City Council - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon.

The time is 4 p.m. and I will now call the March 2024-2026 regular city council meeting to order. Madam Clerk, roll call please.

Mayor Pro Tem Blum absent. The rest of the council members present.

Now is the time for the invocation that will be led by Dave Mann, Pastor Emeritus Calvary Chapel of Costa Mesa. Following the invocation, Council Member Weber will lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Our God, we come before you and together once again ask for your blessing upon our council meeting this evening with all the business matters and agenda before us, considerations and decisions. Bless our mayor, each of our council members that are present here this evening, all our city officials, we lift up our police department, chief of police, the entire police force and staff here in Newport Beach, our fire department, the fire chief, fire marshal, all our EMS and emergency response crews, Lord, we're thankful for them. We consider, Lord, your blessing also in extending our public works, staff, city utilities, our marine and safety, our Coast Guard here, all our city businesses we lift up to thee, and residents residing here in Newport Beach. Lord Jesus, we thank you. for your continued presence, providence, protection and love towards us in our city, Newport Beach, Corona Del Mar. We pray the same for our neighboring cities and presently our entire country and the conditions of our world. We pray, Lord, for your peace. In Jesus' name we pray. Amen.

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 the discretion to extend or shorten the time limit on agenda and non-agenda items.

We'll now proceed with public comments on all agenda and non-agenda items. Please note that members of the public will still have an opportunity to comment on agenda items under consent and closed session later in the meeting, provided they do not offer comments on those items at this time. Any public comments? Please come forward.

Mayor Kleinman, members of the council, my name is Jim Mosier. I had three comments. First of all, I believe that the last week was the first of our new safety enhancement zone areas being in effect that were the subject of some discussion in February I'm surprised although the city police and code enforcement didn't have all the tools in place at this week because the ordinance had not come into effect yet I'm surprised that there's no report as to how that went did we really have an annotation of problems during that week or not the second comment I have is is on item two on the consent calendar, which is the draft minutes from your last meeting. If you look at the very end of that as to how that meeting was noticed, you'll notice or discover that there was no physical posting of the agenda announcing that meeting. I understand that's a situation that has been rectified for this meeting, but it's awaiting, as you may or may not know, some budget to For the city to procure a proper Electronic bulletin board which we do not currently have so that that needs to be taken care of at some time And then the third comment I have also about those draft minutes I spent some time looking at them trying to correct the names of speakers whose names were misspelled, people I knew or could verify. It appears that the clerk has chosen not to make most of those corrections. I do not know why. But I would suggest when you make the announcement for people to speak before you hear, Somewhere in that announcement, you point out that they do not have, there is no requirement for them to identify themselves. But if they want their name correctly spelled in the minutes, it would be very helpful for them to fill out a speaker card. And it would be even more helpful if we had speaker cards up here for them to fill out. Thank you.

Thank you. Yeah, I'm Katherine Young. My husband and I have lived in our house on Surrey Drive in Corona Del Mar for 33 years. Some homeowners in our community wanted improvements in their cell phone coverage. So our association gave AT&T and Verizon a chance a year ago in March to so hold a zoom infomercial for their cell towers proposal it was to construct two cell tower towers 40 feet high above surrey drive 100 feet from our houses and children's park on pelican hill golf course land located in orange county unincorporated land not newport beach being this close to towers putting out microwave and 5g electronic transmissions would endanger our health and our property values somehow houses would get improved coverage but a large group of houses that are downslope to the ocean in our community would fall below the 5G straight line of sight to missions. On the positive side, those houses would be unlikely to have their health damaged and home values reduced, unlike our houses close to the towers, who would have to consider selling and moving away to protect ourselves. Orange County held two public hearings in Santa Ana, one on December 4th, a week after Thanksgiving, and the second, December 18th, a week before Christmas. All who attended the meetings were strongly opposed to the project, as were a huge majority of the letters written to Orange County. The result, as we understand, is that Orange County did not approve, nor did it disapprove, the two cell tower towers of Then recently on Surrey Drive, we saw markings for utility work. The worker told us Spectrum was updating the service. On Thursday, March 12th, in the early morning, there appeared a crew of about 10 workers and many, many huge cable trucks on the street. The supervisor told me that he had all the permits he needed to dig and install a cable across Surrey Drive to deliver power to the cell phone towers on Orange County land. I asked him if he had Orange County permission. He said no, but he had all Newport Beach permissions. The next week, several of our houses received a paper notice in our mailboxes dated March 18th from Cable Brothers of Anaheim describing conduit work for Spectrum to begin on March 23rd. Those of us whose health and home values would be severely damaged strongly oppose the proposed towers. We are amazed that now it appears that Newport Beach has been aiding and abetting this serious endangerment to our lives here, secretly without any notifications or explanations. I think the first object of Newport Beach is to do no harm.

