate
smoking areas and where are they located and asked that staff research that issue.
Chair Tobin opened the public discussion
Jim Walker, Director of STOP Tobacco Abuse of Minors and commended City staff for the
great work and stated that he has worked with many cities on this issue and is here to
answer any questions that the commission might have. He stated that he has information
on civil liberties and noted that that your right to smoke ends at someone else's nose.
Narcis Kabiri, Health Education Association from the County of Orange Tobacco Use
Prevention Program, distributed information on tobacco use and a fact sheet. She stated
that the Seal Beach and Santa Barbara pier, Santa Monica beach, Pasadena parks are
smoke free without any designated areas. She stated that the boardwalk in Santa Cruz is
smoke free and are looking to expand that area.
Commissioner Allen asked if there is a concern that should the City designate a fixed area
that the smokers will move the problem adjacent and asked for guidance on that and do •
they find that the problems occurs away from the pier.
Ms. Kabiri stated that these cities have completely banned it so they do not have that
problem. She stated that they did work with businesses and restaurants and that
Parks, Beaches Et Recreation Commission
Regular Meeting
July 6, 2004
Page 7
• restaurant's were able to designate a particular smoking area outside. She stated that it
becomes easier to make it completely smoke free then have a smoking area here and
there because every beach is laid out differently.
Carolyn Wilkinson, Newport Harbor High School stated that she believes that self policing
wilt work and that people may still smoke if the police are not around to ticket them but
people for the most part are law abiding, and that if they see a sign that says no smoking,
that most will follow that direction. She presented the 13,000 cigarette butts picked up
from the beach back in April by the pier.
Amy Brewer, Community Alliance Network distributed a letter urging the support of the
ordinance and stated that as a resident she also supports no smoking on the beach.
Leslie Serrel, Oncology Education Coordinator at Hoag Cancer Center and on behalf of
Medical Director Dr. Bob Dittman urged the support for any smoking cessation that this
City can help with.
Chair Tobin closed the public discussion
Commissioner Englebrecht stated that smoking was allowed many years ago anywhere,
then no smoking areas were designated in restaurants and on airlines and now studies
• have come out and stated that second hand smoke is as much of a killer as smoking and so
now we have no smoking in restaurants and bars. He is encouraged that most cities do not
have designated areas for smoking and stated that he would be hard pressed to come up
with designated areas and would be more inclined to say "smoke free beaches." There is
no need to provide designated areas for smoking.
Commissioner Allen stated that we need to find out how the residents along the ocean
front would feel if there were smoking areas and noted that we are a different than San
Clemente, but added that she is not abdicating smoking areas as she would not want to
live next door to one. She stated that she is concerned that since we have 11.8 linear
miles of beach of that 6.5 miles is ocean and 5.5 bay beaches and hoped that staff would
encourage homeowners, HOA and business associations for any ideas and comments and
asked staff to research other cities for information on whether it has affected tourism.
Commissioner Ruzicka asked if the smoking companies had tried to ban these ordinances.
Mr. Ohl stated that he was unaware of any of the national tobacco companies intervening
and in fact some of the literature gathered from the web sites has been just the opposite
stating that they are supportive of these type of efforts.
Commissioner Brown stated his support of Commissioner's Allen and Englebrecht
comments. He asked if they could recommend on one of the recommendation without the
• other.
Director Niederhaus stated yes.
Parks, Beaches 8 Recreation Commission
Regular Meeting
July 6, 2004
Page 8
Commissioner Brown stated again that he supports a no smoking ordinance but is not •
ready to reject the idea of designated smoking areas. He stated that he is leaning that
way but since there is time, more information is needed on what impacts negative and
positive that designated smoking areas could have.
Commissioner Ruzicka asked if we could table this.
Commissioner Skoro asked that if and when this is passed on to Council and assuming that
smoking areas are designated would we need to specify those areas in the
recommendation?
Director Niederhaus stated that a couple of routes could be taken. If the Commission is in
favor of a no smoking ordinance and the issue is the second recommendation, but
remembering that staff is trying to be fair to smokers by giving them an outlet and to
address litter issue and to have signs posted. He stated that there is no ownership of the
designated area paragraph, which is why staff did not list those specifically, but if they
had, staff would have notified HOA and business associations at that time.
Commissioner Englebrecht again stated that there is no need to even discuss designated
areas.
