City Council - Regular Meeting

The time is 4 p.m. And I will now call February 10, 2026 regular city council meeting to order. Madam clerk, roll call please.

All council members present.

Now is the time for the invocation that will be led by our very own council member, Joe Stapleton. Following the invocation, council member Weber will lead us in the pledge.

Okay. Please join me in prayer. Lord, thank you for this gathering. Thank you for the ability to make decisions for our residents. Please give us knowledge, wisdom, and discernment. We ask for your continued blessings over the city of Newport Beach, our first responders, and all of its people. These things we ask in your name, amen.

Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God, indivisible with Liberty and justice for all.

Madam clerk, please read the notice regarding public comments on agenda and non agenda items.

The City Council of Newport Beach welcomes and encourages community participation. Public comments are invited on items listed on the agenda and non-agenda items. Speakers must limit comments to three minutes per person to allow everyone to speak. Written comments are encouraged as well. The City Council has a discretion to extend or shorten the time limit on agenda and non-agenda items.

We will now proceed to public comments on all agenda and non agenda items please note the members of the public will still have an opportunity to comment on agenda items under consent public hearing and closed session later in the meeting provided they do not offer comments on those items at this time.

Good afternoon, which looks like evening, given the weather out there. At other municipalities where I've attended council meetings, the consent agenda is usually reserved for approval of meeting minutes and minor budget things like budget amendments, bills paid, purchase orders, et cetera. While I appreciate here that so many things often get thrown on the consent agenda, A number of these things are kind of critically important to a lot of people, and I don't think consent is the appropriate place for some of these things. And when you have stuff on consent, you know, you all vote to approve consent. It doesn't let people know where your positions are on particular issues of importance that are going to have an effect on a lot of people. And being that there are four seats up for election this November, I would hope that you would all, I keep hearing the word transparency used this year, be transparent and have the courage to remove item eight from consent tonight so that we can learn the positions of council members on these things. And in the past, positions on item eight have affected the outcome of elections. Anyone that's been around long enough is aware of that. And I think a more healthy and open dialogue on that particular item would be appropriate. And again, I hope somebody up there has the courage to talk about that. Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Mayor Kleinman, members of the council, my name is Jim Mosher. Of non-agenda items, I could again point out the absence of an item with the usual annual mayoral appointments to the various boards and commissions and outside bodies on which Committee member council members serve I could also mention the council policy review committee that terminated Last December without making any recommendation to you at all and yet this year the public is seeing recommendations that purportedly came from that ad hoc committee being presented first to the Aviation Committee and then last week to PB&R. That all seems a little strange, but what I want to comment on is what happened or did not happen at the planning session on January 31st. The agenda for that meeting had an item that said updates on public works and capital improvement program. It said that the staff would provide an update. on improvements, updates on some major projects, such as lower castaways, the police station, and discussed development of the fiscal year 26-27 capital improvement program. That's the budget coming up for the next fiscal year, not the current one. Yet during the planning session there was a slide, and again there was an ad hoc committee recommendation about a police headquarters, and the slide said if the council prefers the ad hoc committee's preferred site recommendation. Then the changes would include changing the facilities financing plan and including one and a half million dollars, not in the future CIP budget, but in this year's CIP budget, so that the staff could hire a consultant team for further design development, preparation of a final concept, and an EIR for the further council review and approval. And then in the city manager's newsletter, it says that at that meeting, during the planning session, the council asked staff to continue work on a concept for a new police department headquarters in the Civic Center campus. I am asking what that vote meant that you took. Did you actually at that meeting authorize a budget amendment of one and a half million dollars which is not currently in our cip so that staff could immediately hire a consultant team to do all the work mentioned here or is that coming up at a meeting in the future at a public meeting where you're going to authorize that expenditure and staff cannot begin on that concept until at a public meeting you authorize the expenditure i did not know what your vote meant i hope that the city manager was wrong because there was not supposed to be a vote at that meeting thank you any more comments thank you

Good meeting Madam Mayor and Council Member. My name is Todd Priest and I'm a resident here in Newport Beach. And I have the honor of working with the Newport Beach Short-Term Rental Alliance. And so tonight on your agenda, item number three is to expand some of the time zones in those safety areas. And the alliance, we are very supportive of moving forward with that. We know it's short notice because we know that spring break is right upon us. But I was going to ask if the council could consider making one adjustment to the area that deals with STRs this evening. When it talks about revocation of permits, if we can keep in mind that these are people's businesses often that live here, and these are their investments, and there's a portion of the revocation that says the permit shall be revoked, and I was gonna respectfully ask on item number nine, or paragraph number nine in that section, that we build some discretion in there, not only discretion for city staff and others, but we allow some dialogue by changing it from shall to May. It does give the city the ability to still move forward with that revocation, but it doesn't mandate that it happened. It allows for short term rental owners who live and operate in Newport to have some dialogue with the city on what took place or maybe what didn't take place. So hopefully it's not a big ask, but I think it's an important ask for people that have real estate investments here in our city. So with that, I thank you.

Thank you. Any more speakers?