Thank you for your comments, Miss Young. I believe you're conflating two different things. One is a cell tower application by AT&T and Verizon on county land, and another is, sounds like some work being done by Spectrum, but looks like we have another comment on this item. We can certainly have someone from staff work with you offline.

My name is David Brown. I live a little over a block away from the Youngs. I am here in complete solidarity with them and my other neighbors on Surrey Drive. On March 5th, the City of Newport Beach Planning Commission, following a study session with this council and with the bare minimum of public notice and civic discussion, recommended sweeping changes to this city's wireless facilities ordinances which would in many cases allow the city to grant administrative approval for new cell towers anywhere in the city with no public notice, no public hearing and no opportunity to appeal. I'll say that again. This council is seeking to give city staff non appealable authority over permits for cell towers. These enormously consequential changes are being rushed through with a single study session and a single poorly publicized public hearing. Why such a hurry? Why are you rushing to hand the keys to our city over to the cellular companies? Why have you solicited input from those companies but not from the people who elected you? The speed and timing of these proposed monumental changes is both highly prejudicial and highly suspicious. The telecommunications industry is governed by federal laws that they themselves wrote and then got passed by their shills in the United States Congress. They already have nearly unfettered ability to put new cell towers anywhere they want and to blight any neighborhood they choose. But for some reason, this city council cannot wait to make this ruthless industry even less accountable to the citizens of Newport Beach than it already is. At best, this is textbook government arrogance. And if it passes, the only just consequences would be for each and every one of you to be removed from office by the voters and for a cell tower to be built in front of each and every one of your homes. Several of my neighbors, as Kathy just described, awoke one morning in March 2025 to an announcement that two 40-foot cell towers were going to be built literally across the street from their homes. cell phone companies had cynically exploited the fact that the other side of the street is subject to the county's wireless ordinance and not the city's thereby depriving impacted homeowners of any opportunity to appeal to the elected representatives in this room little did we know that there was a movement afoot already to strip us of that right please stop and rethink this the only reason these so-called reforms have encountered no opposition is because no one knows about them Your staff has brilliantly mired them in 147 pages of gobbledygook. My neighbors and I have worked very hard for our homes and we will fight tooth and nail any effort by this council to disenfranchise us and to give the cellular companies free rein to do whatever they want, wherever they want in our city. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers?

Yes, my name is Donovan Aukus. I'm a native, I say native, of this town. I was born in 1945, that puts me almost 81 years old. I'm a combat veteran, Air Force pilot from Vietnam. That's what I did to help our country with our freedom. It gave me a great career. I retired as a Delta airline captain 21 years ago. These are my neighbors. We are pleading with you for being faithful, rightful, honest, and also transparent. We have been alerted that the planet commission has been looking for sweeping changes as been briefed here. So my word to you is this does not seem American. You are taking some blanket information from people. Even the government says in 1996, they said cell towers are not harmful to your health. We really don't know what's going to happen that way.

