A "Short" Meeting Goes Long...

TERRIBLE TIME MANAGEMENT
Tuesday night what should have been a very short Costa Mesa City Council meeting stretched out to nearly double the length of time it should have taken.  It began a half-hour late because the council was delayed in their closed session - probably talking about the negotiations that took place with the Costa Mesa City Employees Association (CMCEA) earlier in the day. Read Brad Zint's coverage HERE.

WELL-DESERVED AWARD
When it finally got started Mayor Jim Righeimer presented his Mayor's Award to Randy Garell, President of The Grant Boys store on Newport Blvd.  The store has served the community for decades and is one of the oldest remaining businesses in the old Downtown area.  Garell is shown here with the award given to him by Righeimer.

MORE ANNIVERSARY FUN COMING UP
Then 60th Anniversary Committee member Charlene Ashendorf made a pitch for the upcoming Scarecrow Festival on October 12th and 13th.  The community is invited to participate in the creation of scarecrows, which will be displayed at Goathill Junction - the model train venue at Fairview Park.  Classes will be held to train folks on how to create scarecrows.   See the following flyer (click on the image to enlarge) on the event and/or visit their website at http://www.costamesahistory.org/scarecrow.htm. 

CONCERN ABOUT ANNIVERSARY CELEBRATION FINANCES
During Public Comments, along about 7:30, several people rose to speak on a variety of issues, but the first one out of the chute was Sue Lester, a member of the 60th Anniversary Committee, who expressed concern that city policies may have been violated and no accounting of the finances of the 3-day celebration in June has yet been made.  She also was concerned about the survey form distributed to the volunteers, indicating that it was much to complicated.

FAIRVIEW PARK AND BUSINESS LICENSE TAX
Other speakers expressed concern for the future of Fairview Park, including the model trains, and Robin Leffler complained that the Finance Advisory Committee had recently given short shrift to the consideration of a modification of the Business License Tax.

NEW EMPLOYEE WEB SITE
Jennifer Muir, representing the CMCEA, mentioned the current negotiations and introduced the council and audience to the new web site recently created to keep the public informed about the negotiations, HERE.

GARY'S OLD BUDGET
During Council Member Comments Gary Monahan actually participated again for the second meeting in a row.  He brought with him a "show and tell" item - a tri-fold document that looked from the audience vantage point like a restaurant menu, but was, in fact, the City of Costa Mesa budget for the 1965-1966 year.  He read some of the entries.

HUBRIS ON DISPLAY
Righeimer went to great lengths to compliment himself for two successful "Meet the Mayor" events within the past couple weeks.  He indicated that he hoped to hold more of them in residents homes, so folks could just walk a couple blocks to hear him speak.  Humility has never been one of his strengths.

"REGISTRATION" REEKS
As he told us about the concern expressed by some Eastside neighbors about the proliferation of rehab homes around town, he mentioned that the previously-discussed Nuisance Ordinance was being re-vamped and a streamlined version would be presented to the council at the September 3rd meeting.  He also mentioned a "Registration" policy, that theoretically would permit city officials to do a headcount at unlicensed group homes, so we could keep track of who lived there.  When I heard that I got just a little nervous, since unlicensed group homes - those with six or fewer "clients" - are treated just as any other family home in our city.  I found myself wondering if this "Registration" scheme might unleash Code Enforcement staffers who may begin pounding on doors throughout the city.  It smelled very much like the Gestapo to me.  I hope the contract legal firm does a good job of vetting this situation before we find ourselves in yet another legal quagmire.


MENSINGER'S MUTTERINGS
Steve Mensinger complimented the Costa Mesa Foundation, a member of which spoke earlier to report on the success of the Concerts In The Park series this summer, and asked Assistant CEO Rick Francis - substituting for the vacationing CEO Tom Hatch - to ask two other community organizations to present before the council on September 3rd, too.  He also addressed the concern one speaker had about Lions Park and a specific event there recently when a city staffer was attacked by a deranged homeless person.  Mensinger said he drives by the park every day - he's just got to get a job one of these days.

