HomeMy WebLinkAbout - Public CommentsComments on April 12, 2019 City Council Agenda Items
Comments by: James M. Mosher( limmosher(cDyahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport
Beach 92660 (949- 548 -6229)
Item II.0 (Closed Session Evaluation of City Manager and Clerk)
On its web pages at http: // documents .latimes.com /sunshine /meetings/ the LA Times' open
government consultants recommend "citizens keep an eye out for personnel evaluations
conducted in closed sessions ... frequent or ongoing evaluation of a top staff member, such as
a city manager, would be unusual." In Newport Beach, the City Manager and City Clerk have
both been "evaluated" in closed session at every Council Meeting so far this year.
Item XII.13.3 (Environmental Cleanup Grant Program)
According to the staff report, this resolution will be attached to several grant applications which,
if successful, will commit approximately $125,000 from the City's Capital Improvements Projects
fund. Although the resolution states that "The City Council has reviewed and supports the
proposal" no specific proposal is attached, and indeed the tense used to make this request
suggests no proposals have yet been written. It would seem prudent to defer passage of this
resolution until the Council (and public) can actually review the applications being supported.
Items XII.13.6 & 7 (Employment Agreements with City Manager and Clerk)
Section 3 of the proposed contracts says they can be amended by future Council resolutions
affecting a group called "Executive Management Employees." In the similar contract of City
Attorney David R. Hunt (C -4131, December 2010) the same group is referred to as "Senior
Management Employees." To avoid confusion in referring to this group, it would seem wise to
use the same language in all contracts following this model. Rather than modifying the present
contracts, it might be noted the Hunt contract was adopted and executed prior to the effective
date of the Measure V Charter amendments -- at a time when the Council did not have the
power to bind the City to contracts of indefinite length, as the Hunt contract is scheduled to
become on July 1st. Perhaps-the language of the Hunt contract can be made consonant with
the present two when and if it is readopted.
Item XVI.12 (Aviation Committee)
There are numerous problems with the membership of the Aviation Committee as currently
proposed:
April 12, 2011 Council Meeting comments by Jim Mosher Page 2 of 2
Council Policy A -9 requires matters such as the time of appointment of citizen members,
their term of membership and the number of terms an individual can serve to be
addressed in the enabling resolution. None of these are currently addressed. For
reference, on Council committees and citizen's advisory committees the term of
membership is normally 1 year (A -9). For citizen members of boards and commissions it
is 4 years (Charter Sec. 702), with a limit of two full terms (Council Policy A -2).
2. Similarly, the person responsible for appointing the "resident of the Newport Coast" (if
required) and the "member of the General Aviation Community" is not specified.
3. It is also unclear if the members to be appointed by Council district are to be selected
from the normal pool of citizen applicants for committee service or from some other
source.
4. The role of the 7 "alternates" from the Council districts is undefined. Are the alternates
full voting members expected to attend and vote at each meeting? Or are they expected
to attend and vote only if they are informed that the primary member will be absent?
Alternatively, are they expected to attend every meeting but allowed to vote only if the
primary member is absent? Does their membership lapse if they do not attend meetings
where they are not needed?
Item XVI.13 (Special Events Advisory Committee)
1. It seems highly inappropriate to have applications screened by committee members
nominated by Visit Newport Beach, the Chambers of Commerce, the Restaurant
Association, the Film Festival, and other organizations likely to be submitting
applications for funding. Although there is a provision prohibiting members from voting
on their own proposals, the public will inevitably perceive this as leading to a "you
scratch my back and I'll scratch yours' mentality.
2. The reason "members need not be residents of Newport Beach" is not explained.
3. The term of membership should be specified if it differs from the default of 1 year
specified for Citizen's Advisory committees in Council Policy A -9. Also, if there is a limit
on how many terms an individual can serve, it should be specified.
4. The statement that "all meetings will be noticed and open to the public" is unnecessary
because by state law this committee is already subject to the more rigorous
requirements of the Brown Act: it is a standing committee and contains members
outside the legislative body that created it by formal action. The committee itself is
probably also required to establish a time and place for the holding its regular meetings.
5. Since the committee appears to be offering recommendations intended to influence a
governmental decision, it would seem the members should be added to the City's list of
Designated Employees who must reveal possible conflicts of interest on Fair Political
Practices Commission Form 700.