Commissioner Garrett stated that designated areas could open a huge can of worms and •
that it it is not a good idea, but possibly an area on each of the piers for fisherman coutd
be designated, also commented that the floats should be addressed. He went on to say
that we should look at this more quickly than later.
Commissioner Skoro asked how long staff would need to address these issues.
Director Niederhaus stated that he would be ready for next month.
Motion by Commissioner Skoro to table this issue until August for action.
Commissioner Ruzicka asked if staff would notice all that would be influenced by such an
ordinance.
Director Niederhaus stated that they would notify HOA's and business associations as we ".l.
He also stated that staff would withdraw the second recommendation if that is the
direction of the Commission.
Commissioner Allen stated that the recommendation should stay as is because the
commission would receive more response from the community.
Commissioner Ruzicka asked that the motion be restated.
Commissioner Skoro stated that his motion was to table the issue until August with stated •
recommendations as is.
Motion carried by acclamation.
•
Parks, Beaches Ft Recreation Commission
Regular Meeting
July 6, 2004
Page 9
OLD BUSINESS
6. Committee Reports
• Finance - Commissioner Garrett stated that they met with Director Knight several
weeks ago and approved the budget.
• Park Development - Commissioner Skoro stated that the next meeting would be July 20
at 8:30am in the Fire Conference Room and asked the Commission to notice the
grading that has been going on at Upper Bayview at Jamboree and Coast Highway. He
stated that enhancement information had been given at the June meeting and
hopefully within a year the park would be completed.
• Rec & Open Space Element - Nothing to report.
• Recreation Activities - Nothing to report.
• Seniors - Director Knight stated that City staff is still meeting with the Friends and
that nothing has been finalized.
• Beach Activities - Commissioners Garret thanks staff for the inclusion of Beach
Maintenance as part of the monthly Parks & Tree Activity Report.
• Ad Hoc
- Community Service Award - Director Knight asked the Commission for any
recommendations and stated that press release would be done requesting
nominations from the community.
• - Youth Sports Liaison - Nothing to report
FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
• Smoking on the Beach & Piers - August
• Donation Brochure- September
• Irvine Terrace Park Encroachment
• Review of Council Policy G -5 possibly requiring approval of HOA where benches will be Installed or
gage number of benches in parks.
• Liability Aspects at Marina Park
• Ordinance 11.04 — Conduct in Parks
• Special Tree Committee appointment - October
• Staff report on Fire Rings
ADJOURNMENT - 8:37pm
Submitted by:
f►J
Teri Craig, Admin Assistant
•
•
PB &R Commission Agenda
Item No. _7
August 3, 2004
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Parks, Beaches and Recreation Commission
General Services Director
Smoking on Piers and Beaches
Recommendation
Support a no smoking ordinance that pertains to public piers, beaches, and certain other public
areas.
Additional Possibilities
1. Designate certain public areas for smokers on public beaches and piers and equip those
areas with signage and smoking ums. Support funding for the maintenance of the ums.
or
2. Equip certain public areas near or adjacent to public beaches and piers with signage and
smoking urns for the purpose of litter control.
Background
Staff provided the attached report to the Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission (PB &R) on
July 6 (Attachment A). A copy of the minutes of that meeting are also attached (Attachment B).
After considerable discussion of the issues and recommendations as well as listening to public
input, the PB &R Commission unanimously supported the primary staff recommendation of a no
smoking ordinance for public piers, beaches, and certain other public areas. The Commission
was hesitant to support the second staff recommendation of designating certain areas for
smoking on or adjacent to the public beaches without further information. The Commission also
requested staff to poll businesses and business associations on their perception of the effects on
City tourism should the Council approve a no smoking ban on public piers and beaches.
Discussion
Designated Smoking Areas
Staff reviewed the history of placing benches along the ocean boardwalk as a means of assessing
resistance to designating certain rest areas on the oceanfront boardwalk as designated smoking
areas. In addition, in conversation with at least one oceanfront residents' association, it was clear
•
that designating boardwalk benches as designated smoking areas would not be acceptable to
Attachment F
adjacent property owners. Staff has retracted their recommendation that smoking areas be •
designated, but has retained the alternative for Commission consideration (Alternative 1).
