Byron de Arakal - "We Should Repeal Measure Z"

CONSIDERING MEASURE Z
At their meeting on Monday, February 24, 2020, the Costa Mesa Planning Commission considered, under Public Hearing #3, the discussion of creation of a new development fee and a committee to administer it per the only conditions of the onerous Measure Z that survived the vote.  You can read the staff report on that issue HERE.

THE VOTERS CHOICES IN 2016
In case you've forgotten, the voters voted heavily in favor of Measure Y, the slow growth measure.  It also passed Measure Z by a smaller margin.  As a result, only the elements of Measure Z that applied were those NOT included in Measure Y.  Here's what the votes looked like back in 2016.

THE CHAIRMAN SAYS "IT'S DISINGENUOUS - REPEAL IT"
Following the lengthy discussion, just prior to the vote being called, Chairman Byron de Arakal took a few minutes to explain why he was going to vote no on this issue.  I think it's important to understand just why he thinks Measure Z should be repealed, so here's a transcription of his entire explanation.

“I will not be supporting the motion and I’ll kinda give some reasons why. 

Principally, I think this fee and the ordinance that created it and the committee structure that it also created are wholey duplicative of fees we already have in place, and processes we have in place to administer park fees.  

As I mentioned in the meeting two years ago about this ordinance that a seven member, or seventeen member, committee to recommend to the council how these fee revenues should be spent should be a job that, if they are going to do it, should be recommended to the Parks and Recreation Commission and not the City Council.  We have a Parks and Recreation Commission for a reason.  

And, so this ordinance creates this big committee, and then it creates a new park fee - we already have essentially two or almost two, and now were gonna have three.  

Measure Z was created to chase voters away from Measure Y, and the only thing that could be placed in that measure to make it amenable to the voters to give them the notion to chase them off Measure Y,  is to say, “You know what, we’ll raise a bunch of money for your parks and your open space.”  - didn’t tell anybody that there are already thousands of dollars  per door for parks fees that get applied to these residential developments.  And so, it was really kind of a ruse, it was, you know, a magic show and I hated Measure Y, and still hate Measure Y, and I hated Measure Z, as well, because it was disingenuous.  It’s motive was disingenuous and how it was constructed was disingenuous, in my opinion.  

Now, having said that, we’re about to foist another fee on the development community, at a time when we’re about to have to figure out where we’re going to place 12,000 more housing units, principally, I think, in the area that just so happens to be in this area where this fee’s gonna be charged.  

Now, don’t think for a minute there wasn’t a motive for placing that fee just on this area, because there were people in this community that wanted no residential development north of the 405, west of Harbor and Fairview.  They didn’t want it, so they put a fee in place to chase the development community away because you’re just adding another fee on top of a park fee we already have.  

And so, ideally for me, I would love to see this commission recommend to the City Council that they place Measure Z on the ballot for a straight up or down vote on whether or not to repeal it - but that’s not gonna happen tonight.  

So, I’m gonna vote no on this motion because I think Measure Z was disingenuous from the beginning, I think it adds another fee to the development community, a development community we’re gonna need to meet our RHNA obligation in our new Housing Element.  And, ah, I just think it’s a big mistake.  And then we create this seventeen-member committee, that, who knows how political that could get?  And it cuts out the Parks Commission’s ability to make recommendations in it’s Capital Improvement Budget review because they’ve got this seventeen member committee who’s deciding now what happens to whatever pot of money comes out of this.  So, I’m going to be voting no." 

WHO?

When the Chairman said "...there are people in this community that wanted no residential development north of the 405...", we know who he meant - the sperm donors of Measure Z.

THEY VOTED HOW?!

And, this issue got curiouser and curiouser as the commission voted.  Commissioner Tourje was absent, but, as you can see from the image below, only three (3) commissioners voted "Yes" - Perkens, Russell and Zich.  Chariman de Arakal voted "No" and Commissioner Colbert and Vice Chairman Harlan abstained after consultation with City Attorney Tarquin Preziozi.  Fun fact - Harlan actually seconded the motion.