And I'm going to tell you, I have profited here.

that was received in Vietnam from Agent Orange. I volunteered to fly. I didn't have to go. I was an electrical engineer and could have had a draft of free job. But I chose to join the Air Force. And I'm not going to say it was God and country and everything. It was a screwed up war. A lot of lies, especially by the government, including saying, don't worry about Agent Orange. It won't hurt you. I have 100% disability from prostate cancer. Please observe the people you were elected by. And I'm going to tell you one thing. My neighbor years ago was Mrs. Dora Hill. She was probably the first lady. Mr. Koop was a manager here. Tuck Koop was my classmate.

1963 Newport Harbor High School.

We did not even have CDM there. We were a village of 5,000 people where the dads worked for a living and people were good and government was honest. Please go back to your values and think about your people. And you don't have to think that the government tells you everything is correct. Agent Orange, Three Mile Island, and now cell phone towers. Thank you.

Thank you for your comments and for your service. Once again, I do believe that the issues are getting conflated here. So perhaps one of your group can get contact information from our city manager or city attorney so we can talk offline more about this. We have another speaker on this topic.

Afternoon, Mayor Kleinman, council members. My name is Dana Marseille. I'm also here in solidarity with my neighbors. I've been a resident of Newport Beach for 12 years. I'm here today to express concern about the proposed new wireless ordinance, not because I oppose improved connectivity. We all want better cell service. It is because of how it limits public participation in discussions that affect our community. As written, the ordinance removes important public notice and appeal rights for many installations. Facilities can be approved administratively with no opportunity for appeal and many modifications by past discretionary review. This means that residents might know a project, not know that it has been approved until it's potentially constructed. Additionally, the ordinance appears to shift some authority in selecting locations for new facilities over to the telecom providers with no input from the zoning administration. While these companies play an important role in providing our service, their priorities are focused on installing new facilities, cutting costs, They are not interested in preserving the safety or character of Newport Beach. Additionally, it was unclear to me whether these new streamlined processes involve only small cell towers, or do they also involve those larger 40-, 60-foot towers, Class IV towers. Many cities have setbacks for these large installations. I didn't notice that there were any setbacks listed in the proposed new ordinance. Is council considering adding these, especially given that there's going to be no public appeal process or input? There are many of us whose homes are adjacent to private or city owned commercial land and without a setback requirement could potentially like a 40 foot cell tower be constructed within 25 feet of our homes if we move right on that border. The reason I raise this question is that these larger facilities also require some increased infrastructure. They need backup generators. They need a big tank of diesel fuel. And if you're going to put this in an area of Newport Beach at high, already high fire risk right next to our homes and right next to our parks, I think it's important that there is some public notification of this and that the zoning commission can weigh in on the discussion. So I would ask the council to just consider re-looking at the provisions that limit public appeal, public notification, and limiting our zoning commission review of these important projects. We want to streamline this process. We all want better cell phone coverage, but the process should not be at the expense of our community safety and the character of Newport Beach. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Jurgis, would you just give Mr. Brown your card, please? Thank you. Any other comments?

So the mayor can briefly respond to comments and direct you to reference staff. There's no violation of the Brown Act if that's what you're implying.

Okay, thank you. If she can respond, can I then respond?

No, it's not. It's basically your opportunity to make public comment. And you've made your public comments, not a forum for debate over an item. She can briefly respond to the item that's within the that's within the purview of the Brown Act. So there's no issue.

Do we have any other public comments?

Yes.

Please go ahead.

