City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Hello. Do you know Marilee Cray? No, hi. Former mayor. Hi, nice to see you. You gave a great time.

I'm sure that was a perfectly objective.

Thank you.

Oh, yeah.

But you know, I mean, I wish they would stop. I have never known that.

Thank you. Thank you.

Yes, so whenever it comes up.

Thank you.

Yeah, I'm sorry.

I'LL CALL THE AUGUST 25TH NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC FACILITIES CORPORATION MEETING TO ORDER. MADAM SECRETARY, ROLL CALL, PLEASE.

ALL BOARD MEMBERS, BOARD OF DIRECTORS PRESENT.

WE'LL NOW HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA AND NON-AGENDA ITEMS FOR THE PUBLIC FACILITIES CORPORATION. ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS?

Chair Kleinman, members of the board, my name is Jim Mosher. I don't see any acknowledgement of it in writing in the lobby, but as I pointed out in writing, item Roman numeral three on the agenda is the election of officers. But you changed your bylaws last year, and so you no longer elect officers. So I assume that item will be withdrawn from the agenda. And then the second comment, I would compliment the city clerk on having kept your records with the Secretary of State somewhat up to date. Last year they were in arrears, but it's been corrected. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers? OKAY. MOVING ON, MR. MOSIER IS CORRECT. THE ELECTION OF OFFICERS IS NOW DONE AUTOMATICALLY. SO WE'LL GO AHEAD AND SKIP THAT ITEM. MOVING TO ITEM APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES ON OUR CONSENT CALENDAR. AGAIN, THIS IS FOR MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 26, 2025 NEWPORT BEACH PUBLIC FACILITIES CORPORATION MEETING AND ITEM TWO, REVIEW OF ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. VICE CHAIR BLUM, DO I HAVE A MOTION?

We do have a motion to approve the minutes as written. Thank you.

Is there a second? Seconded by Councilmember Grant. Are there any other director comments? Seeing none, let's go ahead and vote by hand. Motion carried unanimously. AND THAT TAKES US TO ADJOURNMENT FOR OUR PUBLIC FACILITIES CORPORATION. THE TIME IS NOW 4.05 AND I WILL CALL THE AUGUST 25TH CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO ORDER. MADAM CLERK, ROLL CALL, PLEASE.

ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT.

NOW IS THE TIME FOR OUR INVOCATION THAT WILL BE LED BY ST. JOHN THE DIVINE EPISCOPAL CHURCH. FOLLOWING THAT, MAYOR POTEM BLOM WILL LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF LEGIONS.

From the good book which is Jeremiah 29 is saying seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile and pray for the Lord on its behalf. For in its welfare you will have your welfare too. Let us pray.

Guide the city council in Russia's

decisions bring joy to their duties and let your truth prevail. May justice flow like an ever-present stream. Hear our prayer for the city welfare. We are thankful to you for the strong force of the labor, those who are working in this city, that supplies the tax base. And we thank you for the city management because all these are being done in a way that is pleasing to you. You are blessed, Newport Beach, with this and we count this as kindness from you, oh God. We ask you to bless our neighborhoods with safe homes where families are free from tyranny of any kind We are grateful to you for our fire department, which is always ready for any emergency, and our police department, which serves you with respect from minor incidents to serious crimes. We pray for safety and justice. Finally, we ask that you bless the city office If not for their attention to detail, the routine, even the mundane, we should not have the flourishing community that we have today. Bless this city with more of what honors you. Bless Newport Beach with council members who honor you when they ask good questions and make hard decisions. Bless this. Bless our mayor. Bless the city manager. Bless all the departments that we have and the citizens of this good city. May the fame of our city reach the ears of all, a city blessed by her God. In Jesus' name, amen.

If you'd all join us in pledging allegiance to this great country. I pledge allegiance.

To the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation,

OUR NEXT ITEM IS A CHECK PRESENTATION BY THE NEWPORT BEACH ARTS FOUNDATION. WE WILL HAVE GERALD KAPPEL AND THE CEO COME TO THE PODIUM TO SAY A FEW WORDS AND THEN WE WILL GO AHEAD AND TAKE A PHOTO.

Yes, it's the Library Foundation of Newport Beach is here today. And we are delighted to represent the foundation. Jerry Capo, our CEO, and I am the chair of the foundation. As you know, our mission is to support our beautiful five-star library. and the exceptional services it provides to the community. So on behalf of the board of directors of the Newport Beach Library Foundation, it is my pleasure to present this check to all of you for 182,500 in support of the outstanding work of our library and its continued commitment to serving the Newport Beach community. We're proud to support the library and we're really grateful for everything it does to enrich the lives of so many people in our community. So thank you very much.

One of the great joys I have is coming to work each day and walking into the library and seeing a very hardworking staff. and all the people that come in. And I think the city should be very proud of its library and of the support it gives it. I know as the CEO of the foundation, it gives me a real pleasure to know that what we're supporting is something that is very important to the people of Newport Beach. In fact, important to everyone in Orange County. So your support is very critical and I urge you to keep that support up and make it grow if you can. And we're very happy to be able to do our job in supporting the library. And in fact, This year, not only this $182,500 that is being donated to you, but between the funds we've given to literacy and to other funds we've distributed throughout the year, it's almost $234,000 that we've contributed to the library, plus another $175,000 in programmings for the people of our community. So thank you for your continued support of the library, and we're glad to be partners with you in it.

Thank you. We'll join you down there for a photo.

Move a little bit this way.

everyone take a step to your left let's go a little bit more yeah there we go okay everyone right here ready one two three one two

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. Reading comments are encouraged as well. The City Council has a discretion to extend or shorten the time limit on agenda and non-agenda items. i have about five people on a zoom meeting so at this time the zoom connection is active for public participation anyone wishing to address the council during public comment via zoom should use the raise hand feature speakers will be recognized in the order received when called upon please unmute your microphone state your name for the record and proceed with your comments

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, current business and closed session later in the meeting provided they do not comment on those items at this time. A speaker who comments on any consent calendar item will not be permitted to comment again on the consent calendar later in the meeting. Do we have any

Nancy Gardner representing Good Neighbor Newport want to talk about our election code of conduct. Some of you have called Newport Beach the greatest city in the world, and while that may be a bit hyperbolic, it does suggest that we set a very high standard for ourselves, and we want to be sure that same high standard is met in our elections, our local elections. And those who sign on, we don't expect you not to criticize your opponents, but we hope that you will criticize them based on the truth and the relevance of what your comments are. Last time around, all but one candidate signed up. We're hoping for 100% this time. But our biggest hope is that we have a campaign based on programs and principles, not personalities and parties. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker. Let's refrain from clapping, please. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Teresa Hernandez. I'm a 30-year resident of Newport Beach. First, I want to thank all of you for serving our community. I know it's a lot of work, and I appreciate you. I know the item I'm going to speak about is not on the agenda, but it's important you know how hundreds or maybe thousands of your constituents feel. I and many others do not want to relocate the police station at the City Hall property. $200 million is an obscene amount of money to spend on a police station. You already spent $33 million for a location on Dove Street for a new station. You can use that space. Nobody wants a police station located next to our library where I take my grandkids. The police station is where every pedophile in Newport Beach has to register. We have a relatively new $15 million park next to City Hall that many residents use and tourists, and we don't want that ripped out. Better yet, you can remodel the current station on Santa Barbara Street and make it state of the art for our officers. Many said that's not possible. That's absurd. Thousands of stations have been remodeled in our country and California, including Costa Mesa in 2003. Santa Barbara and Sausalito, all in California. They all house the police in temporary trailers while under construction. Then you can sell Dove Street and use the $33 million to bring sand to the wedge. I would ask... that the million dollars you have allocated for an EIR on the City Hall site be stopped and used to review a different location or just save the money and use Dove Street. I would also ask that you stop the $350,000 allocation you voted on to hire a PR agency to convince all of us that this is a good project. We can make up our own minds. I would like to thank Councilpersons Joe Stapleton and Robin Grant for voting against that particular proposal. Lastly, this letter that was sent to Nextdoor social media platform by our mayor asking to help mitigate problematic posts is outrageous. Last I checked, we still have free speech in America and Newport Beach. Please listen to your constituents. Be good stewards of our hard-earned tax dollars. Remember, you work for all of us in the audience. We're blessed to live in this incredible city. Let's keep it that way. Again, thank you for your service.

Again, let's please refrain from clapping. Thank you.

Good evening. Over the past several months, Newport Beach residents have learned about a series of actions that, taken together, raise serious questions about transparency, accountability, and whose interests the city council is actually serving. First, there is the issue of the public speech, again, on next door. Public records show communication involving Mayor Kleinman, City Public Information Officer Georgia Rios, and next door concerning what were described as problematic posts. Residents, including me, were suspended while criticizing city problems. I brought these records and my concerns directly to our city attorney and asked him to investigate potential violations of law and city policy. Instead of addressing the complete set of documents I supplied, his response completely avoided them. I have now sought an independent legal review to take this further. Then there's the city's continued fight against its own residents over their right to vote. After the city was rebuked, humiliated, and nearly cited with contempt by the judge in court, it was forced to place the housing initiative on the ballot. Yet rather than accept that decision and respect the voters, the city attorney in a complete and breathtaking display of arrogance announced that the city it tends to appeal think about that taxpayer dollars are being used to fight taxpayers over whether taxpayers have the right to vote i think as of today this case may be over we deserve a city government that listens to his residents instead of fighting them Then we have the increasingly troubling influence of the police and fire unions. Their political action committees are supporting the reelection campaigns of Lauren Kleinman and Eric Weigen. Those same unions produced reports supporting relocation of our public safety facilities, including the proposal to put the police headquarters and jail in our beautiful Civic Center Park. And frankly, some of the members on this council don't even own a single piece of property in Newport Beach, yet you are making enormous long-term decisions affecting our property, our parks, our tax dollars, and the future of our city. There's a common thread running through all this if you look at it. Public speech, public money, public land, and the public's right to vote. We are the people you are elected here. I do not think even Dave Ellis can help you out of this mess. But ultimately, he doesn't get the final word, the voters do. And this November, the voters are paying attention.

Next speaker, please.

And if I could just interrupt for just a moment, we don't typically allow clapping for or against people. So if you could refrain from clapping, that'd be great. You can kind of go like this if you support. That way everyone knows you support. But the clapping is something that we just don't do here. All right. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Nini. I've lived in Newport Heights for the last 14 years, and I love this neighborhood. I understand that some of my neighbors feel strongly about moving utilities underground. They may believe it will improve the appearances of our neighborhood. or provide some other benefits. They are entitled to that opinion, but I do not believe that one group of homeowners should be allowed to impose a huge financial obligation on neighbors who do not share that preference and may not be able to afford it. Residents are hearing that the total cost for undergrounding could reach 60,000 and above. plus per property, plus the cost of repairing, hardscaping, and landscaping. We do not yet know actual numbers, and that uncertainty is part of the problem, especially when asking residents to sign a petition without complete information. For residents living on fixed income, this is not a minor home improvement expense. Financing also does not make it affordable. We are hearing claims that undergrounding is necessary for safety, but both overhead and underground system have risk, including during earthquakes. Before residents are required to assume such a large expense, we deserve independent project-specific evidence showing that undergrounding would truly improve safety and reliability in Newport Heights, not comparison to... communities with different fire conditions. Our neighborhood already devoted a lot of time and energy to this issue in 2016. Residents researched it, debated it, and voted. The larger district rejected the proposal. It is exhausting and unsettling for longtime residents to face the same possibility again, now at a higher cost. Please give equal consideration to those of us who love Newport Heights. We want to remain in our homes and do not consent to this expense. A project of this magnitude should not advance without clear, overwhelming, and lasting community support. And the last thing is that last week when I was here, one of the city councils said that city of Newport Beach is not advocating the undergrounding. If this is the case, then let everyone know that this is not a mandatory. Everybody can decide on their own. They can pay for their own and leave everyone alone. Thank you for listening.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Good evening, everybody.