MEETING SCHEDULING
Sandra Genis also thanked the Costa Mesa Foundation and then expressed concern for the conflicting schedules for upcoming important meetings.  It seems that the next General Plan meeting and the Fairview Park Citizen's Advisory Committee are both scheduled to meet at the same time.  She was also concerned about "steps" that had been carved out of a hill at Fairview Park.


PARKS, HOMELESS AND BOBBY YOUNG
Wendy Leece had a long laundry list of items, including the Concerts In The Park; the conditions at Lions Park (she suggested consideration be given to providing "greeters" at the park to manage the homeless folks); the meeting schedule conflict (she suggested moving the Fairview Park Committee meeting); the broader homelessness problem and the role the folks of the Churches Consortium are playing and, finally, she recognized outgoing Finance and Information Technology Director, Bobby Young, for his dedication and professionalism and service to the City as he departs for the private sector on August 23rd.  Last night was his final City Council meeting - and it will be one to remember.  More on that later.

NEW FIRE CHIEF RECRUITMENT
Francis, standing in for Hatch, reported that the recruitment process for a new permanent Fire Chief is moving along and that Hatch will very likely make his decision upon his return from vacation later this month.  He also expanded on the issue of the Lions Park attack by the homeless person.  He told us Vanguard University - next door neighbors at City Hall - has a new President.


SPLITTING UP YOUNG'S JOB

Francis also mentioned the General Plan Workshop coming up, and indicated this one will include a puppet show for the children and refreshments by Starbucks.  And, he also acknowledged Bobby Young and mentioned that they will be splitting off the Information Technology segment of his job and will be looking for two people to replace him - one in Finance and one in IT.  I thought that was VERY interesting.

APPEAL FEE RETURNED
They finally got to the Consent Calendar and three items were pulled for separate discussion.  Gary Monahan pulled item #6, the reimbursement of the appeal fee for the Catalina Shores Homeowners Association.  After a short discussion it was approved, 4-1, with Monahan voting NO.

SLOWING 19TH STREET
Wendy Leece pulled Item #7, the request for the use of grant funds to design traffic calming measures for East 19th Street similar to those installed last year on Broadway.  There was significant discussion on this issue, ranging from the lack of data on the Broadway project to measure its effectiveness to our ability to install such measures on 19th Street because it's on the Master Plan of Highways.

DICEY NAVIGATION PROBLEMS
During the discussion comments were made about the narrowness of the streets at the corners, with some speakers concerned about the safety of navigating around them.  Righeimer, in fact, admitted he had scuffed a planter or two while driving around the area.

EASTSIDERS LIKE BROADWAY
Several Eastside residents rose to speak favorably about the Broadway project, including Syndy Neyland, a member of the Eastside Costa Mesa Neighbors Group, who praised the new beauty of the street, the quiet they now experience due to the rubberized pavement and the safety of the street.  Realtor Jeff McConville, President of that group and a resident of East 19th Street, also spoke in favor of the plan, but expressed concern that there should be something planned to preclude the traffic form squeezing over into neighboring streets - like Magnolia, Flower and 18th Street.   Eventually the item passed, 5-0.

NEW COMPUTERS, AGAIN
Then came the most interesting, and frustrating, item of the evening - Item #9, the purchase of 435 new computers for use throughout the city.  Keep in mind that this council had previously approved this item back in May and the only reason it was back before them is because the successful vendor back then had neglected to include sales tax in his bid.  He refused to work with the city on the issue, so staff brought the item back with a different successful bidders numbers - slightly more than the previous bid.

THROUGH THE LOOKING GLASS
What happened then was like something out of Alice in Wonderland.  It was though we'd had a time warp and the council was re-hashing the entire concept again, not just the new bid.  Monahan said he didn't understand why we should replace all the computers at one time, even though this whole thing was explained back in May.  Mensinger suggested that we go back and get computers that included touch screen technology, even though Young explained to the council that the use of touch screens is much less efficient than the standard keyboards.

THEY JUST DON'T GET IT!
And round and round it went, even discussing which operating system should be used, even though the staff had used a consultant to help identify the specific systems that would work best for the City.  Council members were concerned about buying "obsolete" equipment, even though most of the computers being replaced are 10 years old - that's several lifetimes in computer years.