Good evening, Madam Mayor and council members. Thank you for letting me join you. My name is Jason Schmidt. I'm the elected treasurer of Huntington Beach and a proud former Newport Beach resident. I was extremely excited to return to one of my favorite cities to speak to you today, Until I was talking to a council member last night who informed me that the Santa Ana River dredging project is actually a top secret plan to erect a wall between Newport and Huntington Beach. On the topic of walls, I'm primarily here today to talk to you about bridges, the metaphorical bridges that we have been building across our two communities. As former residents of the peninsula who hated playing Frogger with speeding e-bikes while running on the Strand, my husband Michael and I were extremely pleased to see Council Member Bartow, Wygand, and former Mayor Stapleton borrow a page from the Huntington Beach Playbook and champion a similar ordinance regarding e-bike safety. Our dog Reagan in particular thanks you as he almost got hit numerous times on the beach walks before the ordinance was passed. We hope that Newport Beach will see the same public safety results that we've seen in Huntington Beach. Speaking of public safety, we're building a new bridge today. We are currently offering Huntington Beach a monthly class on investment scams, jointly sponsored by my office in the police department. This is the first of its kind in Orange County and addresses the frightening fact that nearly 30% of Americans have been scammed, with the average scam victim losing $2,000 and many of them losing their life savings. Scamming doesn't discriminate by age. Victims are just as common among Gen Zers in their 20s as baby boomers in their golden years. When I mentioned our program to Mayor Klingman and Lieutenant Little, they immediately suggested making these classes available to Newport residents and co-promoting it with us. So in honor of Valentine's Day, we're inviting all Newport residents to attend our class on romance scams, the number one scam type, next Wednesday, February 18th at 6 PM in Talbert Room and Central Library in Huntington Beach. The class will be taught by our dynamic super volunteer, Steve Levin, and is full of fun videos. I've attended multiple classes myself and learned a tremendous amount from each one. Steve will also be offering a special session of his class on AI scams at Oasis Center in April. More to come on that. So we hope everyone in Newport Beach will pack their passports and visas and head up to PCH to come join us next Wednesday evening. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor Kleinman and council members. My name is Wade Womack, a Newport Beach resident. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. Just wanted to touch base on something I saw on a tentative agenda for council on the 24th. And it's declaring the lower castaways as surplus. AND FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO SAY I'M JUST SUPER GRATEFUL TO THE LOWER CASAWAY SUBCOMMITTEE OR LOWER CASAWAY SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THEIR WORK THEY'RE DOING AND THE PIVOT IT'S GONE TO MAINTAINING IT AS AN AWESOME HARBOR CENTRIC PUBLIC PARK. I'M HOPING WE CAN PRESERVE PUBLIC ACCESS THERE AND MAKE IT REALLY WIDE OPEN TO ALL SORTS OF HARBOR USERS. Stand-up paddle boarders, kayakers, fishermen that go along the coast there, fisher. So I'm hoping it keeps continuing that direction, and I'm super grateful for the movement it's taking, but I'm super concerned about this declaration of surplus property slated on the February 24th agenda. So I think it was put forth by Laura Whitlinger. I just don't see city parks being declared surplus. It doesn't make sense. MUCH SENSE AT ALL. I'M HOPING IT WILL BE MAINTAINED AS A CITY PARK AND NOT GRANTED AS SURPLUS WHERE WHO KNOWS WHAT MAY HAPPEN TO IT. I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY OF OUR PUBLIC PARKS BEING DECLARED SURPLUS, SO I JUST HOPE, I'M HOPING THAT'S SOME SORT OF MISTAKE AND THAT PARK STAYS AS CITY PROPERTY. IT DOES NOT GET DECLARED AS SURPLUS PROPERTY, WHICH I THINK IS PROHIBITED BY CODE IN TERMS OF SURPLUSSING WATERFRONT PROPERTY IN NEWPORT AND HARBOR USE HARBOR DEPENDENT PROPERTY THANK YOU THANK YOU ANY OTHER COMMENTS MAYOR KLIMAN COUNCIL MEMBERS MY NAME IS CHAILEY HILKIMA I'M A MOORING PERMIT HOLDER

The city of Newport Beach intends to raise the fees of mooring permit holders only, three to 500%, though we already pay higher Tidelands fees than most user groups, including those that are commercial and for-profit. And it also wants to revoke our mooring permit transferability, singling us out, as it has always and will always allow the transferability of residential pier permits along with those of other Tidelands users. The city hasn't managed the public tidelands fairly, and its relentless focus on changing policy that negatively affects us makes us feel like unwelcome second-class boaters. It has imposed a kind of financial favoritism where some enjoy the luxury of being preferred tidelands users, but mooring permit holders aren't the chosen ones. Our tidelands group has endured unequal treatment for decades. And now we're having to deal with the insecurity that comes with the threat of an outrageous mooring fee increase and losing our transferability again. Here's the presentation from 2010 to you. Here's the presentation to the Harbor Commission from 2015. We've been through this so many times. The city as manager of the Tidelands is duty bound by the Beacon Bay Bill to make no discrimination in rates for any use or service. And by the California Constitution, which forbids the making of any gift to any individual of money or thing of value to any individual. Yet from my perspective, as a mooring permit holder, it has ignored its duty and responsibility to be fair. Every council member should be aware that residential pier permit holders pay nothing to store their boats at their private docks on the public tidelands, and they pay a fraction of the fees we pay for a much larger footprint on the public tidelands. Unlike mooring permit holders, they enjoy exclusive rights, and the city allows them to rent their dock space for private profit, which can amount to thousands per year on the public tideland. We are like users. We don't need to be continually gaslighted on this issue by members of the Harbor Commission and the City Council. We all need to store our boats somewhere. Some store them on mooring balls, some at the docks. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers?

Good evening, members of Council. My name is Laura Curran. I'm here to talk about the proposal to build a new police station. One of the proposed locations would be here at the Civic Center complex, and I'm going to talk about what we would lose by losing our park. We will gain much by having an even better police station than we already have, but if we were to build here, we would lose a really valuable park. So I'm going to give you some history and talk about the features and then an invitation. So in 2005, Jan van der Sloot, who was very well known for his work at Bolsa Chica and the Oak Grove at Castaways is named after him, and I started talking with city council members and the public about using Orange County coastal natives as the primary plant medium in the park. It was a very degraded site on the bottom half. On the upper half we have the wetlands with some woodlands and as Rogers Gardens general manager Ron Vanderhoff has documented, many hawks and extensive aquatic wildlife and bird life that is hosted here. So we went through that process. We took numerous walks with council members including Nancy Gardner, Steve Rozanski Don Webb in his staff role and in his council role and that vision was voted as the legislation for the park to use coastal natives as the primary habitat and Here we are today where we have a beautiful four acre park where we have the wetlands, which I've mentioned It's a very active park Parks without ball fields are often called passive, but they're actually active. Talk to staff members. They eat their lunch there. The public comes here to see the view, to see the sculptures, and to see the habitat and the plants every day. It's one of our most active locations among many. which means it's also a very healthy location. If you tour the park, your blood pressure goes down, you bring your kids, they run around and say there's lots to see. This is a place of natural beauty and fashion island with natural habitat and one of the few places with those features. The Sculpture Garden attracts people from all over Orange County and the United States. I have to compliment our city staff, because in 20 years, Kevin Pekar has helped maintain it with the vision of coastal natives. Parks and Rec has developed, and Robin Grant was very supportive of this, with Sherman Gardens' docent tours of the park. So we have a lot of recreational opportunities, not to mention the demonstration garden, which shows residents how to landscape with native plants in a way that is actually fire reducing. So when we talk to people about converting their landscape to something that is going to be safer in a fire, this is a demonstration garden that is really one of the premier gardens in California. So I invite all of you to come take a walk, just like Nancy Gardner. I invite all of you to come take a walk with me and I will show you the plants that you can also read about in many of the books in our library. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any more speakers on agenda and non-agenda items?

Wonderful madam mayor City Council Citizens I am lay brother Steven Gerard said Lufsky delighted to be back speaking on new wonderful USA personhood cities Let's open with a random Bible You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart Jeremiah 2913 I'm delighted to let you know I finally was able to get to the library in Huntington Beach and send all of you the pre-born personhood education packet. So you'll be able to view that. If there are citizens out here who would like to also receive it, my email is very simple, brotherstephengerard at gmail.com. Brother spelled out, Stephen with a V, and Gerard, G-E-R-A-R-D.

So, sir?