TO THE COUNCIL ON THE THINEST OF VOTES

So, now this issue will go before the City Council for consideration after the thinnest of votes to move it forward.  This should be interesting.

COMMENTS?
If you wish to comment on this entry you must go to my Facebook entry, which can be found on my page HERE.

Friction On The Dais At Costa Mesa Council Meeting

SPARKS FLEW...
The Costa Mesa City Council meeting last night was marked by a couple "spirited" discussions on the dais from unexpected combatants.  Mayor Katrina Foley and Mayor Pro Tem Sandra Genis sparred a couple of times as Genis took offense at perceived slights.  We saw Genis flailing her arms and nearly jumping out of her seat.  It was interesting, and more than a little disappointing.  But, lets begin elsewhere...

NATIONAL ANTHEM AND PLEDGE
The meeting began with the playing/singing of the National Anthem by Mariachi Herencia Michoacana Group and, following a moment of solemn expression, Councilman Allan Mansoor led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.

ANOTHER LAWSUIT IN THE BOOKS
Foley asked City Attorney Tom Duarte if he had any report out of the earlier Closed Session and he told us that, on a unanimous vote, the council had agreed to settle a lawsuit - number 5 on the agenda, HERE, for $250,000.  One more dip into the self-insurance fund.

PRESENTATIONS
Back on a positive note, Foley announced the City Manager's Leadership Award to Firefighter/Paramedic Givoanni La Placa.  This was a very well-received, uplifting report.  What a great young man!

BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB REPORT
The City was then presented with the Boys and Girls Club Annual Report by Robert Santana, CEO of the Boys and Girls Club of Central Orange County.  Much progress has been made since several organizations have been folded into one.

ACCESS BUILDING, FIRE AND HOUSING BOARD OF APPEAL REPORT
Then the Interim Building Official presented the annual report from the Access Building, Fire and Housing Board of Appeal Committee.  The following slides tell you what he said.

PUBLIC COMMENTS
Several people spoke during Public Comments - non-agendized items.

Jay Humphrey - back in the saddle after major back surgery - gave kudos to Public Services Director Raja Sethuraman and his team for rapid response to trip-and-fall hazards reported by Humphrey.  He also opined that the City should be doing everything they can to prosecute the bozo who drove the truck into vernal pool #4 at Fairview Park, and the tow truck driver that pulled him out.

Al Melone spoke negatively about the recent sparsely-attended Coyote Forum conducted by the CMPD.

Wendy Leece, back from her recent hospitalization and ready for battle, praised the City for attempting to rebuild our public safety organizations, then criticized the selection process for the commissions following the election of new council members, observing that the council violated Council Policy.

Bob Cartright launched into a rambling rant about his concern for our children, offering critical comments about how "the building industry owns our city".

An unidentified woman observed that the residents should not have blind trust in the council.  She remarked about the recent Orange County Register article about Costa Mesa being the Capital of Cool and suggested it should also be known as the OC Rehab Riviera.

Richard Russell spoke on the recent Homelessness Forum held by councilmen John Stephens and Allan Mansoor, quoting statistics from that meeting and mis-identifying the cornerstone of our efforts in that regard, Muriel Ullman, as "Murial Berman".

Cindy Brenneman, once again, brought up the appointment process that gave us Carla Navarro Woods on the Planning Commission - obviously still a festering wound for her.

COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS
Mansoor
During Council Comments Mansoor thanked Melone for his comments about the Coyote Forum and told us about a new, easy-to-use app - Coyote Cache - that allows folks to enter their observations to help track coyotes in the city.

Foley
Foley attempted to defend the commission appointment process - and did not succeed.  A remark she made referring to Genis' vote caused the Mayor Pro Tem to fly off the handle.  It was not a pretty sight.  Foley spoke about her Friday Office Hours program that scheduled folks to speak with her.

Genis
Genis spoke about the need to find a solution to the loss of space at Lions Park while the rebuilding project is underway, observing that the gates at Davis Field should be opened so folks could use that green space for play and relaxation.  She also asked about the First Friday Road Show this week and was assured that it was on as scheduled.  She also spoke briefly about the coyote problem, urging folks to keep their cats inside at night.