EVEN FRANCIS COULDN'T HELP
Francis intervened, attempting to help the council to understand the methodology that went into making the decision and the hours of staff and consultant time that was spent sorting this all out.  Again, this was all discussed in May.  The council has previously budgeted a complete overhaul of the network backbone throughout all city operations and this new batch of computers will facilitate the installation of that infrastructure.

RIGHEIMER KILLED THE DEAL
There seemed to be a major disconnect with the male members of the council on this issue.  The deal was doomed when Righeimer said he'd had some misgivings over the past couple weeks, but he didn't articulate what those misgivings were.  That was straight out of the old Allan Mansoor playbook and it seemed VERY peculiar.  It made me wonder if he might have a buddy in the computer business that needs a job.  Sorry, but his performance in the past makes me suspicious of his motives.


A PARTING SHOT
So, after all that micro-managing discussion - and in a final slap in the face to Bobby Young on his way out the door - the council voted, 2-3, to not move forward with the purchase.  I don't have to tell you who voted which way.  So, it's back to the old drawing board for whomever is left on the staff to worry about it.  The meeting finally adjourned at 9:00, making it too late for any of us who wished to dash over to the National Night Out celebration at the Target parking lot.

OFF-ROAD WITH THE MAYOR
I did end my evening at City Hall with a chuckle, though.  As I sat in my car getting ready to depart I noticed Righeimer driving out of the parking lot and bounce his car over one of the curbs marking a parking spot.  And I didn't even see him with a Diet Coke all evening!  It just seemed somehow appropriate for the evening.  The next council meeting is September 3rd - the day following the long Labor Day holiday weekend.

Colin McCarthy Got It Wrong

INACCURATE AND INFLAMMATORY
This weekend Costa Mesa Planning Commissioner and former City Council candidate Colin McCarthy produced a commentary in the Daily Pilot titled, "Don't burdern C.M. businesses with higher fees", HERE, that attempts to mislead the readers with inflammatory, inaccurate rhetoric on the subject of a possible Business License Tax increase.

ONLY RHETORIC
McCarthy attempts to use the red herring that, if the voters were to approve a modest increase in the Business License Tax - it has had NO substantive change in the structure and/or amount since the 1960's - Nordstrom would pull up stakes and shut down the South Coast Plaza store.  Hog wash!  And, of course, he offers no evidence to confirm his allegation - only his rhetoric.

STUBBORN, NARROW-MINDEDNESS
McCarthy is only regurgitating the party line of those in my Republican Party that are against ANY kind of increase in taxes, even though revenue shortfalls could cripple the ability of Costa Mesa to provide sufficient coverage for public safety - police and fire - and severely limit other services, too.  This kind of stubborn, irrational reaction to this serious situation makes us realize that the safety and future of our city is less important to those ideologues than their own personal political agendas.

REALLY?  I DON'T THINK SO...
Presently Nordstrom - or any of the other high-grossing, top-tier retailers in Costa Mesa - pays a maximum of $200 per year for a business license.  That's a bargain in anybodies book, for sure.  And I don't discount the fact that our laughably small tax may attract businesses to our city.  But, if it was $400 or $800 for those same folks, would that fact alone cause them to pause when considering Costa Mesa as a business venue, or to leave if they are already here?  I doubt it.

WHY NOW?
No, because the Financial Advisory Committee - packed by the current City Council with folks who share McCarthy's aversion to considering even a modest updating of the Business License Tax - has now shoved off any further discussion of the issue until the impact of recently-acquired software designed to help track down scofflaws who have not paid the tax they owe is known, this issue seems to have been placed into suspended animation for six months.  That's what makes McCarthy's commentary so peculiar.  Why now?

POLITICAL MOTIVATION
Well, we are just over a year from the next election that will select at least one new council member, so I suspect McCarthy's ill-timed and inaccurate rant is designed to lay the groundwork for a campaign platform for one or two candidates next year.

COMMENT THREAD IS A "MUST READ"
The comment thread on his commentary is enlightening.  Several residents have taken issue with his views and have debunked his claims one at a time.  I won't repeat them here, but they're worth reviewing if you're at all interested in this issue.