Yeah, good afternoon, Mayor, council, council members. My name is Chris Bliss. I submitted a video I wanted to show, showing the points of contention and some of just the nuts and bolts of the whole mooring issue. These are some of the Newport Harbor moorings. Over 1,000 middle-class boaters rely on these moorings for affordable boating in Orange County. And these are the private piers owned by Bayfront homeowners. Private pier owners have numerous amenities such as fresh water, electricity, walk on, walk off access, and equipment storage, making boating easy and convenient. The mooring users, on the other hand, have no such advantages. Even accessing your boat is inconvenient and challenging. and doing maintenance on the water adds a whole new level of difficulty. Private pier owners often rent out space at their docks, which are over the state tidelands, for high rent, often making tens of thousands of dollars per year, with little or none of that going to the tidelands fund. Mooring permittees are not allowed to rent their moorings. If their mooring is vacant, the City can rent it out and keep the proceeds with nothing going to the permittee who owns, pays for, and maintains the mooring equipment. Both the piers and the moorings are within a few feet of each other and share the same title and space. Both have the same function, which is a place to park a boat. Both require a permit and pay fees to the city, yet the mooring users are required to pay multiple times more than the pier users, despite the inconvenience and lack of amenities. This outrageous inequity and discrimination has been happening for decades. The Newport moorings are the only affordable coastal access for boaters in Orange County. Now, the city plans mooring rate hikes ranging to more than 500%. This will ultimately make boating in Southern California unaffordable to all but the very wealthy. The Newport moorings have provided affordable coastal access for middle class families for 100 years. Please help protect this invaluable resource. Thanks for watching. There are many easy fixes to so many of these problems. And we invite the city to reach out to us to come to a fair and easy solution to some of these problems, which has been going on for years and years and years. Thank you. It's an easy fix.

afternoon, Adam Levins. I had a couple of slides I would like called up. And in relation to the video you just saw, there's been some spin from people that mooring permit holders are trying to jack up everybody else's fees. That's not accurate. We're not saying that anybody is paying too much. We're just saying that the lowest tier access is paying far more than almost everybody else in the harbor. And this has been going on for a long time. This first slide you've seen previously, and I've told you that I'm just trying to have you become more fully informed because I think better decisions come from being better and fully informed. According to the city Tidelands Financials, there's about 1,200 moorings in Newport. They contribute $1.9 million annually into the Tidelands Fund. there's about half again as many commercial slips and side ties and You look at the slip rates at commercial marinas. They have to be making many millions of dollars But they contribute less to the tidal and funds and moorings at one point three eight million and then a similar number of residential piers as moorings approximately twelve hundred contribute two hundred and eighty two thousand dollars next slide, please The mooring rate calculated on a per square foot basis is $1.39 a square foot per year. Below that in the green boxes, these are the city's commercial tidelands fees. And all of those in the green boxes pay less than the substantially more challenging to use moorings that, as the previous speaker noted, were not permitted to rent out. We own the equipment, pay to maintain the equipment, acquire permits under city mandated policies. And commercial businesses that pay less medium commercial arenas, small commercial arenas, shipyards, HOA, and docks for non-member uses of 13,000 to 30,000 square feet, zero to 13,000 square feet, yacht club slips, vessel render facility, boat rentals, sport fishing charters, restaurant guest slips, vessel charters, fuel docks, all others. Some of them pay less than half what mooring permits pay. for, as the video said, walk on, walk off access. It's just so counterintuitive that the lowest tier, most challenging, least amenity boat berthing in Newport has for at least a decade been paying far more than anyone else. And we're just looking for equity and equality. You know, a lot of people with boats, more than half of the people on the moorings can't afford to live in Newport Beach. But this is not city property. This is state tidelands, and it's for everybody. And if we could convince some of the folks on the other side that that's true, maybe we wouldn't be in the pickle we are right now. Thank you.

Any other speakers?

