Yes, you can fight city hall

Mathis Winkler

BALBOA ISLAND -- At this point, Jim Hildreth says the ladder’s safety

is all he’s concerned about.

The ladder is light gray, has four steps and resembles those used for

swimming pools. City officials installed it at the south end of the

island’s Grand Canal in December of 1999 to give Hildreth access to a

shore mooring nearby.

They did so because they removed an illegal pier Hildreth had built at

the location, hoping the ladder would resolve his complaints of adequate

access to his mooring.

Six months earlier, City Council members waived about $1,800 in fines

Hildreth owed the city after refusing to take down the structure himself.

But Hildreth didn’t quiet down. For the past six months, he’s rarely

missed a council meeting to complain about the situation. His persistence

has annoyed city officials, who say they’ve spent too many hours on an

issue that’s been dealt with.

Mayor Gary Adams, sidestepping the protocol of simply listening to

speakers rather than commenting on their statements, has told Hildreth

several times his persistence will not get him anywhere.

At the last council meeting on May 8, Adams even said he’d like to

reinstate the fines.

Waiving them “maybe in retrospect was a mistake,” he said. “I’d like

to not waive them if I could because of staff time wasted [on this

issue.]”

While city policy prevents this, some of Adams’ colleagues also piped

in.

“Frankly, I’m tired of the antics,” said Councilman Tod Ridgeway.

“Let’s finish the paper trail for Mr. Hildreth and hopefully he’ll take

[the issue] to a court and leave the council chambers. It is an

inappropriate comment week after week after week here. He has a recourse.

His recourse is not through the council, his recourse is through legal

action. He needs to proceed with that.”

Let’s backtrack for a moment and revisit the issue.

In 1976, Hildreth’s father, Jack, applied for and was granted a harbor

permit to construct a shore mooring.

That’s basically a pole with an attached line to keep a boat from

floating away. It isn’t, however, a pier -- a wooden platform with stairs

leading down to the canal. And that’s what Hildreth put there in early

1999.

He thinks he should be allowed to do so for several reasons. For one

thing, the city’s annual bill sent to Hildreth classified the structure

as a pier, not a shore mooring.

City officials say that happened because only four moorings exist

along the canal and it made it easier to administer the fees. They’ve

since changed the classification.

In March, they returned Hildreth’s $78 annual pier fee payment telling

him “no such business number exists within the city’s billing system.”

Hildreth also says the city’s applying a double standard by allowing a

resident at the canal’s northern end to maintain a pier while a city

policy states that “lots at the extreme south end and north end of Grand

Canal” should not have piers.

Tony Melum, the city’s harbor resources director, said that pier was

probably grandfathered in. And besides -- city policy also states only

those who own property on the canal can get a pier permit. Hildreth’s

family never owned property on the canal. Together with his mother, he

currently lives in a house on the other side of the canal, diagonally

across from the disputed mooring.

But back to the ladder. Asked whether Hildreth or the city could be

held responsible for injuries occurred on the ladder, City Attorney Bob

Burnham says that’s unlikely.

“I don’t believe the ladder is a ‘dangerous condition’ of city

property, which is the test for city liability,” Burnham wrote in an

e-mail, adding that Hildreth could not be held liable.

For Hildreth, that’s just a sign of the city’s refusal to acknowledge

the potential danger of the ladder.

“I might have to sit back and wait for somebody to be injured and take

[the city] to court thereafter,” he says, adding that he’d stop

complaining if the city tells him in writing that the ladder is safe.

Besides -- he might not be allowed a pier, but he’s got to have easy

access to his mooring, he says.

And while city officials have assumed so far that Hildreth’s referring

to himself when he talks about “J.M. Hildreth” as his father’s successor

to the shore mooring rights, he’s actually referring to his brother, Jeff

Mark.

Jeff’s an entrepreneur in Sierra Madre and says he’s proud of his

brother for fighting for him.

But “I think that he’s a really controversial guy,” Jeff says, adding

that he can’t use the ladder because of a herniated disc caused by a

ladder fall 10 years ago. “I don’t know whether it’s the way he

approached the issue [that has caused problem.]”

Jim Hildreth says his interaction with city officials has got him so

interested in the law that he’s planning on enrolling in law school. For

the time being, he’s doing construction work for a friend to make ends

meet, he says.

At City Hall, those in charge have made it clear that Hildreth’s case

is closed.

“I believe that further discussions or communications will not be

fruitful,” City Manager Homer Bludau wrote in a letter to Hildreth in

February. “Accordingly, I have directed staff to no longer respond to

your inquiries . . . We intend to focus our attention on matters of

importance to the other Newport Beach residents and business owners.”

But what Bludau also made clear is that city officials will comply

with state law and keep releasing public documents that Hildreth

requests.

They also can’t stop him from addressing the council, since he’s

entitled to three minutes of speech time per meeting.

And if Hildreth wants to, city officials say, he’s got the legal right

to do both things for years to come.