The only locations for designated smoking areas that seem to be acceptable and appropriate are
the ends of the asphalt walkways that extend from the ocean boardwalk toward the ocean. There
are eight of those walkways along the ocean beach extending from Orange Avenue to Balboa
Pier. A smoking um could be installed in the center of the cul de sac end of the walkway along
with signage at four of the eight walkways. In addition to the walkway proposal, staff
recommends that urns be placed at a number of other public locations or oceanfront boardwalk,
to combat litter. The attached listing of the walkways and recommended um locations is
provided (Attachments C and D).
The three residents' associations (West, Central, and BPPA) have been noticed of the
Commission review of the issue of designating smoking areas along the oceanfront.
Urns
Smoking urns are available in either plastic or masonry materials. Staff favors the masonry
model for durability and appearance. The total cost per um is $185. A model will be displayed
at the Commission meeting. The recommended um is already in use at the base of the San
Clemente Pier.
Costs •
The original staff report to PB &R (Attachment A) provided a cost estimate of $23,000 for
signage changes, urns, and um maintenance which coincides with Alternative 1 provisions. If
the Commission supports a no smoking ordinance and Alternative 2 above, the total cost would
be reduced to $13,214 (see Attachments C and D).
The cost for Alternative 2 is as follows:
-
1
1 yr x.`�. • ..Y: -""`_�-r. -,i 1�gL.l %�.}�!�Y 7i :: IIC1;j�S�j. - :_d;� /�lY aai '
•n .. •.o �i .11 11
RA
Total
I
If neither Alternative is approved by the Council, the total cost of the no smoking ban will be
approximately $2,000 to apply no smoking decals to existing regulatory signage.
Effects on Tourism
Staff has referred the question of effects on tourism or businesses of a City no smoking ban to •
the Economic Development Committee, the two Chambers of Commerce, the Newport Visitors
-2-
• and Business Bureau, and the oceanfront businesses from 22 Id Street to A Street. All entities
were noticed of the pending issues and the PB &R Commission hearing.
Update of No Smoking Ban
Since the July PB &R Commission meeting, other beach cities are considering or approving no
smoking bans as well. In northern California, Santa Cruz and Capitola are now considering
smoking bans on beaches. Since the Commission meeting on July 6, the City of Huntington
Beach has approved a no smoking ordinance. Staff will provide an oral update of legislation
related to a no smoking ban to the Commission on August 3.
Limits of Proposed Smoking Ban
Attachment C provides a listing of special public areas associated with ocean or bay fronts.
Attachment D provides an aerial view of public oceanfront beaches and ocean piers. Staff has
developed the following list of areas using the two attached resources where staff is
recommending that smoking should be prohibited:
Balboa and Newport Piers
Public Floats and Piers in Harbor (10)
Oceanfront Beaches including Corona del Mar and Little Corona Beaches
Oceanfront Boardwalk
• North and South Bayfront (Balboa Island)
East Bayfront (Little Balboa Island)
19t° Bay Beach
Rhine Wharf
North Star B each
Pirates Cove and China Cove Beaches
The Wedge
N Street Bay Beach
10`h Street Bay Beach
Marina Park Beach
Inspiration and Lookout Points (only non beach locations)
Summary
Staff continues to support a no smoking ban on public ocean and bay piers, ocean and certain bay
beaches, and certain other public areas as detailed above.
In addition, staff has provided the two proposals of designating smoking areas on or adjacent to
public beaches (Alternative 1) or only equipping other public areas with signage and smoking
urns (Alternative 2). Staff favors Alternative 2 primarily to combat litter.