THE "$10,000" OOPS
A year ago this issue was discussed by the City Council with an eye to placing a proposal before the voters last November.  Unfortunately, as part of the staff report presented to the council at the time, Finance and Information Technology Director Bobby Young used one model that would have increased the maximum fee charged to the highest-grossing retailers at $10,000 - a number just pulled out of the air.  I watched as, almost like ballet dancers in unison, the council at the time flinched, then rejected any further discussion.  Obviously, the memory of that $10,000 number has remained stuck in the memory of some people in power.  And, unfortunately, it's impeding any serious discussion of the issue a year later.

CHAMBER DIDN'T FIGHT IT LAST YEAR
The Costa Mesa Chamber of Commerce, a body that certainly should have an opinion on this issue, had no negative comments on a possible modest increase last year.



POLITICAL AGENDAS BEFORE RESIDENTS

The issue is actually pretty simple.  Members of the current City Council majority, and some of their acolytes like McCarthy, have cried "poverty" for the past couple years as a preamble to disingenuous contract bargaining with the employee associations that are beginning now.  They have rejected highly qualified professional recommendations for appropriate staffing levels for public safety organizations and the availability of more funds, like an increase in the Business License Tax, renders those self-serving positions moot.  It is crystal clear to many observers that political agendas are being served here - not the residents, business-owners and visitors to our city.

Costa Mesa Finance/Information Technology Director Bails

BOBBY YOUNG LEAVES COSTA MESA FOR PRIVATE SECTOR

The City of Costa Mesa, in an entry on their web page, HERE, announced to day that Bobby Young, Director of Finance and Information Technology, will leave the city on August 23rd for a job in the private sector.

GOOD FOR HIM!
This is NOT good news for the City, but is probably GREAT news for Bobby Young.  He's among the hardest working staffers in the city and, from my perspective, has done an admirable job of trying to keep up with the ever-shifting and sometimes unreasonable demands placed on him and his staff by the current council majority and respond to the inquiries of members of the public.

THANKS, AND GOOD LUCK
We here at A Bubbling Cauldron wish Bobby the very best and thank him for his dedication and professionalism over his 13 year tenure with the city.  He's a good man.

THE LAST OF MANY
Sadly for those of us in the city, Bobby's departure is just the most recent of senior staffers who have chosen to move on.  Starting wherever you like - with City Manager Allan Roeder retiring shortly after this council majority was seated, to Kim Brandt and Terri Cassidy leaving to Newport Beach, Peter Naghavi recently retiring to the south of France and now Young.  There are many more that could be listed - we may do that at a future date.  All that institutional knowledge and skill will be deeply missed.

Finance Advisory Committee Meeting Was Enlightening

MY FIRST MEETING...
Tuesday evening, for the first time, I attended the meeting of the Costa Mesa Finance Advisory Committee, known in a previous life as the Investment Oversight Committee.  In that previous iteration the committee was comprised of the City Manager, the Finance Director, a council member and a couple - maybe three - members of the public.  Their role was more passive/reactive than proactive.

WHO?
The new City Council has a much different idea about committees in general, and this one in particular.  This committee is comprised of six regular members and two alternates, plus Mayor Pro Tem Steve Mensinger and City CEO Tom Hatch.  Senior staffers typically in attendance are Finance and Information Technology Director Bobby Young, Assistant Finance Director Colleen O'Donohue and Revenue Supervisor Judy Vickers and Executive Secretary Kathy Ulrich.

A MORE PROACTIVE ASSIGNMENT
Having read the agendas of all previous meetings it seems clear that the council wants this group to play a much more active role in how the City's finances are managed and it has taken on assignments previously the purview of the staff.  Tuesday evening was my first chance to actually watch this group in action.

NOT A FULL HOUSE
In addition to the staffers mentioned above, committee members attending the meeting were Shawn Dewane, Jim Fisler, Terry Shaw, David Stiller, Howard Hull and Richard Riva.  Members John Hinson and Robert Juneman were absent, as was Mensinger.

NEW GUYS IN CHARGE
Stiller and Shaw are holdovers from the previous configuration.  All the other members are new to this committee.  Dewane is the Chairman and Shaw is Vice-Chairman.  Dewane and Fisler are Directors of the Mesa Water District Board.  They, plus Hull, can be said with accuracy to be tightly aligned philosophically with the current City Council majority - a fact that became crystal clear as the meeting progressed.

