To vote or not to vote, that is the question

In my last article to the Daily Pilot, I indicated that, as long as I

am mayor, I hope to bring city issues of importance to the forefront

that affect the entire community as well as the future of Newport

Beach (“Bell Curve missed with swing against council,” Jan. 16). This

article is a continuation of that idea.

A standing-room crowd attended the most recent City Council

meeting, which was on Feb. 25. There were four issues on the agenda

that had brought forth a great deal of interest by many members of

the public, and, quite frankly, it was nice to see that type of a

turnout, which clearly shows how involved people in this city really

are. Many of the folks who showed up at this meeting were not those

who you usually see at council meetings or political events. There

were mostly residents who are simply concerned.

The issue I would like to discuss in this article, which I believe

is of interest to the entire city, is the hotel that is being

considered at Marinapark -- the area on the Balboa Peninsula between

15th and 18th streets that has been a mobile home park for many

years.

The issue before the City Council was whether to adopt

recommendations presented by a subcommittee formed to review the

proposed project and make recommendations to the City Council. The

subcommittee consisted of myself and Councilmen Tod Ridgeway and Don

Webb. The subcommittee’s recommendations were simple -- let the

people of this city vote on whether a hotel should exist at this

location after the city completes a full environmental report, as

well as a fiscal report, and makes the information in those documents

available to the voters well before the election.

While the recommendation was really that simple, the subcommittee

had to consider a number of factors before it was able to come to

that conclusion and you certainly wouldn’t think it was so simple if

you happened to watch the council meeting that evening.

The subcommittee wrestled with a number of issues. First, the city

“owns” some of Marinapark, but a portion of the parcel is tideland

that is really owned by the people of the state of California, and

all of it is bay-front property on the peninsula. According to the

State Lands Commission, the existing mobile home park is not

permitted on tideland.

The subcommittee also discussed the fact that the best use of

Marinapark has been the subject of controversy for close to 30 years.

The controversy has increased in recent months with the publicity

attendant to the proposed hotel and the political opportunities the

hotel offers to those who are looking for issues.

The subcommittee also had to consider how the proposed hotel might

be presented to the voters. We are advised that the project probably

didn’t require a vote pursuant to Measure S (Greenlight) because it

did not generate very much traffic. However, the project proponent

actually wanted a vote and could have proceeded by way of initiative,

in which case no environmental report would be prepared, as the

initiative would not require environmental documents.

The subcommittee concluded that if the City Council started a

process to have the people of this city vote on the issue, then an

environmental report would be required, and the subcommittee believed

it was of paramount importance that the voters know, well before the

election, if the project would have any environmental impacts. The

conclusions of the environmental report would be provided to

everyone, and the report would be reviewed for accuracy, completeness

and comment by the Environmental Quality Affairs Committee, which is

a citizens’ ad hoc committee made up of 23 residents in Newport Beach

from varied walks of life and expertise. The committee’s report on

its review will be only one of a number of public meetings on the

issue.

The council decided to accept the subcommittee’s recommendation to

submit this proposed hotel to the voters after a full environmental

report and a fiscal report were prepared and the conclusions passed

on to the voters well before the election. The council felt a vote

was appropriate because the property is owned or administered by the

city, the best use of the site has been a hot topic for many years,

and the council has previously asked the voters to decide just how

waterfront property should be used (the Aquatic Center and Beacon Bay

leases were submitted to the voters).

The City Council’s decision on Feb. 25 was to let the people vote

after they were fully informed as to what they were voting on. While

there is nothing remarkable about what we did, this was a very

typical public outreach that this City Council undertakes on a

regular basis.

What was remarkable is that there were dissenters who tried to

convince the City Council that we should not let the people vote.

Really. They argued that no vote was necessary since a hotel on the

peninsula was opposed by a majority of about 1,000 residents recently

surveyed about their feelings as part of the general plan update

process for the entire city and there had been opposition expressed

at two community meetings. Truly, although there were only a few

people at the council meeting who opposed a vote by the people, it

was somewhat disheartening to actually hear the people say don’t let

the people vote.

Hopefully, everyone in Newport Beach will realize that the City

Council’s decision to place the proposed hotel on the ballot was the

right decision and not make up their minds how to vote until all of

the facts are in. I can guarantee you this City Council will make

every effort to inform the voters, and I hope all of you express your

informed opinion at the ballot box.

In concluding, I simply would like to say, please, don’t be afraid

to let your neighbors vote on an issue that is so important to this

city. It will ultimately be you, and you alone, who will approve or

not approve a hotel on the peninsula.

* STEVE BROMBERG is the mayor of Newport Beach.