Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0 - Public Comment"RIECEi'JED AFTER AGENDA PKNITED:" Pv b i C_� etti 5 /0 -23 -IZ 5rectc� r(m&,,3 Comments on October 23, 2012 Special Council Agenda Items Comments by: Jim Mosher (limmosher(a�vahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949- 548 -6229) Item 1. Commercial Marinas Located Upon City Managed Tidelands G 1 have not had time to study in detail the proposed lease agreement, but I notice the proposed Resolution 2012 -91 (Attachment B) is missing the word "with" in the third paragraph from the end on its first page. I assume it was meant to read "...the Committee held public outreach meetings with commercial marina operators..." G More substantively, I object to the suggestion in Section 5 (at the bottom of page 2 and top of page 3) that the City Council can by this resolution pre- authorize the City Manager (and his /her designees) to enter into actual lease agreements, leaving it to his /her discretion to refer particular leases "to the City Council for consideration. " G The leasing of public tidelands is a serious business, and this provision is inconsistent with Section 421 (Contracts. Execution.) of the City Charter, though which the people of Newport Beach have, since 1954, prohibited anyone other than the City Council from binding the City to contracts. The people of Newport Beach have, in Section 421, given the Council, by ordinance or resolution, the authority to delegate to the City Manager the power to contract for the acquisition (i.e., purchase) of items included in the Council - approved budget, for the disposal of surplus City property, for the sale of products of City -owned utilities and to retain salaried employees, but these leases clearly do not fall within any of those exceptions. • Section 5 is also inconsistent with the signature pages of the template lease (pages 41 51 of the staff report), which (properly) indicate the lease is to be signed by the Mayor. • It may be argued by some that the Charter requirement for the full Council to publicly review each lease and authorize the Mayor to sign it is unduly burdensome. I reject that argument and feel it is part and parcel or good, transparent government. It requires only that the lease, or packages of leases, be made part of the Consent Calendar, where the public has an opportunity to review and provide input to the Council before the final decision is made. This is no different than the requirement with most cities and agencies (somehow ignored in Newport Beach), that a register of all checks ( "warrants ") to be paid by the City be presented for Council review and approval before they actually paid. Likewise most cities and agencies list all claims made against them on the Consent Calendar, and the Coastal Commission places numerous routine permitting matters in a "Director's Report." Although items are seldom "pulled" this provides much need citizen oversight and transparency at very little additional cost. HIL., - r,1 J J -J 91 :0j RV CZ 130 Z10Z