Hello.

My name is Brent Linus. I'm the founder of Creek Team. I'm here to speak about item 19 and specifically commend you guys on moving forward with removing synthetic herbicides in your turfs and in your public spaces where your children play. I STARTED CREEK TEAM TO EXPOSE THE TRUTH THAT THE COUNTY WAS SPRAYING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF GALLONS OF HERBICIDE INTO OUR CREEKS AND RIVERS WITH NO PUBLIC NOTICE AND ZERO CONSENT FROM THE PUBLIC. THAT HERBICIDE WAS KILLING OUR CREEKS, IT WAS WASHING ONTO OUR BEACHES, AND IT WAS GETTING OUR KIDS SICK. It was killing endangered species habitat. And that was done with no health considerations. That journey turned me into an accidental herbicide activist, I guess you could say. By trying to save our creeks from our own county government, I realized that herbicide is literally everywhere. Herbicide is a silent assault. If you walk into an area that was just sprayed with herbicide, there is no odor. There is no idea You have no idea that herbicide was sprayed there and that's part of the problem. It's very pernicious It uncovers an ugly truth that herbicide and the exposure to herbicide is a cumulative issue and Experts say that tracking that cumulative exposure is vital to understanding all of our risk. But that, under today's regulations, is completely impossible. Children are particularly vulnerable to this exposure. And what do kids love to do? They love to play in the dirt. They love to play in fields. They love to play in our creeks and at our beaches. All of these places have herbicide on them right now. So what you guys are doing today I think is very important. Banning herbicides and the use of herbicides is vital for our children's health. And I'd like to thank you guys for taking the initiative to do that. But this is also a little bit of a Band-Aid. In your own staff report, the IPM that you're using still allows the use of herbicide. in areas that you would deem not accessible to the public. And I can tell you that that is a great loophole for the herbicide industry. And I've seen it over and over again, that they will take advantage of that. And they will go in and they will use that as a way to reintroduce herbicides in places that you thought you took action on. YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE THAT MAKE HERBICIDE, IT'S BIG BUSINESS. IT'S HUGE BUSINESS AND THEY HAVE HUGE BACKERS AND THEY WILL FIND A WAY AND THEY WILL COME BACK AND TRY TO FIND A WAY TO GET BACK IN HERE TO CHANGE THE MOMENTUM THAT'S BUILDING ACROSS ORANGE COUNTY. BUT JUST KNOW THAT CREEK TEAM AND THE CREEK TEAM MOMS THAT ARE HERE ARE ALWAYS WATCHING. SO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.

Hi, my name is Aria Norman. I have lived, I have worked here, and I have loved Newport Beach so deeply throughout my whole life. And I'm just really concerned that people are being denied their right to vote. I just think that all of the initiatives need to be put onto the ballot. I just believe so deeply in my community here, and we can't show up for each other if we don't have the right to vote. And yeah, thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Hello, my name is Michael. I'm here to support the strict term limits initiative. Term limits support accountability and fresh ideas from new leadership. Clinging to power only makes people question your motives. So let's close the loophole and let the voters decide.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hello, my name is Honesty Lawrence. I love Newport Beach. I've been a part of the community for a while now. I just wanted to come up here and say that I appreciate the initiatives that have been done to help this city, but I also wanted to say that I believe that taxpayer dollars should serve the public, and when an issue belongs before voters, let voters decide. Transparency and accountability builds trust, and at the end of the day, people deserve a vote. That's all. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Hi, I'm Cole Butler. I grew up in this beautiful city. I don't pretend to be an expert on the police station, but I do believe in listening to the opinions of experts. And I want to read Dave Miner, the Newport Beach police chief, and what he said about the police station. It is logistically advantageous to be centrally located as possible in the event that we do need a surge of resources or to cut down and travel time back and forth to the station headquarters. The issue becomes when there is a need for an increased amount of police presence in an area, whether it is SWAT activation or a crime in progress that requires more than the normal patrol operations allocates. We will surge resources from the police station, and that could be with the SWAT team. It could also be on-duty detectives that are typically working at their desk. SO I AM FOR THE POLICE STATION MOVING TO THIS AREA. I THINK HAVING IT CENTRALLY LOCATED JUST MAKES SENSE, AND I DO BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD REALLY LISTEN TO THE EXPERTS, AND IN MY OPINION, I THINK THERE'S NO BETTER EXPERT THAN OUR NEWPORT BEACH POLICE CHIEF. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.

Good afternoon, Council Members, Mayor Klamen. I'm very happy to be here to speak for just a moment on a subject called undergrounding. Did I say my name? No. Mike Henn.

Can I start over?

I always liked that one better.

Anyway, my name is Mike Henn. I am a resident of Newport Heights. I am also in favor of the undergrounding initiative in the Heights. The first point to make is this is a perfectly democratic process. It is conducted in accordance with state law and it is managed, as you know, by the city to assure compliance with that law every step of the way. It's the democratic process. Last week at Council there were several speakers that spoke in opposition to the undergrounding initiative. They made a number of statements that were false or misrepresenting the situation. I feel compelled to talk about just a few of those today for your benefit and for the benefit of Heights residents that sorry, Heights residents that may be listening. First thing was a speaker got up and put up a list of seven or eight failed undergrounding attempts in the Heights. He failed to mention that just within the last two years, a district of 46 homes in the Heights was approved and completed. And I think he was trying to leave the impression that there's no possible way that this undergrounding initiative could be approved because it doesn't have the support. We know that is not true. I'll speak about that in just a minute. Another speaker complained that we sent out a mailer that included a petition signature page, but not the petition itself. That was a complete oversight. The only time that has happened, we have completely fixed that and made sure that everyone who has signed our petition has had a copy of the petition to look at, a full copy of the petition to look at. Another speaker said that the currently estimated $49,900 cost is likely to go to 80,000 or 100,000 before construction is completed. That is a completely false statement that has no basis in the facts as the city has constructed them. The city's $49,900 estimate was made in assuming construction would not begin for a few years. It includes inflation estimates. And in the first place, it's based upon recently completed projects, not the least of which was the 1,200 homes in Balboa Island.

Go ahead and wrap up. Thank you.

Thank you. Bottom line, we have hundreds of positions signed in hand. We expect to meet our deadline of 60% threshold. And if we do, that will be proof positive that a majority of the residents in the Heights want this and want to see it happen. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Hi, I'm Carol King from Irvine Terrace. I'm sure you've seen my name on many, many emails that I've sent to you. I've even sent emails to Mr. Blom asking for information that would be on the website. No response. I've been to council meetings asking what about this and what about that and what about that? No response. I've asked for Q&A sessions. No response. So today I decided don't ask questions. I'm just going to give you my genius idea. First of all, forget the bus station moving. Doesn't need to move, saves you five years where you can start on the police station earlier, and it would save you about $20 million. Now this money, I'm just tossing out numbers, because that's what we do. You don't need to move the fire station then, so that'll save another $20 million. You can cancel the contract with LPA for designing the park, since nobody wants it here. That'll save $10 million. And you can cancel the study for the soil, the artifacts, the drainage, the wetlands. That'll save about $50 million. So now that I've saved you $100 million, I'm going to tell you how you should spend it. First, build a jail and a substation at Dove Street. Mr. Maloney told me that moving the jail was impossible, which I know is not true, and he cited the statutes of what it needs to be done. That's fine. Follow the rules. Build it at Dove Street. There's no cost for land. There's no environmental products problems. There's no traffic problems. when that's done move the police station temporarily to dove street to the vacant offices there there's lots of parking keep the fuel center where it is and maybe even some of the offices at the civic center could be used during this time to save whatever time you need keep the fuel station as i mentioned demolish and build a brand new police station vertically you're saying you have 300 foot height limit there use it for the police station We always support the police. There's so much comments about you don't support the police. That's just not true. We want them to have a state of the art facility as soon as possible. So once you have built a new station, you can use the Dove Street as a substation for all the new housing that's being built out that way. And then if you really want to save money and do some other things at the same time, You could update the current fire station. You could find another piece of land to build another fire station near the Port Street area. And you could also build a substation on the peninsula. I think 100 million is a good start. Also, I just wanted to let everyone know, I looked at a document that was dated January 13th, 2015. It was the Newport Beach Civic Center closeout and lesson learned. And on page 14 under lesson learned, four paragraphs ended with, quote, you can never give out too much good information, end quote. I need transparency. We need information. People have called me a weirdo for posting so many times on Nextdoor. I wear that with a badge of honor. I will continue to post. I will continue to rile people up. We don't need the police station in the park. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

This puts me way back here.

Good afternoon, Mayor Kleinman and members of the council. My name is Nancy Skinner. I've lived in Newport Beach for 64 years and I've been coming even before that time. I wanted to say it's a beautiful city and much of it is thanks to the citizens of this community. I'd like to just tell you about a few of those things. We don't think I have them all. But if you ever drive down Ocean Avenue and Corona Del Mar overlooking Big Corona and all the way to the bay as well as Little Corona, there's something that you can actually see of all the people that helped to make this happen. Happened to have a couple of people I know on it. My aunt and uncle lived on Poppy. And they worked really hard. And that was a long time ago. Otherwise, you would have had houses, is my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, all along there. So you would have blocked your view on Ocean Boulevard. So that's one thing. Second one, as we all know, the freeway was stopped by citizens. And if you were here at that time, that was kind of a big deal. The city council was all set to support it because they said they had no choice. Everybody said, we have a choice.

And they made it happen. High-rise buildings, Hong Kong.

along the bay front, there was a person that lived on Lido, and she saw what happened at the end of Lido when they put those two high rises there, and said, you know, we're gonna look like Miami if we keep doing this, so let's do something about it. And she did, she got everybody involved, and she didn't do it by herself, but we were lucky, we could see the bay when we come down the ocean on Jamboree, coming toward Balboa Island. So... What did I write next? Oh, the Back Bay. The Back Bay was set to be developed like the Lower Bay with all homes and piers and boats. And a lot of us just felt that that was not right. We had birds out there that came in every season because they were going up and down the coast. And a lot of things just seemed like the wrong thing to do. Gene Watt, our wonderful leader from Spahn on all those days, worked with the Irvine Company and worked out some, I'm sure we must have had the city council involved too, but I couldn't remember anything about that. But they've ended up with some kind of a compromise that worked to keep that bay the way it is, and I hope you're all enjoying it. Also, views from Castaway Park. Spahn tried very hard to get the entire park to be open and for the public because it also has wonderful views. It ended up with a compromise where we now have the great place where Walter Starr is now living in Castaways. but we also have the ability to ride our bikes and walk across the front part of it, so we did not lose views. And you've got to give citizens a chance to give them credit, I mean, for that. And there's another one I was going to mention, and that's Crystal Cove. Now that we... Oh, I guess I can't get to that one. Anyway, I just hope that you'll let all of us save something for the future, and of course you know what I'm talking about.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Good evening.