IMPORTANT ISSUES
I wanted to attend this particular meeting because there were items on this agenda, HERE, that interested me.  I was particularly interested in how they would handle New Business item 7a, Business License Tax Information/Study.  As it turned out, that was the only item they covered - the other two New Business items, PERS Prepay and Revenue Sources, were trailed to a future meeting.

DEWANE DOMINATED
Dewane ran a crisp meeting, blitzing through the early agenda items before guiding the discussion on 7a for more than an hour.  "Guiding" may not be exactly right - "dominating" would be more appropriate, in my opinion.  He began his discussion by stating that this issue should not be political - a statement I later found very amusing because that's exactly what he did - politicize it.

PLENTY OF INFO
The staff had provided a large pile of reference materials, including several city council staff reports that covered the subject previously, focusing on the most recent serious discussion of increasing this tax last year.  Also included were copies of a PowerPoint presentation Young had given to the council last year and the entire section of the Municipal Code that deals with Business Tax.

VIOLATING 4TH AMENDMENT?
As the discussion began Fisler expressed concern about section 9-58, which seemed to him to give authority to city officials to enter his home to look for his business license.  Staff, in response to the concern, assured him that there had NEVER been an instance of that happening.

NO AUDIT, NO PENALTIES
He asked if there had ever been an audit of claimed revenue - our business license tax is based on tiers of revenue claimed by the applicant - or if any penalties had ever been imposed.  The answer was NO.

TAKE A DEEP BREATH...
OK, I'm not going to try to regurgitate every comment word for word.  I'm going to give you my impressions of the high and low points, with some specific quotes as appropriate.

DEWANE'S VIEW
It was very clear to me by the line of questions posed and the positions taken that Dewane and Fisler - and Hull to some extent - came armed with an opinion and were not eager to have the facts complicate it.  Dewane, while dominating the early part of the discussion, frequently expressed disdain for the "insignificant" amount of revenue generated by our business license tax, which runs from $800,000 to $850,000 year after year.  Hatch chimed in to observe that it has been our most consistent revenue source.  And still, throughout his comments, Dewane referred to the amount as "nickels and dimes", and wondered if it was even worth it to have a Business License Tax.  He also referred to the Business License Tax revenue as a "rounding error".

DEFENDING THE REVENUE STREAM
At that point Young jumped into the discussion, taking umbrage at that description, stating that it was a viable part of our revenue stream and, as Hatch had earlier stated, was our most consistent revenue source - much less volatile than the Sales Tax or Property Tax, as demonstrated over the past several years.  To that Dewane stated that "1% of the Budget is insignificant!"  Are you getting his drift?

BUSINESS TAX?  TO RAISE REVENUE
At one point he asked the purpose of the Business License Tax and was told by Young that it was to raise revenue.  That answer seemed inadequate to Dewane.

COLLECTING WHAT IS DUE
The discussion turned to how we collect our Business License Tax.  Until about 3 years ago we had a person on staff that was tasked to check newspapers and other public records to see if folks doing business in our city were, in fact, paying our license fees.  Keep in mind that Costa Mesa's Business License Tax is among the very lowest in the county.  The maximum ANY business pays is $200, with most paying less than half that amount.  Fisler and Dewane both suggested that we could generate enough revenue from the scofflaws that we wouldn't have to raise the tax.  They offered no documentation for the opinion, though.

CMFD CHECKS FOR LICENSES
Hatch told us that the Fire Department, as part of their routine inspections, now looks for the Business License document.

TOO MUCH PAPERWORK!
Dewane continued, referring to the Business License Tax as a way to kill businesses and stifle recruitment of new businesses.  He complained about the 22 page document a businessman must complete to begin a business in the city, observing that it just added to the paperwork burden businessmen face.

NEW SOFTWARE
Dewane stated several times that it's more important to attract more businesses to the city than to raise taxes.  Another part of the equation is the collection of the tax that is due to us.  A new suite of computer software has been purchased and is online now.  Soon it will facilitate the auditing process and aid in collecting ALL the taxes due to the city.  It will also create new efficiencies in the handling of these transactions.