Once again, you must keep it focused on Newport issues and not general matters that are happening outside of the city So anyway, I'm looking for This does pertain to your city because you have a city charter and You also can pass possibly by Mother's Day or Father's Day and Preborn personhood resolution and you're going to be you're provided that information in that information packet Because you have a city charter Your citizens can actually vote in what I call preamble covenant personhood language into the city charter you're already a wonderful pro-life city and And because the US Supreme Court Dobbs decision has sent the decisions back to the state, What the newspapers do not talk about is that it also sends it back to the counties and cities with charters because citizens have a voting say at the county and the city level too. So you'll be reading all of this information that I have sent you, which it certainly does pertain to Newport Beach. I'm delighted I've already been doing the research, because I do the research all over the country, Newport Beach is probably the most conservative voting city in the whole county of Orange County. So that's very encouraging because already you have citizens who are actually hearing about it because I actually go out and get signatures on an advisory petition. It allows me to educate the citizens. So I'm doing you a big favor while I'm in California to educate your local citizens too. I happen to hope to meet some of your church leaders too. God bless you, and I'll close with a song. Let the beating heart, let the beating heart show you there is life in the womb. God bless you.

Thank you. Are there any other speakers?

Carmen Rosso, I have some comments regarding item three of the consent calendar, that is the safety enhancement zone. The staff report, I consider it incomplete. There is some information that is not logical, where we talk about spring breaks, the arrest in Nevada and Arizona was only 2.8% of all the arrests. So if we are going to tie the dates of the spring breaks from Arizona and Nevada, what that correlates with California spring break where California arrests were 54.5% of the total arrests. So something there doesn't seem right. Also, the fiscal impact mentions what the additional cost is going to be for changing the safety enhancement zone for the 4th of July, but doesn't mention the Memorial Day, Labor Day weekends, and it doesn't mention the spring break. So that information I consider incomplete. It mentions the short-term lodging units and says many short-term and long-term units, so I would like to see additional information of how many citations also, not just arrests, were related to short-term lodging units versus the California people coming from Anaheim or any other area. and also by geographical location. I live on 17th Street block on the ocean front, and I didn't know about what's going on in the pier area until later on that I learned through a meeting. So in my block, I didn't see any, out of hand behavior. So do we really need to go all the way to Villa Street or to the Newport Pier? Does it make sense to go further? Because then you have to have more resources to support a larger geographical area. So where is the data that tells me arrests and citations by geographical area in the Balboa Peninsula? Besides that, in the page four of the ordinance where it talks about general notices, there is a mistake there where it says the notice should be provided by 6 p.m. on a Friday when July 4th is on a Friday. Well, in that case, it should be by 6 p.m. on a Thursday. When we talk about illegal fireworks, alcohol consumption and all that, and holding the property owners and agents of short-term lodging units, is that for behavior that occurs within the property boundaries? Or are you going to be making them responsible for whatever happens on the beach? If illegal fireworks are going on the beach, we have no control of what happens in the public areas. So thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Yes, good afternoon. Mayor and council members, thank you for the opportunity. My name is Chris Bliss, and I wanted to talk a little bit about the mooring issue. As you work to seek a solution for fairness and equal treatment between the peer users and the mooring users of the Newport Harbor tidelands, I respectfully request that you consider having stakeholders who will be impacted by your decisions included in any decision making. Last year at the California Coastal Commission meeting in February, where the city's plan to reconfigure Mooringfield C was turned down in a nine to one vote, representatives of the city of Newport Beach were admonished by the commission for not including stakeholders in their decision making process. These are just some of the quotes from the commissioners at that meeting. Commissioner Ann Nodolf, she said, quote, why isn't there a process where the users are at the table? Commissioner Aguirre, quote, you have experts in the room, why aren't they engaged? Chair Cummings said there could have been more communication with them and an opportunity to work things out with them. And then Commissioner Linda Escalante said, and I quote, I look at it in terms of access and I find this inequity Folks with private access, and she was referring to private peers, I mean, this is a piece of the ocean, right? And now it's sort of privatized, right? They can do whatever they want with it. Nobody has a say in those rules. And then we go on the other side, right next to them, and she's referring to the Morigs, the smaller community, the inequity of access is what I find really problematic. All I really want to see is how we can address some of the concerns and at least make it fair among all the users of that space. We need to build a process that's more fair in this harbor." End quote. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers? Seeing none, we'll now move on. It's now time for council announcements, oral reports from council members on committee activities, and the time for council members to request an item to be placed on a future agenda. Council Member Wiegand, do you have any announcements or reports?

Yes, I do actually, because I sit on the vector control as an appointee of the council. I did want to bring up two items and I brought a slide here that our year end report for vector control had on West Nile virus. There was activity in the county that was relatively low to moderate with 168 positive mosquito pools with four human cases reported in Orange County and four positive dead birds. So you can see in the chart here that 2014 and 15 were a bit higher as a peak there. But what I did want to bring to the attention was on the next slide of a flea borne typhus has actually seen an increase in the county from year over year. So you can see kind of how it does kind of ebb and flow, but it was hitting its peak of this last year with 16 cases. And again, Just so you know, flea-borne typhus is typically transmitted by fleas on wild animals in urban areas such as feral cats, possums, and sometimes pets. The best prevention is to limit food sources for animals outdoors and to keep your pet on a flea control medicine year-round. um this was something that uh perked my interest due to there were some uh stories in the news about the west nile virus but in fact that was low and then this is seemingly uh increasing so we'll keep an eye on it for the upcoming years but stuff we talk about uh that you guys don't have to i get to so i appreciate you letting me serve on that role thank you council member bartow no report

Councilmember Grant. Just a quick thank you to the Commodores Club of Newport Beach. We last weekend had the Boat Parade Awards Dinner. It was a fun event for the community that participates in the Newport Beach Boat Parade to come out and receive awards as well as the Ring of Lights Awards. And it was all sponsored by the Commodores Club of Newport Beach. So we're grateful to have them in our community. Thank you.

Councilmember Weber.

Nothing.

Councilmember Stapleton.

I would just like to thank the Central Newport Association for inviting me at their annual meeting last week. I gave a presentation on all things District 1 and everything happening on the peninsula. So lots going on as we gear up for the summer season. So I want to thank them for having me.

Mayor Pro Tem Blum.

Thank you, Mayor.

Nothing to report.

Madam Clerk, would you please read the notice regarding public comments on the consent calendar?

THIS IS A TIME IN WHICH COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY PULL ITEMS FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION, ITEMS ONE THROUGH 11. PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE ALSO INVITED IN CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS. SPEAKERS MUST LIMIT COMMENTS TO THREE MINUTES. BEFORE SPEAKING, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD. IF ANY ITEM IS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR BY A COUNCIL MEMBER, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ARE INVITED TO SPEAK ON EACH ITEM FOR UP TO THREE MINUTES PER ITEM. all matters listed under consent calendar are considered to be routine and will be enacted in one motion in a form listed below council members have received detailed staff reports on each of the items recommending an action there will be no separate discussion of these items prior to the time the city council votes on the motion unless members of the city council request specific items to be discussed and or removed from the consent calendar calendar for separate action

Council member weekend.