Can you hear me? Okay.

Good evening. My name is Lynn Lorenz and I hadn't planned on speaking tonight because other people were going to be here. but I pulled out some notes because I have written quite a bit about what's happening that was spoken about just recently, and that is undergrounding in the Heights area. And I was here, I had retired, and at the beginning of my retirement, that is when the first attempt was made. I was really surprised we had a meeting we had a open meeting everyone was discussing everything we even got to talk to Edison and I remember asking the fellow that worked for Edison I said is undergrounding safer than overhead wiring and he said no not really as if there's not enough dissension going on in Newport Beach this is another issue resurfacing that's pitting neighbor against neighbor and And I live in an older home, which is a beach cottage. And if you were to visit the Heights area, I was just out this weekend in the heat passing out flyers. And if you were to visit the area, you would notice that there's about an equal balance between new homes that are very large and beautiful and older homes. In fact, the older homes still have about 10% advantage in number over the large new homes. And yet those older homes are doing everything they can to maintain the beauty of our neighborhood. But I want you to imagine updating an older home to the strenuous alterations of property required for the undergrounding of utilities. It keeps me awake at night thinking about my torn up grass and concrete, the alteration of my electrical wiring, new panels, service panels upgrades, service working in areas crowded by underground pipes, digging into walls and roofs, all for potentially significant costs. I think some people forget that our economy is not in the greatest of shape right now. and asking someone to put out between 50 and I say 80, I say more than 80 if it's an older home, about putting that kind of money out to have a house undergrounded or have the system undergrounded when it's not even necessary. The people who bought into the area, When there was overhead as there is overhead Wiring and they bought in knowing this and now what they want is to turn around and ask people who've lived in the Heights for years to spend this kind of money and Change their house and potentially destroy their property Thank you much next speaker, please

Hi, my name is Rick Weiss, and I'm going to speak about the underground and answer Mr. Hens, some of Mr. Hens' comments. I wasn't planning on speaking today, but there's some things that he said that need answering. First of all, as far as all I've- Can you address the council, please?

Thank you.

As far as the maps in the districts over the past 15 years, there has not been one voted or completed district, except this one that was a private. He alluded to a small area. They tried to get everybody else to pay for it, but they couldn't get everybody else to pay, so they used a different rule, and they just chipped in as it should be. People can chip in and pay for their own underground. They don't have to put off costs to someone else. The other thing I'd like to talk about is the mailers. Mr. Henn is no novice and he's no innocent. And he knows what mailers are like and how much effort and time goes into putting together a mailer. So when a mailer is sent out to ask for people to put out $50,000 for things they don't even want, it's been shown over and over again they don't want, you have to be very careful. And everybody is very careful what they mail. They mailed a petition signature page with their own biased information on top of it without the actual city petition. So I don't think that was a mistake. Now, we pointed out several other petition irregularities to the city administration, such as out and out digital manipulation, making up photos out of thin air to make the neighborhood look worse. duplicating houses that weren't even there, fear-mongering claims about safety, even, well, anyway, we pointed out all these petition irregularities, and the city kind of encourages the sufferers. They don't do it directly. But they get behind it by just giving it one sentence, say, well, if it ever comes up, then we'll deal with it then. Well, you know what happened to the city council meeting. Basically, you vote on it and whatever went beforehand went before. But you don't really have the chance or the time to look at all the minutia. And it's not being looked at now. The other thing is, if it's about safety, then there's a elementary school immediately adjacent to 118, well, what used to be 118, now it's 118-2, and by the way, 118-2 and 118 before it did not have an official neighborhood proponent. That was put together by the city. There is no proponent, there is no homeowner that asked for 118, and there's no one that asked for 118-2. There was a 114 recently and a 118. So if it's so unsafe, why aren't the polls around the elementary school being addressed also? And the other thing is, you know, we've all spent hundreds of thousands of dollars and millions of dollars sometimes to move into this neighborhood.

Thank you.

If they were so unhappy about it being unsafe.

Next speaker, please.

Well, you gave him a few extra seconds.

Because he transferred microphones. Thank you so much. Next speaker, please.

Why are they asking us to pay for things?

Thank you, sir. And just a reminder, when you make comments, please make them to the council, not to the audience. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Jillian Norton, and I'm here tonight to talk about pesticides. I live in the port streets, and I have three young children who go to Anderson Elementary School. We are deeply embedded in our community and our school, which is why I want to do better for our kids. They deserve more. We've all read the cancer stories. We've seen what's happening in Ladera. but we also vastly overlook the fact that pesticides are one of the largest endocrine disruptors. And this is where my passion turns personal. Almost three years ago, my four-year-old daughter was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. And in April, we found out that my eight-year-old son will likely be developing this autoimmune disease as well that has no cure for the rest of their lives. So when I send my son now out on our green belt in front of our house or down the field to soccer practice and football practice, I now have to wonder every single day is today that the day that these pesticides are going to trigger this autoimmune disease that he is going to have to deal with for the rest of his life. So I beg you, please think about my kids. Think about all the other children when you vote tonight on how to move forward using pesticides in our city. because our kids deserve better. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Hello, good evening. I'll keep this quick. My name is Godfrey Little, and I'd like to address the governmental transparency initiative. I believe that public meetings and public records should belong to the people. They are held for the people, and I believe all of our citizens here have just been asking for complete transparency. And that's all.

Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Hi. Oops. Sorry, I'm a little tall. Thank you. Hi, my name is Destiny King and I'm a longtime resident of Newport Beach. I'm deeply concerned that the people are being denied their right to vote. This is outrageous and quite frankly unacceptable. Put these initiatives on the ballot now, not tomorrow, not next year, but today. It seems almost un-American to keep us from voting during this year, especially as we celebrate our 250th anniversary of freedom. The public offices are meant to serve our community, not serve yourself and whatever hidden intentions you might have. You should be ashamed of yourself from preventing residents from voting on their own city's future. Let the people decide. I'm concerned the city council is trying to keep the issues off the ballot this year. For what reasons, I'm not sure, but I do believe that doing the right thing is important here. The North Star here is democracy, and the people want to vote. Do not get in the way of a voting. It's our one American right that we have and that we should all cherish and keep here deeply. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Good evening, Langston Williams. May 5, 1789, August 22, 1791, November 20, 1910, March 8, 1917, these are all dates in history where the general public got tired of seeing dictators and authoritarian regimes, and those people decided to take a stand. Now, I'm not saying Newport Beach is a dictatorship or an authoritarian regime, but we would like to keep it that way by enforcing term limits. Now, me, just a citizen, I am someone who believes in democracy, and I believe each and every one of you who took this stand, y'all all believe in democracy too, because that is why you are here. Now, if we want to keep this democracy strong, and if we want to keep the voice with the people the way the government was intended here in America, I believe that term limits should be enforced. Now, it kind of reminds me of a movie that a lot of you probably have seen. It came out in 1977. This movie was called Star Wars. It was about a ruler who decided to take his short term as chancellor and to turn it into an empire, and in which we all saw that a lot of fallout happened over the course of nine movies. This isn't a galaxy far, far away. This is a place very close to each and every one of us. And I'd love to see this place never turn into something like that. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Listen to our emerging leaders. Denise Olbermann, thank you, council. I'm here to talk about item 20 on the agenda, the review of options for citizens sponsored charter amendments. It's pretty clear by the actions of the city that it's intent on obstructing transparency. And I'm continuing to make decisions behind closed doors. There are numerous decisions that are pending and they're all out there in some nefarious form but not, again, transparent with no true rational public process. So there are decisions that are being actively made now that will irrevocably alter the character of Newport Beach. So deferring to 2028 is not really a viable option in the eyes of the community. The council has a decision to make. Either continue to deny the residents their constitutional rights to vote, or reverse course and put the initiatives that have been requested on the 2026 ballot. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

hello my name is sarah pride i want to speak specifically about the waste of taxpayer dollars at the end of the day this is our money and instead of simply allowing the people to vote and letting the community have its say the city council has continued to spend taxpayer dollars fighting this issue in court we're talking about money spent on expensive law firms repeated legal battles and even legal fees from cases the city has lost Think about where this money could go. Our streets, our parks, public safety, programs for our youth, or other services our community actually needs. Whether you agree with term limits or you don't, the solution is simple. Let the people vote. Stop spending our money trying to prevent us from having a voice. Put it on the ballot, let the voters decide, and respect the outcome. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Good afternoon, my name is Laura Curran.

City Clerk, could you please put up slide four?

I wanna talk on item 20 and I wanna talk on it now so that people who are interested in this topic can read the staff report before it comes up for discussion. So item 20 is the proposal to put three initiatives on the ballot. And there was a court hearing last August 20th in North Orange County where Judge Julianne Bancroft was the presiding judge. You can call into these, court hearings by Zoom and multiple residents did from Newport Beach. Judge Julianne Bancroft called out the possible findings of obstruction in the court case. And you can read that here. Part of what they said was that the city's actions could lead to a finding of obstruction, adding the city had to be ordered to send signatures to the registrar for validation and suffered other delays that were unnecessary. There was a lot of discussion Led by attorneys from rattan and tucker and by the other side's attorneys about whether the people who filed the initiatives the Newport Beach sit assist Stewardship Association had used the appropriate paper of record the Orange County recorder or the daily pilot It was honestly hard to follow But in the end the result is the judge came back at two o'clock and called out the city for possible findings of obstruction next slide, please In the staff report, it calls out that there's an 88-day requirement, if I understand this correctly, from an initiative being filed to allow for it to be ready for the ballot. And what Aaron Harp has said is the court ruled the city doesn't allow time for public examination of his impartial analysis, arguments for and against the measure, and rebuttal arguments in order to make the ballot deadline. Well, the reason Judge Julianne Bancroft ruled the 88-day timing requirements should not apply is because the city had caused the delays. So the restricted time period was due to the city's delays. If the city now goes forward, it will not be 88 days to complete the period, and I'm sure Mr. Harp will explain this, but the city's delays caused the issue. And we have a very clear principle in the United States, which is justice delayed is justice denied. So you can't obfuscate and drag feet, hoping that it'll come out to what you want it to be. SO FINALLY, IN THE LAST SLIDE, I THINK MS. PRIDE POINTED OUT VERY CLEARLY THIS IS TAKING A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF TAXPAYER RESOURCES THAT HAS BEEN SPENT TO DATE IN TERMS OF DOLLARS, TIME AND EFFORT AND STRESS, JUST THINKING ABOUT THIS WHOLE THING. YOU CAN SEE HERE THE FACTORS THAT ARE INVOLVED. THANK YOU.

NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.