PUBLIC COMMENTS
About 45 minutes into the meeting - it lasted 90 - Dewane asked any of the members of the public present if they had comments to make.  Each of the four of us in the room took our turn to express views on the issue.  Jeff Arthur briefly discussed the points Young had made and posited that perhaps we should increase the threshold of the tax.  Dewane pumped Young about the cost to cut a check.

MOONEY - A SALES TAX RAISE INSTEAD?
Charlie Mooney wasn't satisfied with the purpose of the tax - to raise revenue.  Among other things, he wondered whether, in place of the tax, an increase in the Sales Tax might be more appropriate.  Dewane chimed in, complaining that businesses already pay taxes and fees.  He mentioned a "supplemental sales tax".  He then veered off into a rant about the power of government being unlimited and taxes are a violation of personal property rights.  He said regulation is not business-friendly.

BETH AND I
Beth Refakes, a long time resident and participant in most important meetings in the city, said she had no real problem with the Business License Tax and suggested that volunteers might be useful helping reconcile unpaid tax.  She also opined that the electorate in Costa Mesa probably wouldn't take kindly to the elimination of the Business License Tax.  I suggested that anyone currently holding a license should be required to pay something - at least a modest handling fee - which is not the case today.  You can keep your business license active at no charge if you have less than $1,000 annual revenue.

TO THE EXTREMES!
Dewane, in response to my observation that his opinions made it clear which way he was trying to direct the discussion, rejected that characterization - saying that he was just trying to carry the discussion to the extremes.  Well, he did that well enough, believe me!

PERMITS VS. FEES
The discussion continued and got mired down into the difference between a permit and a fee.  Briefly, Young explained that a permit typically covers the cost of the service - inspections, planning applications, etc.

TRYING TO FOLLOW HIS THOUGHTS
Dewane suggested this issue is highly complicated and political and wanted the staff to do some more work.  He said that if he was a council member in a city with NO business license tax he might be tempted to "poach" businesses from neighboring cities who DO have such a tax.  He also suggested a way to allow businesses to pay their license fees 5 years ahead, which seemed very contradictory to his entire premise before.  Earlier he suggested that Segerstroms might just petition the local agency formation commission to become part of Santa Ana if the tax was raised.  That was an astounding statement!

THE 10K DOOR-SLAMMER
The discussion turned to last year, when the council discussed this issue and did nothing about putting the issue before the voters.  Some wondered what happened.  At the end of the meeting I told them what happened.  One of the scenarios Young presented to the council a year ago had a maximum tax of $10,000.  When the council heard that number their collective brains just locked up and they never could get past it.

MORE GOOD QUESTIONS
Richard Riva presented a list of things he felt needed further discussion/explanation.  He felt the committee needed to continue the discussion and asked the staff to consider several questions, including, What is the capacity for more businesses in the city?  What are the types of businesses worth going after?  He also indicated that permits needed to be part of the discussion.

NO HARM, NO FOUL
Hatch offered this comment.  "Will we fall apart if this tax goes away? - NO.  Will we fall apart if it stays the same? - NO."

HOW TO SPEND THE MONEY
Riva wondered what we would do with, say, an additional $2-3 million in additional revenue from an increased Business License Tax.  Hatch mentioned infrastructure improvements, including City Hall, which is showing it's age.  No, I didn't hear him say we could begin paying down the Pension debt...

MORE WORK FOR STAFF
Finally Fisler suggested that members email their thoughts to Young before the next meeting in July.  The two remaining items will be considered at that time.

NO SURPRISES...
My impressions?  I've heard many of the things Dewane and Fisler espoused last night coming from the mouths of Mayor Jim Righeimer, Mayor Pro Tem Steve Mensinger and councilman Gary Monahan over the past couple years, and during the discussions last year on this same issue.  It was clear to me, as I said earlier, that Dewane, Fisler and Hull are carrying the water for the council majority on this issue.  I was not surprised by this at all.  The biggest problem I saw was that Dewane so dominated the discussion that he intimidated other members and stifled some of the discussion.  Again, I was not surprised - at all.  It will be very interesting to see how this plays out.  There's still time for calm, rational discussions on this issue before the council gets into it to consider placing it on the November ballot next year.