Yes, I had a couple I wanted to pull item number 11. The public comment that had mentioned item number 3 related to the word were changed of shall to may probably warrants me pulling it but maybe I can ask the city attorney or maybe the mayor if she wants to based on that I kind of received some late correspondence requesting that but I don't know if

We'll have to pull it to discuss it so so I don't remember 11 and 3.

Yeah, and then I would like to register a no vote on number 8.

Council member Bartow. And I think that's another grant. That's a member Weber. Council member Stapleton I've known mayor pretend Blum and then. And I have done.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'd like to move the balance of the consent calendar, adjusting the minutes with regard to polling items 11 and 3 from Councilmember Wiegand with a large no vote on item 8.

Let's go out for public comment.

Good evening, Newbridge Council. I have a letter that we'd like to hand out to staff and Mayor Kleinman and members of the council, thank you for the opportunity to provide public comment on proposed resolution number 2026-12 to establish public lands trust management ad hoc committee to review and develop recommendations in response to the California State Lands Commission report on the city's management of the tidelands. We understand the Ad Hoc Committee would determine how and when stakeholders are engaged in this process. However, given the number of diversity of stakeholder groups to be impacted and the concerns raised by the State Lands Commission staff report regarding equitable treatment and transparency, the board of the Newport Beach Moring Association respectfully respectfully urges the council to expand the committee's composition we suggest inclusion of stakeholders represent representatives from each category of tideland users that could potentially be impacted including the resident mooring permit holders, non-resident mooring permit holders, a Yacht Club-affiliated mooring permit holder, and at least one residential peer permit holder consistent with the State Lands Commission's emphasis on making the administration of the public lands trust we further recommend that these representatives be selected through an open transparent process or nominated by the respective user groups rather than appointed solely by the discretion of the city including these regular everyday perspectives would help ensure the ad hoc committee's recommendations as well as documenting balance across user groups and align the city's obligations as trustee of the state tidelands. Such representation would also help address and avoid the perception of politically motivated decision-making referenced in the State Lands Commission staff report and would strengthen public confidence in the committee's work and outcomes. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, the Newport Moring Association.

Hello, thank you for having us. I'm Jennifer Creston and I just wanted to read a couple of letters to the editor of Stu News written by two gentlemen who unfortunately were not able to be here today. The first one is from Drew Lawler. He says, in light of the Coastal Commission rejecting the Harbor Commissioner's plan to realign mooring fields by a nine to one vote, the City Council should dismiss the current Harbor Commissioners and appoint all new ones. Not only was this inconceived plan not supported by even one mooring permittee, their plan only succeeded in opening pandora's box to have the state lands commission examine the fees homeowners pay for their docks over tide lands the entire episode has been a fiasco and is the very definition of a vote of no confidence in their judgment and management of the harbor the next letter is written by a long time newport beach family marine issue should be put aside I know the harbor. The mooring fee issue can destroy a valuable and unique quality of my home. My grandparents bought their first home on the island in 1960. We still have it. I have lived in Newport since 1974, graduated CDM in 1977, sailed the harbor for 45 years. My business has been in Newport Beach since 1993. My kids graduated CDM, and our family is in its fifth generation here. The mooring fee increase is among the worst I've seen. If something is passed in any form without the concurrence of existing permittees, it will change the nature of the harbor for the worst. We don't need Sacramento-style politics here. The best option here is to put aside the vote and work together. Please do not vote to damage the harbor. Thank you.

Thank you.

Adam Leverins again. Thank you, Councilman Wigand, for sharing your opinion.

Mr. Leverins, are these the same comments that you made previously?

I spoke about moving something to consent. I didn't speak about the issue.

Okay. Please proceed.

Thank you, Councilman Wigand, for having the courage to share your opinion on item eight, the three others who are running for election next year. Shame on you. Having communicated with a number of you, I've come to feel that you rely heavily on staff or what comes out of an ad hoc or what comes out of the Harbor Commission. And it's come to my attention that there are a lot of downsides here that have not been recognized. I have something I'd like handed to mayor and council as well. The documents you're being given are emails I've had with a high-ranking city person and I would hope that the substance of these emails have been conveyed to you. I want you to make well-informed, knowledgeable, ethical, equitable decisions and the information that has been being provided isn't conducive to that. uh... a two-person ad hoc i keep hearing transparency talked about this year to form a two-person ad hoc to address this significant issues identified in the california state lands commission report one oh five You're going to have to learn some of this. You can't rely on a former harbor commissioner and a councilman meeting in secret to solve these problems. Again, there are many significant downsides that either they haven't recognized or haven't informed Marin Council of, and I'm trying to figure a way The facts are very supportive. I don't think it all should be aired in public. I'm trying to find a way to reach affordable coastal access and equity for everybody. There are some people that are just determined to drive out a subset of people. And maybe that'll work, maybe it won't. They say you can't fight City Hall, but there's a number of people that are going to continue to try, and there are so many reasonable solutions to this if you move away from the extremes. Thank you.

Are there any more speakers on consent?

Mayor Kleinman and members of the council, my name again is Jim Mosier. Item two on the consent calendar is the minutes from January 27th and your January 31st special city council meeting. I need to say it's become increasingly difficult to follow what the council is doing in the absence of readily available handouts in the lobby. Used to be when changes were proposed, there were handouts for the public to see. On this item, they're currently in a notebook, is a one copy for the public to review of proposed changes to the minutes. I had pointed out that in the motions that you make, the minutes had failed to say that you were finding the actions exempt from CEQA, which used to be an important thing to include in the motion. And to your credit, you did include that by saying you recommended the staff motion, but the minutes were not reflecting that. And I can't have it here to look at, and I don't think it's anywhere online, but the one copy I saw in the lobby corrected one of the motions, but it didn't correct two or three additional motions that appear in those minutes. So you might want to hold off on approving those until they're corrected. And I was going to comment on number three, but you pulled that. And I would point out on number seven, a resolution to dissolve the general plan update steering committee and general plan advisory committee. I should mention I am a member of that, but speaking as a private citizen, I would point out you have no need to actually adopt that resolution because when and if you adopt a general plan, the committee will automatically Dissolve that's in your original resolution. So there's no need to dissolve it at this time and There is in the original resolution something about the appointments expiring today, which some of us I guess are grateful for But if you do not formally dissolve the committee under your policy a to the current appointees will remain in those positions until successors are appointed and so if for some reason you needed to refer something back to the two either of those committees they would still exist so it's actually wiser not to take the action that's recommended here than to take it thank you thank you same comments mr womack i'm sorry do you have the same comments that were previously made or are they different

Oh, they're different. But either way, I think I have a First Amendment right to say whatever I want as long as it's a city business, even if it repeats what someone else said.

