Between the Lines -- Byron de Arakal

It’s always fascinating to witness nimble minds chase an agenda by

pushing and pounding and molding the meaning of words and phrases like so

much Play-Doh.

Usually the degree of difficulty of these floor exercises in meaning

is driven by motive. The nefarious, for instance, tend to be pretzel

makers in their word play. In this case, think of Bill Clinton’s tortured

re-engineering of the word “is.”

Those with virtuous ends in mind more often finesse meaning around the

edges, and not so much as a deception but as a means of staying in

bounds. The picture here is of the football player dancing along the

chalk line as he dashes to the end zone.

Now this setup sends us careening into two issues in Newport Beach

where word art is in play.

Behind door No. 1 is the City Council’s recent closed-door huddle that

produced a pair of contracts worth nearly a half-million dollars for a

two-front lobbying offensive in the evolving John Wayne Airport

settlement agreement extension. The contracts -- granted to former Irvine

Co. lieutenant Gary Hunt’s California Strategies and the Washington,

D.C., lobbying outfit of William D. Lowery -- were inked out of public

view under a provision of the Brown Act that permits closeted actions by

public agencies in certain circumstances. City councils, for instance,

can tinker behind the curtain when wrestling with and acting on “pending

litigation” or when negotiating city-employee contracts.

In this case, the City Council brokered and approved deals with

California Strategies and William D. Lowery in closed session because, it

argues, the work of the two firms to nail down local and federal support

for protracting the settlement agreement is directly related to pending

litigation.

That “pending litigation” is the years-old lawsuit between Orange

County and Newport Beach over the expansion of John Wayne Airport. It was

that legal scuffle that spawned the 1985 and soon-to-expire pact that

placed curfews and flight caps on airline traffic. And it’s under the

purview of that lawsuit that the extension agreement is being retooled,

repackaged and resold to local officials, bureaucrats and lawmakers in

Washington and private special interests.

Now one might think the city would have some sensitivity to

perceptions of cloistered meetings given that it’s already under the

magnifying glass of the Orange County district attorney for possible

Brown Act violations surrounding the city’s closed-door development

agreement negotiations with Koll Center officials in the spring and

summer of 2000. That complaint was filed by Greenlight activist Phil

Arst.

But on this one City Hall seems pretty confident that it acted well

within the ground rules of the Brown Act. Here’s why.

Councilman Steve Bromberg said he believes the legal skirmish that

produced the 1985 settlement treaty is still “pending litigation.” That’s

because the renegotiated terms of the new flight restrictions and curfews

must be reviewed and approved, say Bromberg and City Atty. Bob Burnham,

by Judge Terry Hatter, the presiding judge in the original JWA expansion

tussle. Under those auspices, the brain might reasonably conclude that

the new settlement covenant -- and any lobbying attendant to it -- are

tethered to “pending” or “ongoing” litigation.

In that instance -- word art and interpretation being what they are --

the City Council’s behind-the-curtain work on this one would get a pass.

We’ll see.

Meantime, behind door No. 2 we find some wily massaging of meaning

unfolding in the persistent flap over the gaggle of stubborn ducks who

refuse to leave their encampment on Balboa Island. You’ll recall that the

island and the waters of the Grand Canal have been overrun by ducks and

their natural byproducts, thanks to certain island residents who’ve taken

to furnishing the fowl with great volumes of grub.

Fretting and frustrated over the noise and odor and alleged

contamination these feathered legions have brought to this fairy tale

nook of the city, the City Council outlawed duck feeding. And it also

hatched a strategy to round up and relocate some number of the throng for

relocation.

That plot, at least where the mallards are concerned, appeared to run

afoul of federal regulations prohibiting the capture and movement of

migratory birds. And the U.S. Department of Fish and Game classifies

mallards as migratory birds.

Now if the entrenched mallards were fixing to thumb their bills at

city officials, they might want to hold off. It seems the city and Fish

and Game officials have convened a few noodling sessions to cook up ways

to skirt the “migratory” classification of the island mallards. And it

appears they’ve concocted one.

Since the mallards have loitered in the area for so long -- unable to

pull themselves away from the feast -- they no longer migrate. To wit,

says the city, the ducks are no longer migratory birds.

Hmm.

* BYRON DE ARAKAL is a freelance writer and communications advisor. He

lives in Costa Mesa. His column appears Wednesdays. Readers can reach him

with news tips and comments via e-mail at o7 byronwriter@msn.comf7 .

Visit his Web site at o7 www.byronwriter.comf7 .