EDITORIAL:City hall idea deserves a full, unbiased debate

Newport Beach Mayor Steve Rosansky doesn’t strike us as someone who likes to stir the pot. For the better part of his council tenure, he has sided with the majority and has been on the winning side of votes more often than on the losing side.

But after Tuesday’s address at the annual Speak Up Newport Mayor’s Dinner, a pot looks like it’s going to simmer to a boil.

Rosansky took a very public stand on the issue of where to build the new city hall. And he hinted that placing the city hall on a 12-acre slice of land that has been designated as a park could well be a good idea after all.

In fact, what he said was that not only can city hall move to that spot, but the park can exist right alongside it.

So much for not stirring the pot, eh?

But really, Rosansky should be commended for his leadership on this issue. Although he voted in the past — in concert with the council majority, mind you — not to pursue this idea of moving city hall to this spot, he now says that was wrong.

Everything should be up for discussion, he says.

Stir in some gnashing of teeth from park supporters.

For a little background, the plans for the park have been years in the making by a combination of environmentalists and residents, many of whom live just above the park, which is bounded by MacArthur Boulevard on the east, Avocado Avenue to the west and San Miguel Drive to the north.

They are staunchly opposed to any changes to their plans and don’t want any city hall buildings on any part of the parcel.

Enough said, they say.

Now stir in some Bill Ficker.

Ficker, a longtime architect and noted yachtsman, saw the squabbling over where to put a new city hall and a vision emerged.

Ficker had an idea that moving city hall to that parcel would save the city money, provide a more accessible site, give the city an opportunity to create a world-class civic center that would be adjacent to the Newport Beach Public Library and as a bonus, create a spot that would be almost smack dab in the middle of town.

After some more thought, Rosansky agreed that the idea had merit, and he’s now pushing for a more thorough hearing.

That’s the right thing to do. Anyone who listens to Ficker’s proposal, and we have, would be hard-pressed not to see its merits. Whether the city builds the new city hall on this site is up to the council and the residents, ultimately. But either way, the idea deserves a full debate by an open-minded City Council.

Because as Rosansky has learned, the city still needs to make sure it has the right recipe.