Go ahead.

And so I'd like to move forward with my First Amendment rights, please. Please proceed. Thank you. I just wanted to say, I no longer, Wade Womack, thank you for the opportunity. I no longer have a mooring or a horse in that race. However, a couple observations consistent with some of the other folks. In 2022, there was a staff recommendation to raise shore mooring rates 1,000%. I think anyone looking at that objectively would say that was an effort to price the mooring folks out of the harbor. And so that goes dark for a year and a half, and then a new proposal comes up for 500%. This is just very concerning. And Mayor Kleinman, council, I think this is an opportunity for some real leadership And all they're asking for is to have stakeholders at the table and make this a special committee with some stakeholders and collaborate and work together in a positive fashion to pull this all together. Thank you for the opportunity.

Thank you. Any other speakers on consent calendar?

Good evening. Good evening, Mayor Kleinman. Oh, I guess we're going to be punting. Copy that.

OK. Seeing no other comments on the consent calendar, do I have a motion?

Motion's on the table, Madam Mayor. Second?

Second. Seconded by Council Member .

I did wish to comment on item

We actually pulled that, so we'll come back to it. You're just in time. Okay, we have a motion and a second from Council Member Weber. Let's vote.

Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Okay. Let's go to item number three that was pulled by Councilmember Wiegand. Councilmember Wiegand, did you?

Yeah, I don't know if we want to do a staff report on it. I don't think we have to, but, you know, the comment made by Mr. Priest, you know, warranted at least a discussion here if the word, I think you said shall, should we replace by, you know, I don't know. I don't know if you were picking that up um mayor I'm just trying to be helpful in the process here I know that it's um could be contentious there's a couple folks that maybe not contentious is the word but I think there's some folks that wanted to discuss it a little bit more than what we had so I'm just curious if there was any flavor by the council to look into that that was essentially my thought it was a late correspondence I didn't no much more on the item, but there was an organization that deals with short-term rentals that I figured it would be an opportunity to at least hear that. So I know that Mr. Priest maybe spoke already on it. I don't know if he has an opportunity to further clarify we wanted to further discuss it amongst ourselves. So it just was an opportunity for us to talk more.

Sure. Yes, he did already speak. But Mr. Harp, did you want to clarify the use of the language and the intent behind it, as well as I think there was another item that was brought up related to this item?

Yeah, so for Section 9A and B, which is the provisions that deal with the shall language that the council member was discussing, it was basically inserted so that it would be mandatory to revoke a short-term lodging permit, but only if certain crimes are committed. And these are the crimes that are basically the ones that are really causing a lot of pressure on the police department. So it's not every crime that's committed. It's not leaving your trash cans out. But, you know, it's providing alcohol to minors. It's basically violating the, you know, loud and unruly noise ordinances. So that's why that language is that way. And I think a couple people mentioned a noticing issue under section... 1.04060 subsection e and i'm fine changing that to be having the notice provided the effective date the day before the effective date as opposed on on the effective date for the safety enhancement zones okay thank you do we have any other comments up here on the dice before we go out for additional public comments okay seeing none do we have comments from the public mr mosher

Yeah, Mayor Kleinman, members of the council. My name again is Jim Mosher. This again is an item that is a little bit difficult to follow. I pointed out in writing the version of the agenda packet that I had downloaded did not include a red line, but I see that one has appeared in that strange folder in the lobby, and I see that's actually online. I'm not sure entirely that's the red line of what we're seeing in the clean copy that was originally posted or further changes have been made. And I didn't quite follow what City Attorney Harp said about the noticing. I believe Carmen Rosson is Commenting on something that is on page 37 of the agenda packet. It's a section e Again, we don't have paper copies. So I'm looking at electronic one general notice of the designation of a safety enhancement zone And it has as she pointed out Mr. Mosher, that's what I was speaking about and we'll do it the day before the effective date.

So, thank you. I

Yes, I'm confused because there's nothing in the language that I'm seeing that refers to anything about an effective date. So apparently there's some change that I'm not quite following about this. I think the correct change would be to add the 4th of July to the list of what happens when they fall on a Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday. And then there's another error in the same paragraph, which I pointed out in writing. It says that the spring break noticing will occur at 6 p.m. on the first day of the spring break, but it actually should be on the day before the first day of the spring break. So that paragraph needs some revision, and I don't think it's wise to be changing it here I think it should come back with the proper language and then more generally the whole thing is really poorly conceived because you have language in this ordinance that then gets duplicated in resolutions and that only leads to the possibility of confusion or contradiction. So I think the whole thing should be cleaned up and come back. Thank you.

Thank you.

their climate council members to me sober man i am a resident in one of the coastal sounds uh... just quickly i already submitted written comments that uh... we we are feeling uh... very good about the extension of the safety enhancement sounds from a geographic perspective uh... didn't have a few clarification questions i do understand that the proposed ordinance is directed primarily at enforcement during certain periods and also directed towards permitted short-term lodgings. So my question is if there are the same actions, the same violations, that occur from others that are committing those violations, well, there will also be equivalent level of enforcement. It may be relative to unpermitted short-term lodgings. It may be to other properties and or occupants where people are committing illegal or threatening threats to public health and safety, as the language of the ordinance suggests. So I would encourage the council to really clarify what the broader intent is as well as the narrow intent in here so that the public, whether it's residents, businesses, or visitors to Newport Beach can be clear about what Newport's policy and position is. then lastly uh still remains some question as to what the organizational enforcement process and path is so it would be helpful to really get uh get that further clarified thank you thank you any other speakers on this item

Carmen Roson, I would like to add that I agree with Mr. Moyer's comment that I understand that this was put in the last minute, maybe, to try to implement it before this spring break that is coming here, but it's very poorly written, very confusing. And I think it should be cleaned up before that. Also, it makes comments like, well, we shouldn't have people less than 25 years old in the short-term lodging unit. Well, already the ordinance for short-term lodging units states that the person that books the property has to be 25 years or older and must be at the property during the length of the stay. That's already in the ordinances. So if we had cases of properties where there was no somebody else there that was older than 25 to take care of the juveniles that were breaking the laws, well, we had already tools in place in the assisting ordinance for that. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi, Mayor Kleinman, council members. Thank you again for the opportunity to speak. I just wanted to mention I was doing a little research today. And the law, the California law that grants the city the ability to use administrative fines is California Constitution, Government Code 36900A. And it's real specific. It says, we'll grant you the authority to use admin fines that have a little less due process and the money goes directly into city coffers if you keep it reasonable, if you keep it like infractions. First fine, $100. Second fine, $200. Third fine, $500. By creating the safety enhancement zone, you're circumventing that law and doubling up the fines. And from the research I did, It indicates the intent of capping those is to make sure that cities don't use administrative fines as a revenue generator, number one. I'm a public access guy, and I don't want to see people driven out of our city by outrageous fines where, wow, I don't want to go down there. I might get a ticket for 500 bucks. I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING COUNCIL IS DOING. THE CHALLENGES DOWN THERE ON THE BOARDWALK, THE BEACH, I LIFEGUARDED FOREVER. I USED TO BE A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER. It's all challenging, but I think the code is pretty specific. And I think the use of these enhancement zones to double up administrative penalties is likely not substantiated by the law. I'm not an attorney, layman's guide thing. Just trying to do my best to inform you and share my concerns. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers on this item? Seeing none, I'll bring it back up here to the dais. Are there any other comments or questions? Councilmember Grant?