Good evening, Council. It's nice to see you all. I don't know if I need to do a prayer or a plea or what I need to say, but I want to beg you to examine your priorities. You're all good people. I know you. You're all good people, and I don't know why you got to this position of denying the vote to the citizens of Newport Beach, but it's not okay. It is not OK. And when I was sitting in one of those seats, I remember one of the most difficult things was ascertaining what the public really thought about things. I had my own opinion. I had done my own research. I had talked to staff. I'd made site visits. I knew how I was leaning on issues, but until I got to council and heard the extent of the public comments and read all of the emails we get and everything, I really didn't know what the public was thinking. And ultimately, it comes down to that. If any of you are asked in any of your council candidate forums whether your opinion is more important or whether the opinion of the residents of Newport Beach is more important. I bet none of you will say your opinion is more important. I don't think you would try to get elected that way. And so I'm begging you to please check your priorities. You guys, I maybe didn't learn this until I was your age, but there came a time when I had to say, how did I get to this opinion? Who said what that got me to believe that this is true and that's not true? And I really had to examine my priorities frequently. Frequently when I was on council, I had to examine my opinion versus what I was hearing from the public. I honestly believe that if you guys did that, you would deep down in your hearts know that it's only right to let the people vote. And the thing that's not right is to spend taxpayer dollars fighting the ability of the taxpayers to vote. I swear, I think that's a lawsuit because it's not legal to use our money to fight against us having a voice. And I also don't think it's legal for you to have staff time devoted to pushing your agenda over the agenda of the public. So I really am sincerely begging each of you to examine your heart Look down deep inside and maybe you don't even agree that those issues should be on the ballot But maybe you could say Yeah, it's right that they're there. I don't want them. I don't want them to pass but it's right that they're there So, please do the right thing Thank you.

Next speaker, please

Good afternoon. My name is Eric Prendergast. I'm here to talk about an issue I have in Newport Heights. It's not what everyone else is talking about. It's not the overhead or the underground power. It is the lot at 2700 Cliff Drive. I'm an escrow for this house. I recently approached the city about a driveway off Riverside Avenue. I was given the okay today by traffic and afterwards denied the approval by the director of public works one hour later. This lot's unique in many ways. It's a corner lot. It's on a slope. It's currently red-tagged in a blight to the community. It's very unsafe how it exists in its current form. I'm sure a lot of people here know what I'm talking about. Once I entered escrow, I immediately reached out to Liz Westmoreland, the Deputy Community Development Director. We set a meeting for August 10th. We met and discussed the driveway off Riverside Avenue and other issues. I really wanted to show face, show I cared, and let the city know I was willing to work with them in looking to bring new life into this property in real time. Liz mentioned that I should meet with Dustin Horny from the Engineering Department, who is familiar with this property. I set a meeting with Dustin on August 20th. I met with Dustin, Jose Montoya, Christy Duquette from the city attorney's office, and Jake Marshall with Public Works. I once again proposed a driveway off Riverside Avenue. I created a site plan showing elevation, showing the driveway off Riverside. We discussed corner lot exemptions, issues with the current alley access, safety, it's on a grade with 90 degree turn, constructability, how placing the garage off Riverside expedites the structural work associated with the failing retaining wall, not to mention the overall appearance to the community and seeing a garage versus a block wall from the street. We all seemed to be in agreement that this was a positive design for the city, neighborhood, and lot. I agreed in good faith to sign an aggressive timeline that would have demolition and grading start by 11-1. The city attorneys presented the elevation to Kevin Riley, who is a transportation manager and city engineer. TRAFFIC ENGINEER. TODAY MR. O'REILLY APPROVED THE PLAN. ONE HOUR LATER IT WAS DENIED BY PUBLIC WORKS. I'M NOT HERE ON A FORMAL APPROVAL. I KNOW HOW THAT WORKS. I HAVE TO GET ON THE AGENDA. BUT I THINK WITH THE RAINY SEASON IN EL NINO, WE DO NOT HAVE THE TIME TO WAIT FOR A MONTH FOR FORMAL APPROVAL. I'M HERE TONIGHT TO ASK THAT YOU TALK AMONGST YOURSELVES AND FIGURE OUT WHAT THE CITY REALLY WANTS FOR THIS LOT. I can't sit here with my family and sign into financial recourse that I would have a demolition date that would start by 12-1 if I had to go through council members' appeal. I can't put my families in that situation, especially with the upcoming El Nino. I'm simply asking Public Works to review the request once again. The current owners will not or do not have the resources to address this in the immediate future. I have taken the appropriate steps to make my intentions known and document a critical path to making this lot not only safe, but once again, a beautiful corner lot that the neighborhood can be proud of. It's surprising to see such resistance to a condition that exists on multiple lots within two square miles. I am an escrow today, but this property cannot reasonably be constructed the way it currently exists. I'm asking you to discuss amongst yourself and ask what you really want for this property.

Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Good evening, Madam Mayor Kleinman and honorable council members. My name is Ryan Farsai. First, I want to do a shout out for my Bengal tiger brother, Anurag Chaudhary. Today is his birthday celebrating in Europe. I am a certified Bikram yoga teacher. This December 1st will be 25 years, and I'm nearing 10 years of practicing it daily. As a yogi, I am a master observer. I am not a perfected yogi. I still have desires and greed for the truth and desires and greed for other things. I'm here to talk about the most important thing, which is health. Health as it relates to your body, mind, soul and spirit. To have a healthy life, you need to eat well, you need to sleep well, and you need to exercise regularly.

Sir, it has to be something within the subject jurisdiction of the city council.

Water is the jurisdiction of the council, Mr. Esquire. Water is the number one tool and the number one resource and the number one key for great health. Water is life. Water is the best medicine. Your body is 70 to 80% water. Any city, state, or country that prioritizes computers, data centers over its citizens should be shattered in pieces. All natural resources around the world is held by the lineage of kings and their esquires that help them keep them. The government's requirement is to provide its citizens quality air, quality water, quality food. These requirements are not being met. I am the lineage of kings and prophets. King Cyrus would arrive at your kingdom and surround and conquer you slowly. He would cut off the water going into your city until you caved. In the Art of War, the last paragraph in Sun Tzu, he says, to conquer your enemy, you must control their water. In the Eastern Hindu scriptures, God, I will relate it to you in a second, sir. The poisonous herbicides you're putting in chemicals, The war between US, Iran, and Israel, I'm against that. I'm against anyone that wants to kill. Happy birthday to the city of Newport Beach. And yesterday I was at the police department picking up a report, and I was thinking this department needs to get a new building.

And it's funny that I walk in here and I find out that it is.

So I am in support of that. Thank you very much. Have a great day.

Any other speakers?

Mayor Kleinman, members of the council, my name is Jim Mosher. As a non-agenda comment, I would like to say that I appreciate the increased number of in-person speakers that you've had at your recent meetings, but I would again like to advocate for better publicity about the fact that we do, as required by the state for the next two years, offer an opportunity to participate in these meetings by Zoom. I appreciate the clerk made an announcement about that at the beginning of the meeting, but I think we could do a lot better to advertise that. As you know, the city manager puts out a newsletter every Friday. There is an associated piece of that called On the Agenda, which is the start of the newsletter, but On the Agenda, the separate page, it has extensive directions about how to participate in our meetings. It says if you can't appear in person, you can send in a written comment. Nowhere does it say, as the clerk announced at the beginning of this meeting, that you can participate by Zoom. The city clerk herself has a page about city council meetings. It explains that you can watch them televised. It explains how you can send comments to the council. It doesn't explain that you can participate by Zoom for the next two years. On the home page, there's a thing that goes to agendas, a page that has legislature in its name. On that page, you'll find a zoning administrator meeting that says Zoom. But the council meeting, it says it's at 100 Civic Center Drive. It says nothing about there being a Zoom option for it. And most telling me, for me, yesterday I received an email from a newsletter from the Corona Del Mar Residence Association. News updates for August telling us an important council meeting coming up today. and it said what the hour was, and it said if you couldn't show up in person, you could still send in a written comment. Even apparently the Corona Del Mar Residence Association doesn't know that we have an opportunity to participate by Zoom. So I really think we could be doing better. Thank you.

Thank you. Madam Clerk, is there anyone online that wishes to speak?

I actually do, but there is no name. It's a phone number ending at 6923.

OK. If you have your hand raised online, please go ahead and speak. OK. Unfortunately, if you're trying to speak, we can't hear you online at this time, so we're going to have to move on. Now is the time for council announcements, oral 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, just two minor items. Well, depending on how you look at that. But I'm a representative of the council for the Orange County Vector Mosquito Control District. And we did receive a notification earlier this week that there was one hit on one of the mosquitoes that were tested for West Nile virus. So, just urge the public to be cautious out there. Right now, it's peak mosquito season. SO TRY TO WEAR SOME PROTECTION IF YOU CAN. BUT LOOK AROUND YOUR HOUSE. EVEN A THIMBLE SIZE OF WATER CAN PRODUCE EGG LAYING MOSQUITOES. SO JUST CHECK FOR FRESH WATER, ANY SITES THROUGHOUT YOUR HOUSE. THAT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL TO US. BUT JUST BE CAUTIOUS THIS TIME OF YEAR. UP IN FULLERTON, ANAHEIM, NORTHERN PART OF THE COUNTY, THEY'RE GETTING A LOT MORE HITS, THE NEWPORT BEACHES. SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT'S HAPPENING THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY, THROUGHOUT THE SOUTHLAND. SO JUST BE CAUTIOUS OUT THERE. And then a special thanks to Mark Vukovic and his team at Utilities. A couple nights ago, or last week, there was a main water valve that was leaking right at Newport Harbor High School, right in the middle of the street there that has tons of traffic, especially the first week of school. So his crew was out there from probably 7 p.m. through 5 a.m. in the morning getting that job done. There were several guys there. THROUGHOUT THE NIGHT TO GET THAT, AND YOU WOULDN'T HAVE NOTICED THAT WAS EVEN HAPPENING OUT THERE THE NEXT MORNING, SO THANK YOU GUYS FOR THE HARD WORK.

THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER PARTO?

NO REPORT.

COUNCILMEMBER GRANT?

YES, THANK YOU. IT'S BEEN FOUR WEEKS SINCE WE'VE HAD A REGULAR MEETING. WE DID HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING, BUT A LOT OF THINGS HAVE BEEN HAPPENING IN TOWN OVER THESE LAST WHAT I CALL DOG DAYS OF SUMMER. I WAS ABLE TO ATTEND THE OCTA'S LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ROUND TABLE. which included two important conversations, I think, for our community. One was about Newport's expanded trolley system, how supportive they are. You know, we have gotten some grant money from them, and so it's exciting to see us be able to utilize that money for expanding our trolley system. And then they also discussed a lot of ways that the OCTA can assist with senior mobility in our city, given that we have an aging population. That's especially encouraging. I also want to mention that Newport Beach was home for the second year running. As the Pacific Symphony returned right out here to our Civic Center Green for Symphony in the Cities, nearly 5,000 people from the library all the way back past council chambers joined on the Civic Green to enjoy a really phenomenal opportunity. I was really proud to be there. Visit Newport Beach hosted a fond farewell to somebody very important to all of us, our city photographer for many, many years, Ed Olin, as he leaves Newport Beach to live and work in Barcelona. And I like to say we in Newport Beach are now going to have an artist in residence in Barcelona, so that's kind of fun for us. I'm sure we'll be getting a lot of photography and other information back from Ed as he starts in his new home. Two other things, one, the Battle of the Bay was a spirited competition between Newport Harbor High School and the Corona Del Mar High School girls and boys water polo teams. It was great fun, a lot of camaraderie, a lot of parents, students, and just general community out there in Marina Park as they dueled it in the bay. It was very fun. And then finally, something especially important, Jill Johnson Tucker was named the Citizen of the Year by the Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce. I could go on forever about Jill's impact on our community. She is a trailblazer, but one only needs to step into our beautiful Witte Hall to know that this is very well deserved as a reward for her hard work and vision in bringing something especially beautiful to our city. Thank you.