Very respectfully,
David E. Niederhaus
-3-
0
Attachments:
(A) Smoking on Piers and Beaches PB &R Commission Agenda dated July 6, 2004
(B) .Minutes of the July 6, 2004 PB &R Commission Meeting
(C) Proposed Um and Designated Smoking Locations
(D) Map of Oceanfront
•
11
4-
0
July 22, 2004
TO: General Services Director
FROM: Operations Support Superintendent
SUBJECT: Proposed Urn and Designated Smoking Locations
Staff feels that designated smoking areas could be placed at the end of the asphalt walkways
(fingers) leading on to the beach, thus keeping these areas away from residential properties. The
walkways are located at the following street ends along the oceanfront:
➢
Orange Street
➢
20`h Street
➢
12 1h Street
I I`h Street
Island Street
➢ (2) East and West sides of the Balboa Pier
• "v B Street
The following are locations that staff feels would be appropriate sites for smoking urns:
➢ (2) McFadden Plaza
r Base of Balboa Pier
r 15`h Street and Oceanfront Sidewalk
(2) Corona del Mar Main Beach
➢ (5) Oceanfront Street Ends with benches at 36`h 34`h , 32nd 28`h 26`h Streets
Wedge and Oceanfront — at the start of walkway to beach
Rick Greaney
•
Attachment C
•
Parks, Beaches Et Recreation Commission
Regular Meeting
August 3, 2004
Page 4
Donated for Penny Weiner Myers and Donated by Isidore Myers) Motion carried by the following
vote:
Ayes: Brown, Englebrecht, Garrett, Ruzicka, Skoro
Nays: Allen, Tobin
Motion by Chair Tobin to receive and approve Items 1 through 3 and 5 of the Consent Calendar.
Motion carried by acclamation.
CONTINUING BUSINESS
7. Smoking on Piers and Beaches - Director Niederhaus stated that staff supports the following
recommendation:
Support a no smoking ordinance that pertains to public piers, beaches, and certain other public
areas.
Additional Possibilities:
• Designate certain areas for smokers on beaches and adjacent public areas. Equip
designated areas with smoking urns and support funding for the maintenance of the urns.
OR
• Equip certain public area near or adjacent to public beaches and piers with signage and
smoking urns for the purpose of litter control.
Director Niederhaus stated that it seemed to him that it had been generally unanimous from the
last meeting that the Commission was in favor of a ordinance but not with naming designated
areas. He reported that notices of the meeting had been mailed to residents and businesses from
the west end of McFadden Square and A Street had been notified and had received no response.
Commissioner Englebrecht stated that he is not in favor of designated smoking areas and
suggested that the "urns" will not enhance the beautification of the area.
Director Niederhaus stated that there needs to be something as most people are reluctant to put
out there cigarettes in trash cans as it is a fire hazard.
Commissioner Ruzicka stated that he agrees with Commissioner Englebrecht.
Commissioner Garrett stated that no one will want an areas around there home to be a
designated smoking area and or urns. He went on to suggest that a recommendation be made to
the Harbor Commission regarding smoking on the bay and the harbor floats.
Chair Tobin opened the public hearing
• Marta Hayden, Newport Beach Visitors 8 Conference Bureau stated that she could find no reason
that a ban of this sort would cause a deterrent in tourism but that the reality is that there is a
litter problem and something should be done about that.
Attachment G
Parks, Beaches & Recreation Commission
Regular Meeting
August 3, 2004
Page 5
Richard Luehrs, Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce stated that he had contacted many
business owners and that none had a problem with the banning of smoking. He commented that
regarding the enforcement issue it would be preferred not to have headlines about enforcing the
no smoking rule but it be enforced by complaint only.
Dennis Baker, Arts Commission, stated that the urns on display here are hideous and suggested
that more investigation be made in ones that work and look good within the City.
The following people spoke in support of a ban on smoking at the beach and opposed any
designated smoking areas, that visual clutter is also a concern:
Stephanie Barger; Earth Resources
Jim Walker
Nancy Skinner
Elle Erpenbeck
Louise Fundenberg
Kay Mortenson
Karla Duesterberg
Christine Crahan
Alexander Machowsky
Jesse Low
Wendy Brooks
Ray Halowski, Surfrider Foundation stated that the Commission is focusing on the wrong issue
that litter is the issue, cigarettes right or wrong are legal and we just need to get people to
change their habits.
Discussion ensued regarding the "urns" and the consensus was that they should be called
receptacles and that the ones displayed at the meeting will not work and that staff should
investigate other receptacles.
Chair David Colley, Arts Commission offered guidance from the Arts Commission regarding
smoking receptacles.
Chair Tobin closed the public hearing
Chair Tobin stated that it seemed that no one was in favor of the types of receptacles displayed
here at the meeting.
Motion by Commissioner Ruzicka to:
• Support a no smoking ordinance on the beach
• Not designate smoking areas.
• Investigate the best placement for smoking receptacles.
• Investigate alternative types of smoking receptacles.
Motion carried by unanimous vote.