I guess just quickly, maybe in thinking about Council Member Wiegand's comment about may or shall, you know, we have this come up a lot in our code as far as when we are mandatorily doing something versus having the discretion. We certainly have a lot of confidence in our staff, and so I'm not immediately not in favor of the shall, but in hearing the concerns of the city attorney that the kinds of violations and seeing what we've prepared in the adjustments to the code, the kinds of violations are fairly grievous. So I don't know if we want to have more discussion about that. I think, are we getting a proposal to change the language? You just wanted to discuss? I think that we do have a fairly robust enforcement in place for specifically, you know, minors drinking, things like that. Obviously, it's just unacceptable in any, you know, residence or business in our community. you know, by law, we agree with that. That's something that, you know, we're going to enforce robustly. So, I don't know if layering that into the short-term rental, you know, context is necessary, maybe. I do understand from the community the concerns about short-term rentals when they're not used properly. We certainly have very good operators that are operating these short-term rentals in a very legal and community-friendly way, but we do have quite a bit of concern about non-legal or non-community-friendly use of the short-term rental program. So I would defer to staff on this if they feel that they need this mandatory provision, then I'd like to hear about that. But I also trust that staff would have good judgment if there is something that's pretty egregious and they have the opportunity to pull a permit that they would. But in the event of a mistake or something, if we have a shall, I don't know, I guess maybe I'm asking the city attorney, if there's a mistake and we pull the permit, do we have a remedy process? If that's a shall, We pulled a permit. I seem to remember this came up in another context with the finance director having discretion over permits being pulled. And we had that discussion probably about a year ago.

So it would be a mandatory revocation if the specific crimes that are listed in the ordinance are committed, and it's proved beyond a preponderance of the evidence that it happened. So if it was a mistake in citation and wasn't issued appropriately, then the preponderance of the evidence wouldn't be there in order to support the revocation. It is basically designed to make sure that people keep their properties in check and that they're renting to people that aren't going to throw huge parties and cause a burden on law enforcement. Last year, especially at the 4th of July, we saw a lot of people come in from Arizona, saw a lot of people come in from Nevada. and it really impacted operations for the police department the safety of the community so the decision of course is the council's but i think that it's designed to require the mandatory revocation primarily so that it forces the short-term lodging permit holders to make sure that they're actively managing their properties

I think you addressed my concern because I'm hearing from you that the process is that if there's a mistake there has to be a preponderance of the evidence somehow there's going to be a process it's not going to just be there was an arrest made of an underage drinking and then the permits pulled but there is some process that establishes that through I think you said a preponderance of evidence so I think that addresses my concern that it actually be a real violation that there's not going to be mistakes and that it's going to be limited to these very egregious kind of incidences. Thank you.

Councilmember Stapleton.

I would just say this is direct response to the residents, especially in District 1 where I reside. At the end of the day, we have to give our code enforcement, our officers, we need to give them the teeth that they need to enforce the rules and regulations that we put forth. last year during the summer, whether it was spring break, Memorial, Labor Day, Fourth of July, it was not good. It was an opportunity for those. Newport Beach has always been a welcoming destination for visitors, and it will continue to be. But for those that want to come here for clicks on social media, throwing things at our officers on the beach, that is not going to be tolerated. We are a community that loves our city, and we love our visitors and our residents, and we're going to continue to do what we can to reward those that are good operators and those that simply want to give to anybody, rent their homes to anybody to show up. I mean, it was routinely our officers would show up to the same house multiple times to issue enforcement citations because there were 100 to 200 people at a given residence. that cannot happen. Um, for those that want to come here and enjoy our community safe and enjoyed, I'm all for it. And I know the council is as well. So we're going to give our officers our code enforcement, the tools and resources they need to make sure that Newport beach is safe and well enjoyed.

Thank you. And uh,

Thank you, Councilmember Stapleton, for those words. I echo them wholeheartedly. I'd like to push the motion forward with staff recommendations, and I would also like to incorporate the general notice change into the motion. I'll second that.

Okay, we've got a motion and a second. Let's go ahead and vote.

Motion passed unanimously.

Moving now to item number 11, also pulled by Councilmember Wiegand. Councilmember Wiegand, did you want a report?

No, but our Public Works Director, Dave Webb, if you could hang out in the hot seat for us. I brought this item up because there's just one little section here ACTUALLY TWO SECTIONS. THIS IS RELATED TO TRAFFIC CALMING IN THE BAY VIEW HEIGHTS AREA OF SAN ANA HEIGHTS. SPEED CUSHION LOCATIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT THERE ARE TWO ON ORCHID. THOSE ARE SUPPORTED BY THE RESIDENTS THERE. but there was a requirement coming out of our study session that we had a while back on this topic that six homes, three on each side in a row, would sign paperwork that would allow them to have said speed bump. And the residents there did a great job of getting that. But on one of the set of speed bumps, they received four instead of six. But the circumstances that required that or they face was one house was vacant. Nobody lived there. They couldn't go. And then the other person died. just wouldn't sign or be present towards their request. Now it wasn't to say that they were for or against, they just would not be responding to the people who've come to knock on the door. So I'm asking this council for a waiver on top of our waiver. to allow for the two speed bumps on Orkin. And I asked a couple residents there to come to speak to that if there were any further issues amongst us. But one of the speed bumps received the required as staff had requested six signatures and the other one had four. But I think the circumstance warrant that those two missing were above and beyond the control of those folks trying to collect the signatures. The other discussion was on the staff report in the monument section that was a median to calm the traffic on Spruce. And there was a little bit of, not concern, but the residents there maybe wanted a little bit more time as a group to approach staff to decide what that would look like. there's some language on it but also the question was could it be landscaped could there be a potential for a roundabout so i think the residents there maybe just need a little discussion with staff so i think we could approve it but allow the residents to sit down with our traffic team to decide what that final product looks like and you know if that warranted something that pulled back from staff they could bring it further back to us if it was substantial changes but I THINK IT'S, YOU KNOW, IS THERE SOME LANDSCAPING? IS THERE SOME DIFFERENT LANGUAGE? IS IT PLACED IN THE APPROPRIATE SPOT THAT THE RESIDENTS THERE THINK? SO I THINK THAT WOULD GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE FINAL SAY OF SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO BE IN THEIR COMMUNITY THAT THEY'RE GOING TO SEE EVERY DAY AND KIND OF BE A DETERRENT TO TRAFFIC. This is something that they've asked for. We did have some discussions on striping their street and they do like that. I've talked to a lot of residents that we did some striping. So we're slurry sealing later this year and then the striping will come back because they are very appreciative. We also had some discussions on some trees and some landscaping within the community. Kevin Picard has been working with our team and the residents there. There's a lot of houses that don't have trees but they're allowed to have trees for free. So it's a service the city provides and the residents are receiving some communication there to get some additional trees. And then obviously the flock cameras that will implement in that neighborhood are really well liked. So that's an easy one. It's really just me asking you, my colleagues here, on the two speed bumps if that one set can get four signatures instead of the required six. So I think that was a request that our public works director had of me, so that's why I needed to pull that item for it.