Council Member Weber. NONE. COUNCIL MEMBER STAPLETON.

THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I WOULD ALSO SAY, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, COUNCIL MEMBER GRANT, BUT I THINK LARRY TUCKER WAS ALSO THE JOINT CITIZEN OF THE YEAR. OOPS. MAYBE THAT'S AN HONORABLE MENTION. I'M NOT SURE. BUT CONGRATULATIONS TO BOTH OF THEM, HUSBAND AND WIFE, CHILD AND LARRY TUCKER, FOR BEING ACCEPTED AS THE 2026 CITIZENS OF THE YEAR. SO THAT'S AN INCREDIBLE HONOR AND THEIR FINGERPRINTS ARE ON ALMOST EVERYTHING IN THE COMMUNITY. I DID WANT TO HIGHLIGHT ON SEPTEMBER 14TH, MONDAY EVENING, 6 P.M. AT MARINA PARK, I WILL BE HOSTING A TOWN HALL MEETING FOR DISTRICT ONE RESIDENTS WHEN IT COMES TO ALL THINGS PUBLIC SAFETY ON 4TH OF JULY. WE'VE GOT OUR POLICE CHIEF AND OUR AREA ONE COMMANDER, LIEUTENANT DEPWIG ARE GOING TO BE THERE. ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER TARA FINNEGAN IS HELPING PUT THIS TOGETHER. IF YOU KNOW ANYONE, ALL ARE WELCOME, OBVIOUSLY, BUT DEFINITELY BE FOCUSED ON ISSUES, QUALITY OF LIFE THINGS THAT HAPPEN IN DISTRICT ONE. LOTS GOING ON THERE. I DON'T KNOW WHY NO ONE WANTS TO TALK ABOUT IT UP HERE, BUT MY VICTORY IN THE FIGURE 8 RACE IN THE COUNTY FAIRGROUNDS TO RAISE MONEY, THAT'S OKAY. I DID WIN. I BEAT COUNCILMEMBER WEBER AND MAYOR PRO TEM NOAH BLOM. WE'LL CONTINUE THAT. I DO WANT TO HIGHLIGHT OUR FIRE CHIEF. HE DID WIN THE DEMOLITION DERBY FOR THE RVS. THAT'S A HUGE CONGRATULATIONS TO OUR CHIEF. I THINK THIS IS YOUR SECOND YEAR IN A ROW NOW. SO WE DID GREAT. TWO BIG VICTORIES THAT NIGHT FOR THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH. WE RAISED A LOT OF MONEY FOR CHALK HOSPITAL FOR THAT. THAT WAS A LOT OF FUN. THAT'S MY REPORT.

Okay. We have two matters brought by council members per city council policy A1. Council members may bring forward a matter for consideration and if approved by a straw vote of the council, staff will return with a report on the matter at a later meeting. The first matter is brought by council member Grant to consider establishing a public safety council ad hoc committee to develop and recommend public safety strategies for holiday and other city needs. GO AHEAD AND TAKE A STRAW VOTE. ALL OF THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSED CONSIDERATION.

THE VOTE IS 3-4. THE MOTION FAILED.

YOU ONLY NEED THREE TO MOVE IT ALONG FOR CONSIDERATION, SO IT PASSES. THE THREE VOTES BY COUNCILMEMBER STABILTON, GRANT, AND BARTO IN FAVOR.

THE SECOND MATTER IS BROUGHT BY COUNCILMEMBER WEIGAN. CONSIDER HOLDING A STUDY SESSION TO DISCUSS RECENT SAND DISPLACEMENT SLASH COASTAL EROSION AT THE WEDGE AND SEEK POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS TO RESTORE CONDITIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. AGAIN, WE'LL TAKE A STRAW VOTE, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSED CONSIDERATION. Motion passed by 7-0. Madame Clerk, would you please read the notice regarding public comments on the consent calendar?

This is a time in which the Council members may pull items from the consent calendar for discussion, items 1 through 18. 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 on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and will all be enacted by one motion in the form listed below. Council members have received detailed staff reports on each of the items they command in 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 item to be discussed and or removed from the consent calendar for separate action.

Council Member Wiegand, do you have any items to pull from the consent calendar or conflicts to announce related to items number one through 18?

No, I do not. Just want to thank staff on item number seven. Appreciate it.

Council Member Bartow? None. Council Member Grant? None. Council Member Weber? None. Council Member Stapleton?

Yeah, conflict on item number three for real property interests at 4100 and 4110 MacArthur.

Mayor Pro Temblon?

I have none. Thank you, Madam Mayor.

AND I HAVE A CONFLICT REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 8 BASED ON PROXIMITY AND INTEREST IN MY PERSONAL RESIDENCE. IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR AGAIN ITEMS NUMBER 1 THROUGH 18?

Mayor Kleinman, members of the council, my name is, you know, is Jim Mosher. Item number two, there's two ordinances for adoption on the current consent calendar. I think both of them are problematic. The first one, item number two, involves removing something that's long been in our municipal code called a cost recovery table that governs what fees and what percentage of fees will be charged by the city. I think it serves a good purpose being in the municipal code and taking it out of the municipal code. I don't think it's a wise thing to do and I'm not sure why you would support that. And then item number three is the The final actions you need to entitle a housing development, 132 units at 1300 Dove Street, which incidentally happens to be next door to the notorious 1201 Dove property owned by the city of Newport Beach. The issue here is that the developer is asking for a concession of $5.5 million in park fees that would normally be due for that property. And they're claiming that you, the council, are required to waive $5.5 million based on seven affordable housing units that they're providing out of the 152. And as I explained in writing, there is a reasonable question of whether the state density bonus law that they're basing it on actually requires you to give a concession with just seven units, or in a project on a lot of that size, it requires 17 units. And since there's a lot of money involved, I think it would really be prudent to wait until you get a definite answer as to whether they qualify for that or not before you just give away $5.5 million. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Good afternoon. My name is Laura Curran. Can you please put up slide number one? So I'd like to talk about item number two, which is the cost recovery process. Okay, so agenda item number two talks about addressing cost recovery percentages for municipal fees and updating the ordinance 2026-11. I had to read three documents in order to understand what was really at play. The cost recovery is discussed in the title and the subject of the staff report. If you read, go to the next slide please, attachment A, you'll find out that what it says is that There is 100% cost recovery policy in place now, and that this is, in theory, primarily an administrative change. What I want to call to council's attention is a topic we've talked about before, and I'd really like to see the finance committee and our management team address, which is that the staff report says that there is no fiscal impact because this is administrative in nature. And I talked about this with Jason Aleman, our administrative director, and he said that was his opinion. However, I know from my years of experience in business analysis that administration leads to processes, paper, people, things getting done, and those are generally done by people at a management level, and those people cost money. So the second thing that I found in the staff report A is that this policy says that we have 100% cost recovery process. That's all it essentially says. So I don't really understand what those fees are going to be. So I looked for an analysis. And again, we need one that covers important things like, By the way, there are three new fees in this particular process. We need pro formas that show the fiscal impact of these types of activities. We need to know what the forecast is of the estimated fees that you expect to recover. We want to know how much they are in the city budget. We'd like to know how they're going to be audited, that the fees are being collected. These are basic things that a finance person can do Kind of, you just know how to do it. And you do it so you can have good conversations. And we continually do not do that. So please go to slide three. As Jim mentioned, this red line table means fees no longer applies. I was told by Mr. Amon to refer to the schedule of rents, fines, and fees, which is not included in attachment A. So I still don't know what the fees are. But even more concerning is if this is how we analyze simple things like municipal fees, and make it hard for residents to figure out what they're going to be when there's a change, then how can we have confidence in the analysis of things like the OCTA bus station? Because at the special meeting, we agreed, the council agreed, to take on the analysis of the OCTA bus station move without a cost estimate for the analysis or for the relocation. Same for the police station. The failure to do fiscal analysis at a deep level calls many of our analyses into question. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any other speakers on the consent calendar? Madam Clerk, is there anyone online?

I do have the same number, 6923.

OK, if you're online and would like to speak now, we can hear you, hopefully.

Go ahead.

Hello. Can you hear me?

We can hear you. Please proceed. OK.

This is Adam .

I'm able to make it as I'm at another meeting far away. But as far as consent, the minutes you're approving state that I allege the city website contains misinformation if I allege something that will be detectable in the language I use I was making factual statements identifying instances of misinformation on the city website this is at least the second time I've stated factual information and the minutes try to minimize it by claiming it's an allegation. Consent item two, schedule prints, fines, and fees. I will bring up again, previously, the city clerk used to provide different copies of staff reports and materials in public comment as people walked into the meeting. And that has ceased for a few meetings. It was allowed that under the schedule of transplants and fees, members of the public could print out copies to the city court's office for public distribution. That is now no longer allowed in the year of transparency. Item number three, the Dove Street townhomes. I mentioned again, 132 units, seven were to be affordable. They're getting a $5.4 million waiver in park fees by creating seven affordable units. At the meeting, I suggested that the inclusionary amount be raised to 6%, which you had imposed on another developer at the same meeting. It would seem like a gift of $5 million. and a half million dollars would warrant one more unit of affordable housing. And then item number four, the short-term lodging unit thing, I will mention again that when council did that, it required in certain mixed-use zoning districts that any short-term lodging individual or entity have 20 units, which precludes any homeowner or normal person from doing that. And again, bending over backwards to accommodate developers and big business to the expense of so many residents is just not acceptable to a lot of people, and I would hope to see change. Thank you.

Madam Clerk, is there anyone else online? Mayor Potemblum, do I have a motion?

Yes, we do. Thank you, Madam Mayor. Noting the adjustments, the minutes, the recusal from Councilmember Stapleton to real property interests on item number three and your own recusal due to your personal property interests on item eight. I have a motion on the floor.

Is there a second? Seconded by Councilmember Weber. Let's go ahead and vote.

motion carried by unanimous vote madam clerk will you please read the ordinances that have been adopted ordinance number 2026-11 an ordinance of the city council of the city of newport beach california amending um section 3.3 6.0 3, 0 cost recovery percentages of the new beach municipal code and repealing exhibit a of section 3.3 6.0 3, 0 of the new bridge municipal code ordinance number 2026 dash 12 and ordinance of the city council of the city of newport beach california a proven and zoning code amendment for a once 132 unit residential townhome project located at 1200 dole street 1300 dole street and 4041 macarthur boulevard pa 2025-0170 Ordinance number 2026 dash 13 ordinance number 2020 is an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, California, approving a development agreement for a 132 unit residential townhome project located at 1200 Doe Street, 1300 Doe Street and 4041 McCarrison Boulevard, PA 2025-0170.

Thank you. We'll now move on to item number 19, athletic field sod management program. Mr. Jurgis, do we have a staff report?

