Clarifying issues that could use more study

As the mayor of Newport Beach, I am expected to be the spokesman for

the City Council, and as such, I am out in front on many issues and

some of those issues, unfortunately, are distasteful. This is one of

those instances.

Recently, one of my colleagues, Councilman Dick Nichols wrote a

community commentary (“Speaking up where challenges are needed,” May

28). My colleague wrote this article in what appears to be a

suggested defense to certain actions he took before the Newport Beach

Planning Commission on May 22. Nichols spoke on behalf of a resident

who had applied for a height variance and did so as a Newport Beach

City Councilman. It has been reported that when Nichols recognized

the Planning Commissioners comments were leaning toward a denial of

the variance, he accused one or more Planning Commissioners of taking

a bribe. According to reports, his exact words were “It looks like

you are taking money for this one.” Nichols wrote in his commentary

that he stated to the Planning Commissioners, “The inequity of our

zoning results, looks to the causal observer, like someone is getting

paid off.” The proceedings were taped, a transcript is being

prepared, and we will all know sooner than later exactly what was

said.

The purpose of this article is not to chastise Nichols or to

discuss the substance of the project about which Nichols spoke. The

City Council must give the applicant and the community a fair hearing

on the variance application and it would be inappropriate for me or

anyone else on the council to express an opinion on the matter before

hearing all of the evidence or to argue the matter in the newspaper

and as such, I do not intend to conduct the hearing in the newspaper.

Likewise, it is not appropriate for anyone at this point in time,

to judge the conduct or Nichols as direction has been given to the

city attorney to review the tape of the proceeding and transcript

relative to what action, if any, the City Council can or should take

if Nichols did in fact accuse one or more Planning Commissioners of

taking a bribe and did so without any proof. My direction to the city

attorney asked him to advise the City Council what action we should

take, such as censure, if my colleague made unsubstantiated

allegations. The direction to the city attorney also included a

request for information as to what actions the city council can take

to avoid such conduct in the future.

So, if I am telling you why I am not writing this article, then of

course you are asking why am I writing this article. Clearly, there

is a learning curve for every new council person and all assistance

from fellow colleagues as well as city staff are available to new as

well as experienced council members when issues arise. In this

instance, my concern is that my colleague has made a number of

comments in his community commentary that are simply not accurate,

and, as the electorate, you deserve to know if an elected official’s

comments are accurate or not accurate. That is why I am writing this

article.

Nichols’ comments were inaccurate in many respects but I want to

focus on just a few issues. First, the primary thrust of his

commentary was that the Planning Commission’s denial of the variance

application was evidence of his theory that the city treats people

differently. However, a variance is a request to be treated

differently than your neighbors because your property is different

than theirs. To deny a variance is to say the property owner has not

proved that his or her property is different than the neighbors’

property. To grant a variance, the Planning Commission has to find

that the property is different than other parcels in the neighborhood

and that strict compliance with the zoning laws will be a hardship.

To deny a variance simply means that the property owner will have to

abide by the laws that are applicable to every other parcel in that

zone. Nichols cites a number of other “examples” to support his

theory of unfair treatment and, quite frankly, the examples are

totally unrelated to the variance before the Planning Commission or

don’t reflect the real facts.

Nichols states that our city government should treat all residents

equitably, and suggests that we do not. Well, after being involved as

a community activist long before I became a member of the city

council and after sitting on the City Council for 2 1/2 years, I

recognize that we do treat our residents equitably and we do not

engage in disparate treatment. If you have had an issue before one of

our boards, commission or the City council, and were not successful,

you might disagree with the result, however, you will be hard pressed

to say that you were not treated fairly or equitably.

My colleague references that City Council members actively

participate in and head the majority of our city’s committees. He

cites as examples: The Aviation Committee (I do chair the Aviation

Committee). The Harbor Committee. We do not have a Harbor Committee.

The Economic Committee. We do not have an Economic Committee.

Environmental Committee. We do not have an Environmental Committee.

General Plan Update Committee. This is a council and citizens

committee chaired by Councilman Gary Adams. General Plan Advisory

Committee. There are no City Council members on this committee.

Nichols then states that no council member has yet been assigned to

the Planning Commission.

In my opinion, Mr. Nichols hasn’t taken the time to truly learn

the system of government that he represents or the laws that apply to

everyone in this city. His inaccuracies regarding the committees are

unfortunate. With respect to the Planning Commission, we have seven

boards and commissions in this city. These are independent bodies,

and they are not staffed by council members. These commissions/boards

are the Board of Library Trustees, City Arts Commission, Civil

Service Board, Harbor Commission, Parks, Beaches and Recreation

Commission and the Planning Commission.

In addition, we have 11 City Council/citizens ad hoc committees

and citizen advisory committees. With the exception of the General

Plan Advisory Committee, these committees have two or three council

representatives, and three of the 11 committees are chaired by

council members. Most importantly, all of the committees and

commissions are staffed by volunteers. 154 of them. These are

hard-working citizens who apply to serve on these committees and

commissions and I can represent to you that the application process

to serve is extremely thorough and the resumes of most of these

applicants read like a who’s who with respect to their given

specialty.

As council members in this wonderful city, we owe a very firm

responsibility to not only these 154 volunteers, but to all of you,

to be sure that we run this city efficiently and effectively and that

we do not engage in irresponsible activities that might cause one or

more of these individuals to become damaged goods so to speak. We are

expected to perform at the highest of standards, and that expectation

is quite appropriate.

At this point in time, the issue I referenced regarding the report

requested from the city attorney will be addressed at the City

Council meeting on June 10. At that time, this matter will be on the

agenda, and it will be open to public discussion. As I have said in

the past, part of my responsibility in serving you is to be sure you

are in a position to base your decisions and conclusions on city

issues and the performance of the City Council and our many boards

and commissions, on the facts, and not on the basis of allegations or

speculation.

* STEVE BROMBERG is the mayor of Newport Beach.