Did you want to hear from staff before we go out?

I don't need to, but Dave, if you have something that I missed.

No, you covered it well, Council Member Wagon. This is a little unusual because when we waive policy and we need to put speed bumps in, you're dealing with property rights and frontage issues. And as you know, we've had problems in the past with taking bumps out later and moving them, things like that. So by procedure, we require that three people are going to be affected on either side of the street agree to it. As I understand here, one of them, the speed bumps you asked us to put in by waiving policy, they have the six signatures. One of them, as Council Member Wagon, they have four, but one of the residents just doesn't want to deal with anybody. He doesn't care either way. I think it's just I don't deal with the government, and another one's vacant. So staff would be supportive of just go ahead and allowing that bump, too, provided you're good with not collecting the signatures. uh, with regard to the medians, we'll work with them on that. The only reservation I have on that is that we have no power water in that area. We have to set power and water if they want to do extensive landscaping. But we can work with the council member of the district on that to come up with what we can do for that entry and spruce.

Okay, let's hear from the public if there are any comments on this item.

Hi, Jennifer Crest again, but I just had a question about speed bumps. Doesn't the fire department have an issue with putting more speed bumps in a residential area because it's really bad for their equipment when they try to go over it? Just a question.

Thank you. Any other comments?

All right, good evening. Let's try this again. Mayor Kleinman, Councilmember Wiegand, remaining members of the council. My name's Ryan Schlager. I live on Spruce, and I was active in working on the traffic calming measures and appreciate the work that's gone into your guys' attention and also everything that Councilmember Wiegand's brought forth. As we talk a little bit about the monument, it's a great idea to put in some signage that indicates we're moving from that commercial area, which just to bring you up to speed, there's two commercial buildings that are right on spruce as you enter the residential neighborhood. We're kind of looking to break that up and then to calm the traffic that cuts through there. So as we talk about the monument, We'd like to to put that in the middle more of a roundabout concept to bring some foliage to bring some signage to add trees that and then also reduce the traffic speed there. So there's a stop sign that is RESPECTED AT TIMES, BUT I THINK A ROUND ABOUT THERE WOULD ACTUALLY ADD THE AESTHETICS, BRING THE SIGNAGE IN, AND THEN ALSO REDUCE TRAFFIC. I THINK PEOPLE LOOKING DOWN THAT WAY MAY JUST SAY, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE ANOTHER ROUTE BECAUSE THAT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE ENTERING INTO A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. SO AGAIN, WE APPRECIATE THE FLAW CAMERAS, THE SPEED BUMPS, AND THE ATTENTION THAT'S GONE INTO THIS. IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT WE CAN'T CLOSE THE STREET THERE. THAT'S WHAT WE HAD FINGERS CROSSED FOR. I'd spoken about putting our heads together and coming up to a solution that works for everybody. And so I'm hopeful that if we maybe push towards that roundabout, it's kind of agreeable to all. So thank you all for your efforts.

Thank you. Seeing no other speakers, I'll bring it back up here. Do we have a motion?

Madam Mayor, I'd love to make the motion on this piece right here. And I'd just like to waive the policy and not require the signatures, but move forward with what we're talking about.

Do we have a second? Seconded by Council Member Weber. Let's go ahead and vote.

Motion passed unanimously.

Okay, we'll now move on to public hearings.

Before we move on to public hearings, I think there's one after consent items. We typically read the ordinance that have been adopted. So, Lena.

An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, amending Chapter 12.62, temporary street closure, and Chapter 12.63, solid waste management of the Newport Beach municipal code related to solid waste hauling.

Thank you. Moving on to item number 12, status of City of Newport Beach vacancies and retention efforts for fiscal year 2025-2026 pursuant to government code section 3502.3. Mr. Jurgis, do we have staff report?

Thank you, Madam Mayor. I'm going to go ahead and turn it over to our Deputy Director, Sarah Rodriguez, and she has a very short presentation for you.

Good evening, Mayor and Council members. Just want to touch base on our vacancy presentation, which is something that we have to do annually now prior to the fiscal year budget being adopted to let you know how many vacancies or the percentage of vacancies that are consisting within the city for full-time positions. This slideshow is just indicating, based off of the associations, the vacancy percentages to the far right. You'll see on the bottom, the largest vacancy percentage is 12% for our key management unrepresented group. We do currently have 26 full-time recruitments the hiring process right now and a lot of the ones that are pertaining to key and management are because of retirements or promotions and then there's a trickle effect to that but the good news is that we're under 20% for all of the bargaining units and that's a good standard As far as recruitment and retention efforts go, the city does a good job of promoting from within. As you can see, as far as new hires or new employees that were hired, we had 58 last year. And with promotions, we had 48. So I think that speaks a lot to the city as far as growing from within. And then on this slide, it's indicating the overall city competitive benefit packages, which we use to attract talent. Um, the biggest ones that we tend to get questions on and recruitments are the cost of living adjustments, which the city, um, has in place already. And, um, we implemented the PRS reduction in some of the bargaining units, which is a huge attraction as well. And the last slide is more in reference to retaining talent. So for the retention purposes, we kind of broke apart with the bargaining units certain things that came out through these last negotiations. And I would just highlight that deferred compensation was put into play for some of the bargaining units that did not have that, as well as longevity, which was a hot topic. And that's the basis of the presentation. If there's any questions.

Thank you. Are there any questions from the dais? Seeing none, do we have any comments from the public? Okay. Bring it back up here. Do we have...

I'll make a motion.

A motion. Seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Blum. Let's go ahead and vote.