We do. Thank you, Madam Mayor. This item is the recommendation from the Integrated Pest Management Ad Hoc Committee to expand the Buffalo Hills Park pilot program into a full sod replacement program. I'm going to go ahead and turn it over to our Municipal Operation Director, Zach Gentry. We'll make a very brief presentation along with Kevin Picard.

Thank you, Simone. Mayor Kleinman and Council, I'm Zach Gentry, Municipal Operations Director, and I'm here with Kevin Pekar, Parks and Trees Superintendent, and we're here today to discuss the Athletic Field Sod Management Program and the Integrated Pest Management Ad Hoc Committee Recommendations. OUR CURRENT PILOT PROGRAM IS AT BUFFALO HILLS PARK ATHLETIC FIELD AND A LITTLE HISTORY ON IT. IN APRIL OF 2025, THE INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT AD HOC COMMITTEE WAS ESTABLISHED OVER PUBLIC CONCERNS OF HERBICIDE SPRAYING. IN NOVEMBER OF 2025, CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE PILOT PROGRAM TO REMOVE AND REPLACE THE TURF AT BUFFALO HILLS PARK ATHLETIC FIELD. And in December of 2025, we completed the sod replacement where people could then use it in January after a month of rerouting. And the total budget of that was $189,000. So the intent of the program was to eliminate the synthetic herbicide spraying at Buffalo Hills athletic field and also deliver a safe and level playing surface while addressing community concerns over herbicide spraying. We also were testing an organic and mechanical weed management program. The integrated pest management ad hoc recommendations are to discontinue the synthetic herbicide use on all city athletic fields and implement a rotational sod removal and replacement program where we will be approximately replacing 650,000 square feet of hybrid Bermuda sod each year Typical replacement life for the 17 fields will be three to five years with an average of three year replacement for each field. Each time we close a field, it will be closed for four to six weeks approximately. During the time of sod removal, we will also work on irrigation upgrades, drainage, and leveling the field before re-sodding and then giving it back to everybody. Here is a location map of the 17 city-maintained athletic fields. And there are only 11 bullet points, but Bonita Canyon Sports Park does have six fields to create the 17. And the Ad Hoc's recommendation is to expand the pilot program and make permanent to all city athletic fields. And with that, we are here to answer any questions.

Are there any questions up here on the dais for staff at this time?

JUST A QUICK QUESTION. I KNOW THAT SOME OF OUR SPORTS FIELDS HAVE ARTIFICIAL TURF. HOW DOES THAT AFFECT THOSE FIELDS? ARE WE GOING TO REPLACE THOSE OR JUST LEAVE THOSE AS ARTIFICIAL TURF?

WE'RE GOING TO LEAVE THOSE AS OF NOW.

SO THE 17 IS LESS THOSE?

YES.

AND HOW MANY OF THOSE ARE THERE?

THERE'S THREE ARTIFICIAL TURF FIELDS IN THE CITY. THEY'RE ARROYO PARK, BENITA CREEK PARK, AND GRANT HALDE PARK.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

SEEING NO OTHER QUESTIONS UP HERE, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. JUST A REMINDER, IF YOU DID COMMENT ON THIS ITEM PREVIOUSLY, YOU ARE PREVENTED FROM COMMENTING ON IT AT THIS TIME. ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS?

MAYOR CLIMON, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, MY NAME IS JIM MOSER. I DID HAVE SOME COMMENTS. First of all, in reading the staff report, I noticed that the ad hoc committee is an advisory committee. So I was a little puzzled when the staff report said that the committee had ordered this pilot project to go on. So I'm glad that the presentation we heard today, if I understood it correctly, said it was not the advisory committee because their role is to provide advice, not to direct the staff to do things. APPARENTLY DID COME BACK IN LAST YEAR WITH A RECOMMENDATION AND THE COUNCIL AS A WHOLE APPROVED THE EXPENDITURE FOR THE PILOT PROGRAM. I THINK THAT WAS BECAUSE OF THE DOLLAR AMOUNT, BUT EVEN IF THE DOLLAR AMOUNT HAD NOT BEEN THAT GREAT, I THINK THE COMMITTEE WOULD HAVE HAD TO COME BACK HERE TO GET APPROVAL TO DO THAT. The second thing though that I noticed in reading the staff report and looking at the enabling resolution for the ad hoc committee was their sole purpose is to recommend changes to our city's integrated pest management program. And it was not clear from the staff report exactly where that integrated pest management program is or what its status is. And so I looked on the city website and the parks division does have a link to a program they say. But it's just an undated document. It does not say that the city council approved it or not. And I could find no resolution ever approving an integrated pest management program. And the attachment to this staff report about the athletic field program, I couldn't see how that integrates with the program. So is this an official city council document? How does the attachment to this amend that? And are you approving really a new program and how are you doing that approval? All mysteries to me. And then as Ms. Curran pointed out, many of our reports have very superficial explanation to the public of the financing of these items. This one is especially so. It mentions an appropriation needed for the current year. And we're apparently supposed to do some math and multiply 650,000 square feet by $1.75 per square foot. But don't we currently do some sod replacement? And so this is more frequent than we would normally be doing? Or how is that? What is the difference per year that we anticipate compared to the current cost of maintaining these fields? I could not find the answer. I don't think you could find the answer in the staff report. And then finally, is that the final recommendation? Is the committee done now? Are they continuing to the end of the year with more recommendations? Finally.

Thank you, Mr. Mosher. Next speaker, please.

Good evening mayor and city council members. My name is Brooke Lessman. I'm a mom of three living in the port streets. And first I would like to thank you for your service and dedication to our community. My family is very cognizant of our exposures. We eat organic food. We use non-toxic products, but from the moment we step out of our dorm, our health is no longer in our control. We are immediately inundated with chemical pesticides. Every walk we go on, park we visit, and kids practice we attend. According to the city's records, Newport Beach sprayed 217 days out of the year last year. Our family's exposures are tremendous with the amount that we are currently spraying. An example from the city's records is a highly toxic chemical that is routinely sprayed on our fields called 2,4-D, also called Speed Zone. This chemical is a recognized carcinogen and a known cause of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma among many other cancers. The half-life of 2,4-D is up to 14 days, yet it's sprayed all over our athletic fields, and then sports practices resume as normal. One more product that is frequently sprayed is called Reward, and this chemical has been linked to Parkinson's in numerous scientific studies. Newport Beach has an IPM that states an organics first policy. When last year only a single organic herbicide application was applied. An organics first policy should be an all encompassing organics first approach. And it should mean that all organic options including implementing organic herbicides be exhausted before even considering synthetics. And synthetics should never be used in an area where it would be in contact with people or animals. The IPM also states that they don't spray when people are present but I can tell you firsthand that on many walks, I've seen merchants spraying directly adjacent to the sidewalk with unlabeled tanks and zero safeguards. Given the horrific situation unfolding in Ladera and all of these parents and community members pleading to end this for the sake of our future generations, I ask that you invest in the future of our kids and please approve the proposal to stop spraying synthetic pesticides on our parks and fields. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

I'M A RESIDENT OF THE PORT STREETS AND A MOTHER OF THREE. I'VE BEEN INVOLVED WITH ADDRESSING THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH REGARDING THE USE OF SYNTHETIC CHEMICALS IN OUR LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT FOR THE PAST SEVEN YEARS. SO NEEDLESS TO SAY THAT AFTER SEVEN YEARS I'M PLEASED TO FINALLY SEE IT PARTIALLY ON THE AGENDA AGAIN. I'M GRATEFUL TO THE CURRENT CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS WHO HAVE MET WITH RESIDENTS, RESPONDED TO EMAILS, AND HAVE EVEN TAKEN IT UPON THEMSELVES TO DO THEIR OWN RESEARCH REGARDING THIS MATTER. I am also concerned with certain city staff members who have endlessly defended the continued use of these products that have been proven harmful to residents, pets, and wildlife in our community. I'm in strong support of organic sod management in agenda number 19. I believe the synthetics that have been used for broadleaf application are some of the most detrimental to human health and that one of our most vulnerable populations, our youth, have been continually exposed on our sports fields. In addition, new information provided by one of the contracted landscape companies revealed that spraying of Reward, a Paraquat-based synthetic, on a weekly basis on our sports fields, the EVA cites severe side effects of these chemicals when absorbed through the skin, inhaled, or made contact with eyes. I do believe this should be only the beginning of our city moving towards more thorough organic land management. There are fiscally conservative approaches to amend our soil and alternate solutions that can provide sustainable and long-term outcomes. Furthermore, I think we should look at our organics first policy, ensure that it's being executed as directed. There's a strong discrepancy between our city policy and public records that we've requested and how this has been executed. Thanks for your time. Thank you. Next speaker please.

Hi.

I was here last time, and I was here with my husband. Since then, he's had his third surgery for lung cancer. He's 50 years old. He's getting great care at City of Hope. They don't know where he got lung cancer from. He's a non-smoker, but they do say it's from environmental exposure. We live in the port streets, and I'm so happy that it's on the agenda. It means so much to us because we're trying to lessen all the exposure that he can get so that he can be around for our five kids growing up. So as I was digging into this a little bit, asked for the spray schedule, and then found out that certain parks are being sprayed every single day, and it wasn't disclosed what you guys were spraying, so I called the landscape management company myself, and everyone's willing to talk to you if you have a personal story like mine, and she was, someone there was willing to help me, so that was great. AND SHE REVEALED THAT THEY ARE SPRAYING REWARD LIKE EVERY SINGLE DAY AT BANITA CANYON SPORTS PARK. SO AS YOU MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROPOSAL, I HOPE THAT THERE'S SOME TRANSPARENCY. SO SOME PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HAVE, YOU KNOW, THEY WANT TO PROTECT THEIR FAMILIES A LITTLE BIT MORE. SO IF YOU COULD DISCLOSE ONLINE WHAT'S BEING SPRAYED AND WHERE AND WHEN, I THINK THAT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL FOR CERTAIN FAMILIES THAT ARE TRYING TO PROTECT THEIR FAMILIES. themselves a little bit more and then also one thing that I noticed in the proposal is that It doesn't actually stay in the program that synthetic herbicides are prohibited So if you could address that all synthetic pesticides, not just herbicides, would be required to be publicly posted and before every application, because I think you make the schedules like every Friday or Monday for the spray schedule. So if that could be uploaded online somehow or at the playgrounds, that would be very, very helpful. Overall, my goal here isn't perfect grass. It's just a safer, less toxic environment and that we have full disclosure of what's happening at these playgrounds. Thank you.

THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR KLEINMAN AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS. FIRST AND FOREMOST, THANK YOU FOR HEARING US SPEAK TODAY. I AM ALSO A RESIDENT OF THE PORT STREETS AND THIS IS SUCH AN IMPORTANT ISSUE TO ALL OF US AND TO US PERSONALLY AND WE KNOW THAT MANY OF YOU FEEL SIMILARLY. SO WE THANK YOU FOR THAT. Yeah, as you can see, I'm already emotional. I think similar to the additional, my fellow residents, I'm not sure why I'm being emotional, but this has been such a long and hard fought battle. I think as our fellow residents said, and I think many of us here do try to lead very non-toxic lives, but it's so difficult when the city, and the city like Newport Beach really exposes you to so much toxicity when you step outside your door. And I think this being on the agenda is so exciting for us, and we're so hopeful that all of you agree for your own family, for yourselves, and for your residents. For anyone who might have hesitation, please let me explain. There's really absolutely no reason to continue using these toxic herbicides that have been proven to be so detrimental, study after study after study. There is no benefit to them at all. Parents and residents are literally terrified to send our kids to practice, to play on the field. I know I'm often kind of hesitating when there's a practice on schedule. Do I send my kid? Do I not? What's the balance of it all? As residents, as parents, we shouldn't have to do that. We're a wonderful city, very active, very athletic, very just... involved in our city and we shouldn't have to question that. We should be free to do what we want in this beautiful city. Newport has stated, we've reached out several times and have been told it's an organic first policy in practice. It's not, as my fellow residents have explained, Oftentimes, these chemicals, these toxic chemicals are sprayed. They're non-organic. Toxic chemicals are sprayed excessively. We've seen them being doused, in fact, by these employees who probably don't know better and without proper notices. Notices are either removed before and after immediately, and there's no meaningful way of knowing what was sprayed or when. In addition, these sprays linger on the fields for months and months, all the while being reapplied multiple times per week. So it's like there's no getting away from it at any point in time. There are plenty of organic practices that exist and have been tried and proven by our neighboring cities. The city of Newport Beach is better than what it has been doing with respect to synthetic herbicides. And we're, again, so excited this is on agenda. And we're really hopeful to you and look to each of you, your families included, to know that you all deserve better. We all deserve better. With that said, I think the cost is practical based on the staff report. And we think the benefits THANK YOU, ALL CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND MAYOR KLEINMAN.

THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? MADAM CLERK, IS THERE ANYONE ONLINE? I WILL BRING IT BACK UP HERE.

Thank you, Madam Mayor. And thank you for all of you that came out to speak on this one. You know, I do understand some of the ironies we look at, that we go out and choose eggs even though we have no idea what it actually says on the labeling, but I guess the freest ranging and the most organic. And we constantly fight for our children and our families. You know, we started this years ago and, you know, we're told one thing and I've seen your complaints over the years. And when the mayor and council member Weber and I decided to work on this program, you know, we started looking at other cities. And I would say the one thing that was the most amazing was realizing that there is an ability to just put new grass that we will mow for five years and we don't ever have to do anything to it. And I think that was surprising to a lot of us. It doesn't have to be organic. It doesn't have to be synthetic. It just has to be grass, which I think a lot of us that grew up in the 90s remember. Bees exist, as do clovers. That's okay. It's good for kids to get stung, and it's good for us to trip sometimes as well. At the end of the day, I want you to know that we do really care. I mean, we spend the same time, and we go to the same markets you guys do. We care about our children. We're raising them all here. And there is nothing we want to harm any of them or ourselves. So for me, this was a very easy decision. There's money well spent, and then there is money very well spent. And for my piece, this is money very well spent. So thank you.

Is that a motion?

Thank you. I'd love to move staff recommendation.

Do I have a second? Second. Seconded by Councilmember Weber. Let's go ahead and vote. Motion carried by unanimous vote. Moving on to item number 20, certification of election results. Does any Councilmember need a staff report?

Councilmember grant sure I think it would be a good idea to have a staff report so the public knows what we're discussing

The city received three citizen-sponsored initiatives for a charter amendment. The first initiative is the public meetings, public records oversight and enforcement, and that one was received on December 23rd, 2025. SECOND ONE IS LIFETIME CITY COUNCIL TERM LIMITS AND THE THIRD ONE IS A DISTRICT ONLY VOTING THOSE TWO WERE RECEIVED ON APRIL 17TH 2026. EACH MEASURE WOULD AMEND THE NEWPORT BEACH CITY CHARTER SO THE COUNCIL DETERMINES WILL DETERMINE WITH WHEN THE QUALIFIED MEASURES PROCEED TO THE VOTERS So these are the four main decisions that the City Council will need to take tonight. It's accept the Orange County Register voter certification regarding signature verification. All three initiatives had sufficient amount of signatures. Second, select the election date, whether November 3rd, 2026, primary election March 7th, 2028, or general election on November 7th, 2028. the third one will be to decide whether the city council will submit arguments against the measures and designate the authors of those arguments from the city and finally adopt the applicable resolutions and as arise any budget amendment needed for election and administrative course for all of the three um petitions The election date is possible. The first option A, November 3rd, 2026. The court authorized the council to call a November 3rd, 2026 election, even though that date is within the ordinary 88-day timing period. however the county was not a party to the litigation and is not bound by the court's order the county elections official may reject delayed resolutions decline requested services or determine that the timing is not administratively feasible the deadlines for resolutions are for this election already passed the council may also select march 7th 2028 which is the primary election in 2028 and november 7th 2028 election So staff recommends November 7th, 2028 election because it is both a statewide general election and the city's regular general municipal election. General elections traditionally attract broader voter participations than primary elections and voters will already be considering city council representation at November 2028 election. The late date allows adequate time for impartial analysis, public review, arguments, rebuttals, and coordination with the county. It also supports accurate ballot preparation and orderly implementation of the election processes. uh so first is recommendation like on the council staff report is except for first of all certification for petitions since they were found sufficient second the city council needs to select the date out of the three options available again staff's recommendation is for november 7th 2028 election and if that election is select selected then um resolution 2026-73 will be required to explain findings why November 3rd, 2026 was not selected. Then the resolutions also direct the city attorney to prepare partial analysis and establish deadlines for arguments and rebuttal arguments and designate authors of arguments as submitted. Staff will also be authorized to prepare the budget augmentation for the election and cover administrative costs. I'm available for questions.

Are there any questions up here? Seeing none, we'll open it up for public comment. Again, a reminder that if you commented on this item previously, you may not comment on it again now. Do we have any speakers?

Good afternoon, mayor and council members. My name is Walter Starr. The city should place these measures on the November 2026 ballot rather than delay two years until November 2028. That report was really remarkable for what it did not say. It did not say anything about how the city for the past year has been delaying and obstructing and raising frivolous arguments in court to prevent the people of this city from deciding these issues. For example, NBSA submitted the Sunshine Measure to the city on December 22nd of last year. The city attorney delayed for months, preparing the required 500-word summary. He eventually went to court to delay yet further. When the court ordered and prepared the summary, and the proponents collected the signatures, tens of thousands of signatures, the city devised a new argument as to why these weren't adequate, saying that the notice had been published in the wrong newspaper. The city prefers the Daily Pilot over the Orange County Reporter, ignoring the fact that the Orange County Reporter is listed on the Superior Court website as a paper of record. The court rejected that argument as well. Last week, the Superior Court rejected all of the city's remaining arguments. What did the city do? Did it accept? No. It filed an emergency appeal late Friday night in the Court of Appeals trying to overturn, saying that dreadful things would happen if that order was allowed to stand. Well, guess what happened today? Just hours ago, the Court of Appeal rejected both of the city's appeals. So the city has wasted tens of thousands of dollars on an emergency appeal that was rejected in a one-line order to add to the hundreds of thousands of dollars which the city has spent on outside counsel to prevent the residents from voting. The arguments for 2028 ignore the fact we live in California. We live in a state in which the people retain the right to vote on constitutional amendments and charter amendments. For example, 14 statewide measures are going to be considered in November 2026. The fine print runs to 32 pages. If the people of California can decide on the billionaire tax and 13 other measures this fall, the people of Newport Beach can decide on these three measures this fall. The only one that's slightly complex is the sunshine measure, but that is fairly summarized in the words of Mayor Pro Tem Noah Blum and my friends, Noah, sorry, the other summaries.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

They're quite their climate and Council members, my name is Lori and Petri and I'm in 50 year plus resident of Corona Del Mar. Let me get my glasses on. Free and fair elections that are you want to move the microphone closer to your mouth and it's okay to hold this that sort of shape. Free and fair elections that follow procedure are rights given to all legally registered people in this city and throughout the country. Uphold what is right. It may not be what the council wants, but it's clear it's what the citizens want. Four initiative signatures were counted and verified. all four of them. Voters and the judiciary agree. The people of this city have the right to vote on them, and the council should not attempt to deny them this right. It is absolutely fundamental. What is the council afraid of? Fear is the only reason I can think of for this attempt to thwart putting them on the ballot. Fear. That will not hold and should not be tolerated. The people of this city have a right to vote and the council has an obligation to uphold fair election laws. The only path forward is to put all the NBSA initiatives on the next regular election ballot on 11-3. Count the ballots. No one knows the outcome, what the outcome will be until all the ballots are counted. It's that simple. No council should be afraid. No persons should be afraid. Do not let fear control any decisions. Do what is right for the people. Do not cower. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other speakers?

GOOD AFTERNOON. THE PROPONENTS OF THE CITIZEN INITIATIVES GATHERED 40,000 SIGNATURES PLUS FOR THE FOUR INITIATIVES. THE COUNTY REGISTRAR OF VOTERS HAS VERIFIED THAT ALL THE REQUIRED SIGNATURES HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED FOR ALL FOUR OF THE INITIATIVES. The city stalled on writing the title and summary for the Sunshine Initiative until the court ordered them to do so in April. Then the city requested an expedited hearing to challenge the Sunshine Initiative under the single subject rule. The court overruled that challenge in June. The city then filed another lawsuit claiming that the notice procedure for the housing initiative was insufficient. Around the same time, the Newport Beach Stewardship Association submitted over 30,000 signatures for the three remaining new initiatives. The city refused to count those and process the signatures, saying that the notice procedure was insufficient for the three additional initiatives. In mid-July, the judge ordered the city to count the signatures and forward them to the county. At a hearing last week on August 19th, the Superior Court overruled the city's notice objection and directed the city to comply with its obligation under the Elections Code to decide at which election the initiatives will be placed on the ballot. On Friday last week, the city filed an appeal requesting extraordinary relief. This morning, the appellate court denied that appeal. Now the city has prepared a resolution explaining why the initiatives cannot be put on the November 2026 ballot. They argue that there is insufficient time for public review, education, and election preparation. Because of the several delays by the city, the initiative have been already held up for more than a month. In other words, the city's stated reason for delaying the vote, the need for additional time for public review, education, and other election preparations, comes after a delay caused by the city's own efforts to prevent these initiatives from being put on the November 2026 ballot. I find these efforts by the council and the city to be shocking and disturbing. I hope that you will do the right thing by putting this immediately on the November 2026 ballot. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Hi, Carol King again from Irvine Terrace. I had no intention of talking about this today. But when I hear that the courts have struck it down twice, I have, like my mind is blown that you would spend one more dime on trying to keep this off the ballot. It makes no sense. Put it on the ballot. Let people vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