Stephens
Next up was Stephens, who managed to violate the agreed-upon 4 minute time limit by at least another 10 minutes.  He spoke about his plan for a noiseless July 4th Fireworks program, observing that PETA donated $5,000 to his program.  He then spoke about the trip he, Foley, City Manager Tom Hatch and another city staffer took to San Antonio, Texas to look at a possible solution for our homelessness problem.  While a worthy subject, this is where the time element got to be problematic.  He went on and on - acknowledging that he was exceeding his allotted time - and THEN had an 8 minuted video played to compound the issue.

Righeimer
Righeimer was last and quickly criticized Stephens for his long presentation - not that it wasn't interesting, just too long, per their rules.  He then said we should put the Navarro-Woods issue behind us - then slipped in a little jab about how he understood she was missing meetings.  The man is a snake - I intend to watch to see when he sheds his skin this year.

We were now at 7:24 p.m., twenty-four minutes after the normal start time for Public Hearings - and we had a long way to go.

CONSENT CALENDAR
Next up was the Consent Calendar - those items that could - and probably should - be voted upon in one vote without separate discussion.  Alas, it was not to be.  Four items were pulled from the nine on the list.  The remainder were passed, 5-0.

Sober Living Lawyer Fees
Item #2, the Warrant Resolution, was pulled by an unidentified resident to observe about the money we are paying lawyers to work on Sober Living issues.  It was passed, 5-0.

Linares Contract
Next was Item #6, the renewal of the professional services agreement for the consultant - Mike Lineares - that handles CDBG and HOME grants for us.  The same unidentified person pulled that one and Senior Staffer Willa Bowens-Killeen explained the need.  It passed, 5-0.

Towing Services
Next came Item #8, the Towing Services Contract with Metropro Road Services and G&W Towing, pulled for discussion by a non-winning competitor for the contract.  This should have been a slam-dunk, but it wasn't.  After lengthy interrogation of the City Staff Team, led by CMPD Lieutenant Vic Bakkila, by the City Council they finally voted, 5-0, to approve the contracts, but with a 2-year term with a single 1-year extension.  The discussion took a half-hour.

Finance Lawyers
Item #9, the amendment to the professional services contract with Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth for their work on the Lions Park Project debt financing element.  Wendy Leece pulled this one for discussion.  Celeste Brady - of the law firm - and Interim Finance Director Steve Dunivent presented the City discussion.  It went on and on, degenerating into a technical discussion of bond financing and the people's right to know, during which we saw another cat fight between Genis and Foley.  Finally, at 8:30, the council passed the item, 5-0 and Foley called for a brief bathroom break.  We were now 90 minutes behind the normally-anticipated schedule for Public Hearings.

FEDERAL FUNDS
When the meeting conveined Linares and Bowens-Killen presented Public Hearing #1, the hearing for the Fiscal Year 2017-2018 funding priorities for the CDBG and HOME grants.  The following slides will describe the presentation.  The short version is, we don't know how much money will be available this year and, based on blather coming out of the Trump White House, we may not see this kind of program funded for future years.  The staff presumes $1,000,000 for CDBG funding and $340,000 for the HOME programs.

Several applicants for the funding presented themselves to the council to introduce their programs.  Finally, at 9:15, the council approved the staff recommendations, including the provision for the staff to make proportional modifications to the grants once the actual total dollars are known, 5-0.

MEASURE Z ORDINANCES
Next, led by Deputy City Attorney Tarquin Preziosi and consultant Sherry Vander Duessen, came Public Hearing #2, the Measure Z discussions - the creation of a fee structure for developments in the far northwest corner of the City, to be used for open space and park land - and the creation of a 17-member committee to oversee and advise the council on these issues.  The Planning Commission had earlier recommended to delete this committee from the discussion and place the responsibility for this activity in the hands of the Parks and Recreation Commission.

DON'T NEED IT
Councilmember Jim Righeimer led off by observing that this committee would actually have no funds to work with for one or two years, so he was concerned about the rush to create this new committee to do basically nothing.