Motion carried by unanimous vote.

Madam Clerk, would you please read the statement on motions for reconsideration?

A motion to reconsider the vote on any action taken by the City Council at either this meeting or the previous meeting may be made only by one of the Councilmembers who voted with the prevailing side.

Are there any motions for reconsideration? Seeing none, before we proceed to closed session, we'll adjourn this meeting in memory of Dan Hamilton, Councilmember Stapleton.

Yeah, tonight we adjourn in the memory of Dan Hamilton. Dan was a long time Cronendale-Mar resident and a dedicated advocate for local businesses and public safety in our community. A graduate of the Milliken University, Dan married his wife Jeannie in 1974 and they raised two children. He was the son of Bill Hamilton, who rebuilt the iconic cannery restaurant in the 1970s. He also opened and built Malarkey's Restaurant in 1977. And I was told as I was walking in here, he had something to do with the Reuben E. Lee, which I did not know. So the Hamilton family, legends in our community, Dan followed in his father's entrepreneurial footsteps, becoming a restaurateur and later opening his own catering business in Costa Mesa. Dan joined the Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce in 1988, became a Commodore serving as the Skipper. He was a long-standing member of the Amigos Viejos and volunteered his time at local Someone Cares Soup Kitchen. For nearly four decades, Dan was an integral part of the community. SUPPORTING EVENTS LIKE THE CHRISTMAS BOAT PARADE, THE FIRE AND LIFEGUARD APPRECIATION DINNER, THE POLICE APPRECIATION LUNCH, AND THE SANDCASTLE CONTEST IN CORONA DEL MAR. IN RECOGNITION OF HIS DEDICATION TO SERVICE, DAN RECEIVED THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE'S SILVER ANCHOR AWARD FOR VOLUNTEERING IN 2009 AND WAS NAMED COMMANDER OF THE YEAR IN THAT SAME YEAR. WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR HIS YEARS OF COMMUNITY SERVICE AND EXTEND OUR DEEPEST CONDOLENCES TO GINI AND THEIR FAMILY. HE WILL BE MISSED.

THANK YOU. BEFORE WE TAKE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION, DO ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS HAVE ANY CONFLICTS OF INTEREST THEY WOULD LIKE TO ANNOUNCE?

YES, I HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITH ITEM NUMBER THREE.

IT'S CLOSED SESSION A, NEWPORT BEACH. I'M SORRY. I'm sorry, it's closed session item B.

B, not three. B, in order to reduce the appearance of impropriety, I will recuse myself from that item.

Okay, let's go out for public comment on closed session.

Mayor Kleinman, members of the council, my name again is Jim Mosier. Actually, item B on the closed session agenda is one of those very strange things that the Brown Act requires you to invite comment. But all the public knows is that you are considering the initiation of litigation. And we have no idea what kind of litigation you might be considering initiating. So it's rather strange that you're required to accept comment on that. I was planning to comment on the first item, which involves three pieces of litigation in which the city is involved. And my comment about that is I tried this afternoon to find out what the status of these cases might be. And I was able fairly easily to look up the second and third case. But the first one, I googled the name of the case and it told me it was a personal injury case filed last October alleging the negligent operation of a vehicle, I suppose, by a city employee. But when I tried putting the case number into the Orange County Superior Court case search system, it came up blank. And so I'm thinking possibly there's an error in the case number that's referenced here. And I would point out that after the 2025, there's seven digits. And if you look at the other cases, there's eight digits. So perhaps there's something missing there. And then the only one I really know much about is the last one, which is the Stewardship Association case against Newport Beach, which is on appeal to the Court of Appeal in California regarding the failure of the council to order a green light vote. on our housing element, actually the land use element. And I personally think the green light vote was needed, but I think they would have a much better case if they had made that claim when you were adopting the housing element rather than the land use element that followed from that. I think there's no doubt that a green light vote was needed when the housing element was before the council but the public was told don't worry we'll take to it when we come to the land use element then when that came up we were told oh we can't do it because we have a housing element in place I think that was kind of a bait and switch thank you thank you

I THINK I NEED TO CORRECT. I AM CONFLICTED ON ITEM A, NOT B. IS THAT CORRECT? I CLOSED MY NOTES BEFORE. YOU GOT IT RIGHT.

IT'S ITEM B.

IT'S ITEM B?

YEAH.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR KLEIMAN AND COUNCIL. REALLY INTERESTED IN TRANSPARENCY WITH OUR CITY. AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT ON THESE CLOSED-DOOR SESSIONS THAT GENERALLY SPEAKING, YOU NEED TO DISCLOSE THE PARTIES. AND SO UNDER ITEM B, THERE'S NO PARTY DISCLOSURE AS TO WHO THE CITY MAY BE ANTICIPATING LITIGATION FOR OR MAYBE THIS IS ONE WHERE THE CITY IS ANTICIPATING POSSIBLY BEING SUED. SO IF IT'S POSSIBLY BEING SUED AND EVERYONE KNOWS ABOUT IT, IT'S KIND OF SOMETHING THAT'S OUT THERE, I BELIEVE THE CITY HAS AN OBLIGATION TO DISCLOSE THE PARTIES. AND I DON'T SEE THE PARTY ON HERE. OF COURSE, I'M NOT PRIVY TO B, BUT IT DOES MAKE ME WONDER HOW COUNCILMEMBERS KNOW WHAT B IS, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT B IS. THAT SEEMS TO IMPLY THAT THERE'S OTHER INFORMATION PASSING HANDS THAT SHOULD PERHAPS BE IN PUBLIC PURVIEW. THIS IS ALL NUANCED, AND I JUST WANT TO EXPRESS A GENERAL CONCERN. IF THERE'S A CLOSED-DOOR SESSION ON LITIGATION, GENERALLY SPEAKING, WE THE PUBLIC SHOULD BE MADE AWARE OF WHO THE PARTY IS, MINUS a couple very minutiae exclusions. Being if the city anticipates being sued, but they don't think the party who may sue them is even aware of the liability. Like the city sees exposure and they don't think the person who tripped and fell or what have you, knows that the city is worried about it, that's like the one exclusion where you don't have to disclose the names. But other than that, I believe the city has a full-on obligation to disclose the parties involved. And I just want to be part of a really democratic and transparent city. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Harp, do you have a closed session announcement?

I do. Thank you. So the City Council will meet in closed session to meet with legal counsel regarding four litigation matters. And that's Stephanie Carrera, David Fitzgerald. He has two matters and Newport Beach Stewardship Association. And as well as meeting with legal counsel regarding the potential initiation of litigation. And that's all set forth under the closed session agenda item 5A and B. Thank you.

We are adjourned to closed session. Mr. Harp, do you have a closed session report for us?

Thank you, Mayor. There's no closed session report this evening.

Okay, and we are adjourned.