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.
All the latest on Orange County from Orange County.
Get our free TimesOC newsletter.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Daily Pilot.