good afternoon my name is michael alti i'm here to urge you to substantially increase enforcement against illegal motorcycles on our sidewalks and and bike paths by the police department i moved here from los angeles about 20 years ago los angeles is not a very safe place to bike and newport at the time was a very safe place to bike i really appreciated the bike paths, the back bay, the boardwalk, the river. We have really great facilities. About 15 years ago, the city, I'm not sure if you're aware, had a bicycle safety committee. It was run by Mayor Gardner and later Tony Petros, and I was on that committee for a few years. At the time, the danger was over a two-year period, about eight different people were killed on their bikes by vehicles. Now our situation is very different. That committee doesn't exist anymore, but the danger is from motorcycles. I know a lot of people call them e-bikes, but they're really motorcycles. These shouldn't really be called bicycles. I know you change your ordinance. effective January and there's a new state law. Right now I have two kids and I want to take them out biking on our bike paths on the sidewalk and the boardwalk. We live very close to the boardwalk and we don't feel safe. I don't feel safe. My kids don't feel safe. It's completely, completely out of control. You see these teenagers, sometimes they're adults, usually it's teenagers, and they act like the road belongs to them. You tell them they're not supposed to be on their motorcycle. They yell at you that, what are you going to do about it? Because they don't have license plates. So I can't take a video and report them. That's pretty useless. Whenever I'm on the bike path, on the peninsula, wherever, I don't really see any police stopping these individuals. I spoke with Sergeant Spencer today and he informed me that there is some enforcement, but that the police department doesn't have enough resources and has other priorities and can't go and have more enforcement. But if you have over the summer, over the course of a few months, every single weekend, police at the bike path on the boardwalk, jamboree, other places, the back bay, stopping people, that would get the word out and these kids would stop using these motorcycles if they get confiscated. That's how you do it. This shouldn't be a controversy. It should be pretty easy to do with some leadership initiative and dedication over even just a few months period. The word will get out. These motorcycles get confiscated. The parents will get the message and it'll stop. And I also urge you to work with neighboring cities, the county Huntington Beach to add to all work together on enforcement, especially on the river trail and really needs more leadership here because it's out of control and it's very unsafe.

Thank you. Any other speakers?

Good afternoon. My name is Bjorn Hazelquist. I'm the founder of a local nonprofit called Strength and Pain Foundation based out of Costa Mesa. We are an organization dedicated to supporting survivors of brain injury and concussion. I'm also a local surfer. I was born and raised here in Newport, and like many others, I learned to surf at Blocky's and have been surfing in this community for over 30 years. For my entire life, Newport Beach has had blackball rules to protect swimmers. In essence, what I'm proposing tonight is blackball for beginner surfers, or as experienced surfers affectionately refer to them, kooks. Newport Beach has some of the most heavily surfed beaches in the world, and with that comes a real and growing safety problem that this council has the power to address. In 2022 and 2024, I personally suffered two concussions and one major neck injury from two separate collisions in the water. On both occasions, the surfer who hit me lacked the experience and skill to safely navigate the conditions they paddled out into. They should not have been out there. I suffered personal injury and financial damages in the form of out of pocket medical expenses that exceeded $10,000. And yet, under current law, I had no legal recourse because the harm was unintentional Courts typically ruled that the injured party assumed the inherited risk of the sport and the case is dismissed. I believe the nature of this entire situation is fundamentally unfair. Just like all of us here would not be comfortable with a 12-year-old child with no driving experience taking a car for a joyride on the 405 freeway at rush hour, most experienced surfers are not comfortable with absolute beginners paddling out at advanced surfing spots. Unnecessary collisions and injuries inevitably happen when there is no regulation over where beginners are allowed to serve. So at the local level, I'm asking this council to take two practical steps. First, post large, clearly visible informational signage at Newport Beach surfing spots, similar to what already exists at Trestles and San Onofre. These signs map the breaks and specify the skill level and equipment required to surf safely, as well as specify which spots are for experienced surfers only. They set clear expectations before anyone paddles out. And second, I support citation authority for local enforcement when beginner surfers disregard posting guidelines and cause injury to others. I also want to be clear about what I'm not asking for. I firmly oppose a state-mandated surfing license, and I do not support a local city-mandated surfing license either. A city surfing license has been done in the past, in the 1960s, and during that era, it seemed to be more about control and collecting revenue for the city than anything else. So in conclusion, I just ask that something be done about this issue. I don't want to get hurt again. I don't want to see anybody else get hurt again. So thank you for your time.