COMMITTEE TOP-HEAVY WITH YOUTH SPORTS FANS
Resident Cynthia McDonald observed that, while youth sports are great, the configuration of the proposed committee would be heavily-weighted in that direction, leaving advocates of open space poorly represented.  She observed that we don't need another stacked committee, like the failed Fairview Park Citizen Advisory Committee - particularly when the median age of Costa Mesans is increasing.

An unidentified resident agreed with her and commented on the outstanding competence of the new Parks and Recreation Commission.

STEPHENS MOVES THE ITEM
Stephens moved the recommended action, citing the opportunity for greater citizen involvement.  Genis observed that it had too great an emphasis on youth sports, and that she feared it would take away responsibilities from the Parks and Recreation Commission - which it would.  She asked to have the "youth sports" language deleted, to which Stephens replied it could be replaced with "recreation".

Righeimer made a sarcastic remark that whenever  a committee had an acronym of seven or more letters it was a sign of "government run amok".  He said it's a level of government that we don't need.  He defended the existing, private Youth Sports Council over seen by Costa Mesa United.

After a 30 minute discussion the council finally voted the staff recommendation, with the language changes, 3-2, with Righeimer and Mansoor voting NO.

BIG MISTAKE!
My observation here is that this council made a big mistake.  The duties described in the resolution are clearly those that could, and should, fall under the umbrella of the Parks and Recreation Commission, not a large, unwieldy, committee.  From the beginning this has seemed to be a power play, to emasculate the influence of Costa Mesa United in recreational issues in our City.  Whether that is good or bad is another discussion.  However, a much more satisfactory solution to this would have been to change the ordinance to abandon the proposed committee and allow the Parks and Recreation Commission to perform this work - it's a natural!  Certain members of the City Council seem, for whatever reason, to be in a tug-of-war over youth sports with Costa Mesa United.  I believe it has clouded their judgment on this issue.  We'll find out soon enough, as the recruitment for those 17 positions on the committee begins, probably within the next week or so.  It's very possible that some of groups will boycott this effort, which would be a shame.

152 EAST 19TH STREET
Next on the agenda was Public Hearing #3, the resolution to vacate a portion of  East 19th Street at 152 East 19th Street.  This was a no-brainer and passed quickly on a 5-0 vote.

"PEG" FEES FOR CMTV
As did Old Business #1, the ordinance reauthorizing the collection of "PEG" fees for CMTV.  That also passed on a 5-0 vote.

GROUP HOME ORDINANCES
We were now at 9:50 p.m. and about to hear Old Business #2, the second reading of two ordinances regarding Group Homes, as amended by the council at a previous meeting.  Again Preziozi and Vander Dussen led this discussion.  Twenty minutes later, after a discussion that included public comments questioning the process and asking for clarification of the distinction of the Conditional Use Permit vs. Special Use Permit and how the ordinances would be enforced.  One speaker described the process as being "outta control", indicating that the sober living home operators have control in the city and are willing to spend a lot of money to get their way.  The issues passed, 3-2, with Mansoor and Righeimer voting NO.

RE-AUTHORIZING THE BIA
The final item on the agenda, New Business #1, was the re-authorization of the Business Improvement Area (BIA) and the review of the annual report.  President of Travel Costa Mesa, formerly the Conference and Visitor's Bureau, Paulette Lombardi-Fries, made a presentation and showed a glitzy video clip to dazzle the council.  The council voted to follow the staff recommendation on a 5-0 vote at 10:22 p.m.

GENIS DISAPPOINTED
In final comments Genis expressed "profound disappointment" that her peers seemed willing to not follow the rules they had established - referring to the earlier 4-minute violation by Stephens.

ROAD SHOW CLOSING?  NOT MY FAULT!
Foley apologized for letting Stephens run so long, then observed that she had heard a rumor that the First Friday Roadshow was shutting down and said "it was not me!"  She also wanted a report from Duarte or head of Code Enforcement Fidel Gamboa on code enforcement activities with sober living homes.

SEEMED LIKE MIDNIGHT!
The meeting ended at 10:30, but it seemed much longer.  And we have not even begun to hear all the pent-up appeals for Sober Living Homes yet.  It's going to be a long summer...