Mayor Kleinman, members of the council, my name is Jim Mosier. I do hope you will take to heart what former council member Brenner said this afternoon and find it in your hearts to do the right thing. I think it's clear what the right thing is. And I don't think anyone really believes that there could be this much concern about a tiny advertisement appearing one time in a print edition of a newspaper that very few people are gonna look at, whether it is the Orange County Recorder or the Daily Pilot. that that one day notice would have made any difference in that, or that's what really people are concerned about. To me, some people are concerned, maybe it's the staff, maybe it's the council, I don't know, about showing that they have power, they are the ones in charge, not the people who signed the petition. And more importantly, those people who want to demonstrate their power want two more years to pursue what has been fruitless, unsuccessful litigation. What I want to speak about is the explanation that the staff has provided for why you would delay these measures. I appreciate the court ordered that, but I think even if the court had not ordered that explanation, you deserve an explanation to the people of Newport Beach. And staff's explanation makes no sense to me. It says you have before you three closely interrelated issues that are very complex, and need more time for analysis, explanation, public review, and so forth. One of the three measures, the one about transparency, is complex. I will give you that. But I see no relation between something about transparency, something about term limits, and something about district voting. They are not interrelated. and two of those are not complicated at all, particularly about the petition you have before you for vote about district voting. It removes, proposes to remove four words, the city at large, from a provision under city charter and substitute two words, that district. THAT'S NOT A BIG CHANGE TO THAT PROVISION IN OUR CITY CHARTER. IT SHOULDN'T TAKE TWO MORE YEARS FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT CHANGE MEANS. IT SHOULDN'T TAKE TWO DAYS. IT SHOULDN'T TAKE TWO HOURS. PROBABLY SHOULDN'T TAKE TWO MINUTES TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT IS. WHY DO WE NEED TWO MORE YEARS to evaluate what that change is the other one about district voting is a little more complicated and i will admit at your last meeting last week i probably myself misunderstood that but i think it's clear now what it means what threw me off is it has a date in it and i thought the date reset THE CLOCK ON THE TERM LIMITS, BUT I UNDERSTAND NOW IT'S PROBABLY NOT DOING THAT. THE CITY ATTORNEY IS PROBABLY CORRECT THAT WAS INTENDED TO INCLUDE PAST THINGS, BUT IT'S STILL NOT A COMPLICATED ISSUE. IT'S NOT RELATED TO THE OTHER TWO. IT DOES NOT NEED TWO MORE YEARS.

THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM? MADAM CLERK, IS THERE ANYONE ONLINE WISHING TO SPEAK?

Good evening. Can you hear me?

Good evening, Mayor. Council members, my name is John Petri. I've been a resident. My wife and I have residents here for over 50 years. And unlike Mr. Weiglin's comments, I'm not a regular. I don't show up here to complain on a regular basis. You've all been elected to represent the citizens of Newport Beach and on many occasions claim that you do and have reaffirmed their commitment. But to pass this down or kick, in effect, kick the can down the road for two years, many of you, maybe most, won't be on the council anymore. And just be aware that would be a very cowardly way to have left. Thank you.

Thank you.

It sounds like there was someone online. Go ahead, Adam.

If you're waiting to speak online, please proceed.

Am I coming in now?

Yes, we can hear you.

OK, thank you. I'm Adam . You heard a bunch of speakers at the beginning of the meeting. And given the clerk's summary here, that one of these initiatives that was from December of last year came from April. The continued gymnastics that I will attribute to staff on some level to preclude citizen-led petition initiatives to be able to be voted on by the citizens is quite troubling to many, as you have heard. And, you know, okay, the court wants you to explain or the city to explain why this year isn't feasible. And the compressed time, as has been noted, the city would be being rewarded for causing these delays that keep getting not favorably ruled on by the court. And the argument that I believe the clerk said mayor and council aren't bounded by the bound by the court order. I think the staff material say the County elections officer isn't bound by the court order. I mean, come on. And then at the special meeting on the 18th of this month, I believe after closed session, uh, you folks decided to appeal an unfavorable ruling. Think about this. You're elected by the people. And it turns out an unfavorable ruling is that the citizens who elected you get to vote on ballot initiatives. And whether that can occur this year after city delays by staff or have to wait close to two or over two years, according to the preferred option. I mean, think about your morals. Is this really what you want to do? It's like, why be so fearful of the vote? And I remember, you know, Mayor O'Neill seeming to imply on the Greenlight Initiative that people might not be smart enough to make the right decision. If you withhold the vote from people, they maybe weren't smart enough to make the right decision when they voted for you.

and that didn't turn out too bad for you so just let the people have a vote whether you like it or not it's becoming comical thank you madam clerk is there anyone else online okay i'll bring it back up here for any additional council comments or questions council member grant thank you

Okay, so tonight we're at an important juncture and we have an opportunity to replace a lot of uncertainty that we've had over the last number of months with some clarity and basically to bring this process to a responsible conclusion. The notice issue that we've been struggling with and have brought to the courts has been ruled sufficient and we're beyond that now. We're not making any value judgment appear at all about the individual merits of any of these initiatives. I would mention that I do strongly support transparency in open government, but we already operate under the Brown Act, and what we need to do is rigorously enforce the transparency, open meeting, public participation, and other requirements currently in the existing law. Notwithstanding that, it's a different matter that's before us tonight. And I do believe that our city, and I mean that when I say that our city does benefit from some certainty at this point. We're already facing immense pressure from Sacramento to implement state housing mandates that are reshaping every inch of this city. Residents, property owners, businesses in the city itself really needs to understand the rules under which we're operating. And I recognize that there's benefits and detriments to placing the initiatives on any one of the opportunities that are before us. I especially am sensitive to staff time and the need to properly implement these responsibilities that we have under the election code. But I think that these considerations have to be viewed in the larger context of what prolonging this matter means to our community and maintaining the confidence that the public has in this city council. OUR ROLE TONIGHT IS TO PROVIDE CERTAINTY AND ALLOW THE PROCESS TO COME TO A CONCLUSION, SO I WOULD SUPPORT MOVING FORWARD WITH THE INITIATIVES ON THE NOVEMBER 26 BALLOT. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? MAYOR POTEMBLOM.

THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO PUT A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.

Well, before we have a final motion on this matter, we do need to decide whether to call the election. Just break it down here. For one, two, or all three of the ballot initiatives for Tuesday, November 3rd, 2026, March 7th, 2028, or November 7th, 2028. Now you can proceed with your motion.

Thank you. And so within that motion, I'd like to recommend... staff recommendations A through D and F through H with the following specific actions. That we select November 7th, 2028 as the election date at which the three charter amendment initiatives will be submitted to the voters. We find the city council has reviewed the argument for and against the measure and ballot questions as compelled by the court order of August 3rd. Find the city council expressly reserves and does not waive the city's appellate rights, objections, or any other available judicial relief. That we adopt the resolutions directing the city attorney to prepare the impartial analysis as well as the action for setting the deadlines for the impartial analysis. and arguments, but removes from the resolutions the decision whether the City Council must submit arguments against the measures, and if so, who is designated to do so. The City Council adopts resolutions related to the rebuttal of arguments, but as noted, does not determine whether the City Council will author the arguments against, which will be considered at a future date, and incorporate them into a resolution considered as part of this agenda item and operative language related to the City being compelled to act and not waiving the City's appellate rights, which was provided by the City Attorney to the City Clerk, City Council, and the public this evening.

Okay, that was a motion. I think we first need to take a straw vote on the date, and then we can take your motion following that.

Did you want to make a motion? I think if you had a second, you could vote on the motion. He's proposed a date.

Okay, so Mayor Pertemplem's motion is seconded by Councilmember Weber.

And just to confirm, that's for all three? Because you could have a separate date for all three. It's for all three.

Okay, we have a motion and a second. Are we voting by straw vote or?

No, I think you just do a regular vote. Okay.

Let's go ahead and vote.

Motion carried by vote 5-2 and opposed Eric Councilmember Wiegand and please refrain from booing.

Let's try to maintain some decorum. Thank you.

I'm sorry. Sorry. I haven't read it. Like, can we go back? Haven't read it. It was opposed Councilmember Robin Grant and Michelle Barton. OK.

GIVEN THE RESULTS OF THAT ACTION, I THINK IT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR US TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE CITY COUNCIL WANTS TO SUBMIT ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE MEASURES AT A CITY COUNCIL MEETING IN THE FUTURE AND MAKE A DECISION AT THAT TIME ON THE DESIGNATION OF COUNCIL MEMBERS IF ANY. MR. HARP, DO WE NEED TO TAKE ANY FURTHER ACTION?

No, I think I covered all the items.

Okay. 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 by the prevailing side.

Are there any motions for reconsideration? Hearing none, we'll move on to public comments on closed session.

Mayor Kleinman, members of the council, my name is Jim Mosher. These two agenda items are closely related to the item that you just reviewed in public. You're reviewing two court cases. One is about the three measures that you just talked about. One is about the responsible housing initiative that you put on the ballot back November and are now trying to recall from the ballot. This is not the first closed session you've had on this, but the public has never, at the end of one of those closed sessions, heard who is directing this expensive litigation that's going on. I was a little surprised in the city manager's newsletter to see him say that the city was going to appeal the court decisions from last week. I kind of thought since you were conferring with the city attorney in your closed sessions that you would be the one directing that, not the city manager. But then we found on Friday that emergency petitions were filed. I would note that the Brown Act requires when you hold a closed session, at the end of the closed session, when a piece of litigation is on the agenda, that it tells us what the votes were, which councilmen are pursuing this litigation and directing staff to go forward with it. We're supposed to hear who voted for, against, or abstained. And not just on the initial litigation, but whether you gave direction to defend or to seek or to refrain from seeking appellate review or relief. And so I'm hoping at the end of tonight's closed session, and I'm going to stick around, that we do get an announcement and we do hear which of our council people are spending our tax money on unproductive litigation, which apparently is going to be going on for two more years. Thank you.

Before we go on to close, I believe we have an adjournment in the memory.

Yes, we do. Thank you. Thank you for putting that picture up. As we adjourn this evening, let us remember Chung Kwang Lee, a longtime member of our community who passed away on August 20th at the age of 94. Born in Yangzhou, China, he left home at 13 to study culinary arts in Shanghai. At 17, he married So Ching Lee, beginning a lifelong partnership that would span continents and decades of service. Their journey took them from China to Hong Kong, Brazil, and ultimately Southern California and beautiful Newport Beach. Mr. Lee's connection to Newport Beach began in 1969 when he transformed a restaurant on Balboa Island into the very successful Shanghai Pine Gardens. That entrepreneurial spirit continued into the next generation. Three of his sons, Wing Lam, Ed Lee, and Ming Go Lee went on to found Wahoo's Fish Tacos in 1988, one of Orange County's most iconic restaurant brands. In 2024, the Lee family was inducted into the Orange County Hall of Fame for their contributions to the community. Mr. Lee was also one of the earliest supporters of Zhu Qi in Orange County, dedicating decades of his life to charitable work, disaster relief, education, and service to others. On behalf of the City Council, I extend our deepest condolences to the entire Lee family and all who knew and loved Mr. Lee. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Harp, would you please announce our closed session items?

Yes, just real quickly before I do that, I'd like to note from Mr. Mosher that all the announcements have been made. I'm not sure he wasn't here at the end of some meetings, but all announcements regarding council actions have been appropriately made. Regarding tonight, the City Council adjourned a closed session to meet with legal counsel regarding two litigation matters. The first is City of Newport Beach versus Newport Beach Stewardship Association at all and the second a city of Newport Beach at all versus Robert page and those are set forth on the agenda under item 721 a and B.

Thank you Thank you. We're recessed to closed session Mr. Harp, is there a closed session report?

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

We are adjourned.