Thank you. Any other speakers?

seeing none now is the time for council announcements or reports from council members on committee activities and the time for council members to request an item be placed on a future agenda council member wagon do you have any announcements or reports yes i do having served the city as our vector control representative there are two items that i wanted to bring up we approved a design build contract for with snyder langston with gensler as our designer for our 1949 building that we have that needs to be rebuilt on site in Garden Grove. So we're moving forward with that process. And then also there was a recent, it's called 80s Squaminger and it's a winter salt marsh mosquito and it was having a heavy breeding season in the Randall Preserve. And so the prevailing winds can send them up to 20 miles away and they ended up in Costa Mesa. but there was a significant hatch off in the brackish water. So it's a brackish water mosquito, and there was a high tide event mixed with some fresh water that created a ton of these mosquitoes that were breeding. So our teams came in, helped in a localized spray to take those down, and that's been helpful so far, but this was something that I don't think we were expecting, and the team is on it and has brought those levels back down, but that was something that I found interesting that I should share, so thank you.

Thank you. Council Member Bartow.

Yes, a couple of weeks ago I was pleased to attend the first of many weekly farmers markets up on Dover Drive over by Bob Henry Park and Newport Harbor Lutheran. It was the first day, so I think everyone came in with low expectations, but it was a really well done farmers market, so I encourage everyone to attend. They're going to be there every Saturday. And then around December, they plan on doing some kind of Christmas market thing. So again, I'm kind of picky and wouldn't recommend it unless they did an excellent job. I think everyone would enjoy it.

Council Member Grant. Thank you. I first want to congratulate our Utilities Director, Mark Mikoyechek. He was able to speak at Speak Up Newport this month and give us a wonderful update on the history of our water reliability in Newport Beach and We basically get an A-plus on our report card. We'll be water independent very shortly, and that's in large regard to many people that came before Mark, but he's definitely carrying the mantle for that. I also was able to attend the 1-1 Marines Foundation Mess Night. 1-1 is our Marine Foundation here in the city of Newport Beach. It was at the Balboa Bay Resort and it was a really memorable evening celebrating the 20 years our community has devoted to supporting the Marines at Camp Pendleton. And then finally I am grateful that local business Casey Lesher Real Estate hosted a sort of a startup community appreciation day in Corona Del Mar with a vintage car show and an In-N-Out truck and Lots of residents coming, and it was a nice way for a business to appreciate the community. So thank you to Casey Lesher Real Estate. That's all.

Council member Weber. None. Council member Stapleton.

I just want to thank the Newport Shores HOA annual meeting. They had me over there, gave a state of District 1 and a state of the city, which was great. So I appreciate them having me every year. And then to the public works team, utilities department, congrats to the Newport Beach Foundation. We went and fed our public works and utilities employees. I don't know, 150 employees or something showed up with Beach City Barbecue, and I was there with the mayor, and it was a lot of fun to...

Say thank you to those that are maybe left on the other side of town sometimes so great effort Mayor Pro Tem Thank You madam mayor nothing dad Madam clerk, would you please read the notice regarding public comments on the consent calendar?

I

This is a time in which council members may pull items from the consent calendar for discussion, items 1 through 11. Public comments are also invited on 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 by one motion in the form listed below. Council members have received detailed staff reports on each of the items recommending the 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 for separate action.

Council or why and you have any items to pull from the consent calendar or complex to announce relate to items number one through 11.

No, I do.

Council member Bartow I do not Council member grant none Council member Weber none Council member Stapleton done. Mayor pretend long.

I have none, but I did just want to comment quickly on item 10, the purchase of the auto pulse automatic checks compression devices that I think we all need to be fully aware of how impactful they are in the city, saving lives and the amazing work the fire department does using. So thank you.

Thank you. Are there any members of the public that would like to speak on the consent calendar at this time?