OLD BUSINESS
•
•
•
•
E
C V
N O
EN
r
m M
N
� y
7
N 7
V Q
2
N
f0
N
C
N
T
L
N
t0
CL
a
Attachment H
Y
f/1
�
3
my
O
N
T
N
O
V
x
x
m
m
m
m
a
m
f0
Q7
Q
C4
x
N
N
m
...
x
CX.
m
d
X
x
m
x
x
x
e
�o
m
Y
N
G
x
Q
a
m
Y
>°
e'
W
ro
a
x
x
m
a
N
G
O
U
T
c
U
U
00
mU
U
(D
@
m
�p
N
N
m
C
m
�?
O
O
N
'Q
3
C
C
N
C
U
N
m
o�
@
m
o�
o�
(D
m
U
a@i
@
m
c
c
Q
Q
n
t
U
m
m
ca
ca
U
C
m
N
N
c
m
m
m
m
m
m
N
O
W
7:
J
J
J
0
0
0
0
(n
(n
C V
N O
EN
r
m M
N
� y
7
N 7
V Q
2
N
f0
N
C
N
T
L
N
t0
CL
a
Attachment H
C
Y
F
t
U
F
ro
t.
L
Smoking Receptacle Models
• A B C D
•
•
212lbs/$514
E
146lbs/$147
2151bs/S230
F
93lbs/$180
H I J
1 Olbs/$78
1 Olbs /$83
270lbs/$230
Ash cover
keeps
cigarette
waste
contained
and out of
sight
35lbs/$169
35lbs/$347
Attachment J
City of Newport Beach NO. BA- 009
BUDGET AMENDMENT
2004 -05 AMOUNT: $�s,000.00
FECT ON BUDGETARY FUND BALANCE:
Increase Revenue Estimates Increase in Budgetary Fund Balance
X Increase Expenditure Appropriations AND X Decrease in Budgetary Fund Balance
Transfer Budget Appropriations No effect on Budgetary Fund Balance
SOURCE:
from existing budget appropriations
from additional estimated revenues
NX from unappropriated fund balance
EXPLANATION:
This budget amendment is requested to provide for the following:
To increase expenditure appropriations due to no smoking ordinance that pertains to public piers and beaches.
ACCOUNTING ENTRY:
Amount
BUDGETARY FUND BALANCE Debit Credit
Fund Account Description
010 3605 General Fund Fund Balance $19,000.00
REVENUE ESTIMATES (3601)
isFund /Division Account Description
EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATIONS (3603)
Division Number
Account Number
Automatic System Entry.
Signed:
Financial Approval Administrative Services Director Q ate
Signed: z,
q Administrative pproval: City Manager Date
gned:
City Council Approval: City Clerk Date
Attachment K
Description
Division
Number
3140
General Services - Operations Support
Account
Number
7040
Overtime - Miscellaneous
$12,325.00
Division
Number
3140
General Services - Operations Support
Account
Number
7425
Medicare - Fringe
$175.00
Division
Number
3140
General Services - Operations Support
Account
Number
8170
Maintenance - Beach Cleaning
$6,500.00
Division Number
Account Number
Automatic System Entry.
Signed:
Financial Approval Administrative Services Director Q ate
Signed: z,
q Administrative pproval: City Manager Date
gned:
City Council Approval: City Clerk Date
Attachment K
City of Newport Beach 1��. ��.- �: � S
BUDGET AMENDMENT
2004 -05 AMOUNT: $19,000.00
EFFECT ON BUDGETARY FUND BALANCE:
Increase Revenue Estimates Increase in Budgetary Fund Balance
X Increase Expenditure Appropriations AND X Decrease in Budgetary Fund Balance
Transfer Budget Appropriations No effect on Budgetary Fund Balance
SOURCE:
from existing budget appropriations
from additional estimated revenues
X from unappropriated fund balance
EXPLANATION:
This budget amendment is requested to provide for the following:
To increase expenditure appropriations due to no smoking ordinance that pertains to public piers and beaches
ACCOUNTING ENTRY:
BUDGETARY FUND BALANCE
Fund Account Description
010 3605 General Fund Fund Balance
REVENUE ESTIMATES (3601)
Fund /Division Account
EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATIONS (3603)
Description
Division Number
Account Number
Signed: (f • 4
Signed:
Signed
Financial Approval: Administrative Services Director
City Council Approval:
Amount
Debit Credit
$19,000.00 *
Automatic
$12,325.00
$175.00
$6,500.00
ate
Date
Description
Division
Number
3140
General Services - Operations Support
Account
Number
7040
Overtime - Miscellaneous
Division
Number
3140
General Services - Operations Support
Account
Number
7425
Medicare - Fringe
Division
Number
3140
General Services - Operations Support
Account
Number
8170
Maintenance - Beach Cleaning
Division Number
Account Number
Signed: (f • 4
Signed:
Signed
Financial Approval: Administrative Services Director
City Council Approval:
Amount
Debit Credit
$19,000.00 *
Automatic
$12,325.00
$175.00
$6,500.00
ate
Date
kof
IL it
u
w
I
iLh ; I
w
b
'•a
ii
rif.