Adam Levins, just several quick things. The minutes that you're approving from the last meeting indicated that I had supported heightened qualifications for the appointment of citizens to the finance committee. I submitted a correction to that. What I had suggested that I had faith in all of you to vet candidates and that I hoped you'd be open-minded enough to not limit it to only people with a formal education or a degree in finance because sometimes there's people without those things that make lots of money and become incredibly successful. Consent item nine, general plan and housing progress report. Again, encouraging some actual affordable housing to be built and I'll tie that in with consent item 11, which is a planning commission agenda for an upcoming thing that as I understand it will come before you in the future. But as Newport Place planned community development plan amendment to revise the minimum inclusionary affordable housing percentage applicable to for sale housing development within the residential overlay from 15% to 6%. another reduction of what isn't already being built as far as affordable housing. And with the in lieu fees, I've seen other places where a developer can claim to build affordable housing somewhere else undetermined at some point in the future undetermined, or they can pay a $36,000 fine. I've pointed out that it's more economically sensible for them to simply pay the fine. And I worry that at some point the state's going to come down that the city is not even coming close to meeting its affordable housing mandates and I hope there's some plan I'm not aware of but but thought really needs to be put into this and again reducing the percentage because developers apparently can't construct affordable units and make money there's got to be some kind of an option thank you.

Any other comments.

Hello, Mayor, city council members. Ron Rubino, East Bluff resident, took time off from the Hoag Classic to come over, so I'm not dressed up very well today. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you. My comment is on number nine, the housing status report. I went through the report. Table A shows 1,701 units, of which 165 were ADUs. Table A2 reports 168 permits, of which 10 actually have gotten to occupancy. In the last five years on the sixth cycle, we have 352 units towards our goal. The mandate is 4,845 affordable units. We have 4,493 to go with only four years left. So five years into it, if you do the math, we're not on a good track. And we're not going to make it unless something different happens. Table B is really informative. I encourage the public to go down into the detail. I have a couple of quick questions that I'd like you to ask staff and deal with in the future and make it in a public forum so we can hear the discussion. Is the density bonus concept used in the city's housing plan working? Is it really producing the affordable units? I don't see the math. Year to date versus projection says you're not going to make it. What is not meeting the state mandate in terms of permitted projects by the end of the sixth cycle? Are there penalties? Will it give the developers more rights? Will it roll over as an additional goal for the seventh cycle? Will this deficit be able to be caught up by the end of the sixth cycle? Can the city sponsor single purpose projects such as seniors, veterans, and workforce housing with assistance in land costs? Can there be grants? Can there be loans? What creative ideas do we have? I read about them in other cities. I don't see anything like that going on in Newport Beach. We need 100% projects that are going to be geared to the affordable units, which is a good thing to have in our community, not a bad thing. And so that's my comments. I'd like to see discussion of this progress report where you don't have to dig through to find the numbers. My review says we're not on track to make the goal. What's the impact?

Thank you.

uh mayor clyman members of the council my name again is jim mosher and my first comment is if i'm understanding the agenda correctly the entire business of the city council tonight is on the mr mosher did you already comment on consent i believe he came up and commented on consent already during uh general comments i commented on the minutes which is one item calendar mr mosher thank you

ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON CONSENT? SEEING NONE, DO WE HAVE A MOTION?

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I HAVE A MOTION WITH THE ADJUSTMENT OF THE MINUTES.

COUNCILMEMBER WEBER SECONDS. LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE.

Motion carried by unanimous vote.

Madam Clerk, 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 council members who voted with the prevailing side.

Are there any motions for reconsideration? Hearing none, we will proceed to close session. Are there any council members who have any conflicts to announce on closed session agenda?

Yeah, I do. I'm recused on closed session item 4B and C based on real property interest at 4100 and 4110 MacArthur.

Before we go out for public comment, I just want to mention that we will adjourn this meeting in memory of Norma Pat Moore, council member.

Yes, thank you, Madam Mayor. Tonight we adjourn in memory of Norma Pat Maurer. Norma was a beloved grandmother, Navy veteran, and long-time Balboa Island resident. Born in 1923, she served in the United States Navy during World War II as part of the historic Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Service, also known as the WAVES. While stationed in San Diego, she met her husband, Phil, at the Hotel Del Coronado. The couple were married in 1945 and made their home on Balboa Island where they lived for 40 years and raised two sons. Phil later served on the Newport Beach City Council as mayor in the 1980s. Pat was active in the community, including her involvement with the Balboa Island Improvement Association and as a docent for local theaters. In 1998, Pat and Phil retired to Fallbrook where she enjoyed gardening, entertaining friends, and staying active on the tennis court. After Phil's passing in 2002, Norma returned to Newport Beach where she spent her later years surrounded by friends and family. Pat passed away just one month shy of her 103rd birthday. We are grateful for her service to our country and her lasting connection to Newport Beach community. We extend our deepest condolences to her sons Matthew and Craig and daughter-in-law Jay and their four grandchildren. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any comments on closed session?

Adam Leverins, regarding closed session item A, it states anticipated litigation, threat of litigation. This is referring to a letter from a law firm regarding concerns of violations of the Brown Act at a previous meeting. I went through and watched the video of the meeting from February 24th. and noted that a member of the public had read an agenda item, and I'll read it. Ordinance number 26-2, amending various sections of the Newport Beach Municipal Code to address illegal activity during high-risk periods. It was noted that that didn't describe what you all voted on and discussed. It turned out that some of these things are 365 days a year. And to say on an agenda item that is doing something only during high-risk periods and then implement it year-round was stated as a matter of concern on the 24th. I believe it was on February 10th. THERE'S A LETTER FROM A LAW FIRM NOW. I SEE ANOTHER LETTER FROM THE SHORT-TERM LODGING PEOPLE. I HAD SENT EMAILS TO STAFF AND THE CITY ATTORNEY RESPONDED SAYING, NO, THESE RULES ARE YEAR ROUND. I JUST HOPE, I MEAN, THERE'S AN ATTORNEY OVER HERE, THERE'S TWO ATTORNEYS UP HERE. I HOPE YOU CAN RECOGNIZE something as simple as this. And as Mr. Mosher stated in his written remarks, this isn't a threat of litigation. It's just seeking a correction of process. And it doesn't seem that that should be so hard to do. And just there are people that come up here and say things you should really take to heart and at least consider rather than just ramming stuff through as frequently as it looks like happens. Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Mayor Kleinman and members of the council, my name is Jim Mosher. I too would comment on closed session item 4A, which is the letter that was received politely asking the city to reconsider the ordinance that had not been properly noticed. I think there's no doubt that the part of it about shade structures was not It was not clearly noticed. It was not only not clearly noticed, it was misleadingly noticed so that people reading the agenda did not know what that item is. This becomes a threat of litigation or actually exposure to litigation only if you choose not to reintroduce that part of the ordinance and I certainly urge you to do that. It's very simple as Adam said and it's the right thing to do. As to the letter regarding this that you also got from the Short-Term Lodging Owners Association, I did not see them complaining about the notice of that. It was a little vague, but not quite so bad. But I would point out attending that meeting and the following meeting where the ordinance was again discussed, I thought that it was very misleadingly described to the council at that meeting. I repeatedly heard the city attorney tell you that the mandatory revocation portion of that short-term lodging ordinance, which will come into effect during the next spring break period, would be triggered only by the most egregious violations. But if you actually read the list of conditions that trigger mandatory revocation, extremely minor infractions by tenants of a short-term lodging That as drafted and as you approved Will cause mandatory revocation. I thought that was misleading for people to think that it was only very serious violations It is not minor violations as well. You just read what the ordinance says. Thank you.

Thank you any other speakers Seeing none. Mr. Harp, please announce our closed session items. I

you mayor the city council will adjourn a closed session to meet with legal counsel discuss potential litigation based on alleged violation of the brown act on february 10th 2026 related to an ordinance submitting the municipal code concerning shade coverings the initiation of litigation regarding one matter and one matter of existing litigation entitled newport beach stewardship association versus the city of newport beach and that's all on the agenda under items 4a through c thank you thank you we are now adjourned to closed