Y
'!�•
'�d'� : t'.
• ^.'� {.
t..pp `j.
:Sit
I
iLh ; I
w
rpmref
I.
2" -
t . . I . I., ,
W, .
At
Ste«
iA l.
.I ,
..w
�rJ
,f
- Y
. .:�t�_ �•f7
of, .
zt
';:�
.... .. ..4...
;pt.;. Vr :.nC .. ' p
• . v'' u �;�.. �
� �.
l '��:
,' r
�`;. ..
..
.'t
f i
.
� �
'
Yt%d'iY �$� . ' ��t� . t
� �
..a�s
.�t...• _
Illlilfl
In
, ot
T�tmail -
Page 4 of 5
CIA
'J1�
http: //by l 8fd.bay 18. hotmail. msn. com/ cgi- binlgetmsg ?curmbox= F000000001 &a= 420899c2... 6/3/2004
Ohl, Daniel
From: RCTelecom @aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 9:27 AM
To: dohl @city.newport- beach.ca.us
Page 1 of 1
"RECEIVED AFTER AGENDA
PRINTED:" A:� 2 2 -P L °Y
IV D
•04 Al 24 P 3 :00
Subject: Smoking Ban OFFICE OF fiE CITY CLERK
CITY OF t,.WPORT BEACH
This is really going too far. I am a smoker who happens to take every cigarette with me when I leave the beach.
Also, there are no ashtrays at the beach for smokers to begin with. I have always been aware of where I smoke
and do not litter. What about all the styrofoam cups at the beach? Are we going to ban having a coffee at the
beach next? I do not support this ban and will not come to Newport again if it passes. I have enjoyed going to
Newport for over 20 years and I can take my business elsewhere. Why put ashtrays at the beach after the ban,
this is again another backwards approach of our government at work.
Thank you,
Louise Fiduccia
(714) 434 -3574
08/24/2004
ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR
OF SMOKE -FREE BEACHES
Dear Newport Beach City Council Members,
Thank you for demonstrating the leadership and decision making responsibilities of your office in protecting
the health and well being of your community.
Jim Walker
Director
Stop Tobacco Abuse of Minors Pronto (STAMP)
WATER QUALITY:
Ordinance demonstrates to State the intention to comply with California clean water policies.
What future cigarette butt litter there may be can be said to largely originate from up stream communities that
should themselves now do a better job of managing their own pollution run off.
Newport Beach maintains leadership role in State clean water efforts.
CIVIL LIBERTIES
The United States Constitution does not guarantee smoker's rights. What the US Constitution does say is "... all
men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these
are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted anions
men..
With this in mind and "in writing ":
1.) Consider, there is no other more preventable cause for the loss of life today than that caused by tobacco use.
(Approximately 435, 000 Americans die from tobacco use each year — that's essentially a death toll comparable to
a "9 -11 World Trade Center - each week. ")
2.) Consider, how liberty has been sadly confused with indulging in an addition, which by definition restricts
an individual's ability to exercise their personal freedom.
(Some 60% of smokers say they would prefer not to smoke.)
3.) Consider, how the "pursuit of happiness" has been sadly used to justify drug use.
4.) And then consider that right after the Constitution defines it's purpose, it clarifies that government's role is not
to abdicate the responsibility of decision making but in deed, to make secure the lives, freedom to choose and
happiness of it's citizens.
ENFORCEMENT:
Newport Police Department has said this ordinance should meet with at least 85% voluntary compliance, which is
a significant success and a tremendous reduction in cigarette butt litter.