Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout25 - Consideration of Changing the Structure of the Finance Committee - CorrespondenceReceived After Agenda Printed June 12, 2018 Closed Session and Item No. 28 & 25 From: Lynn Lorenz <lynnierlo@aol.com> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2018 4:49 PM To: Dept - City Council Subject: Council Meeting scheduled for June 12th To: Newport Beach City Council members Why would the City Council of Newport Beach suddenly propose three new controversial financial ideas for the city -all to be presented at one meeting? And this coming on the back of the fateful attempt to turn Newport into a port city. COPs will tie the hands of future councils and impair our flexibility fo finance large projects quickly. We would be the only city in America doing this. In a natural disaster this could be extremely costly, driving up the cost of any project that uses a COP for funding. And why would we want to sell the Lido House on a whim? It makes no sense to sell this property instead of using it for income. Finally, changing the structure of the finance committee could weaken its effectiveness rather than strengthen it. Is there some compelling reason that these three hefty new ideas are being hurriedly presented or is this merely a politically motivated procedure? I say NO to COP debts, NO to selling the Lido House Hotel, and No to the elimination of councilpersons on the city finance committee. Those of us who have lived in Newport Beach for many years and value its unique qualities and beauty do not like to see ideas being promoted, particularly in haste, that are not in the longtime best interests of our city. Much more information thoughtfully presented, consisting of educational open-ended workshops, and overall citizen participation might bring some understanding and sense to these otherwise complex and "spur of the moment" ideas, but it is doubtful. Respectfully submitted, Lynn Lorenz, 434 Redlands Avenue, Newport Beach, Ca 92663 949 646 2054 lynnierlo@aol.com Received After Agenda Printed Jun 12, 2018 Closed Session and Item No. 28 & 25 From: Susan Skinner <susanskinner949@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2018 5:26 PM To: Dept - City Council Subject: Agenda for June 12 meeting Dear City Council members: There are three items on the agenda for the June 12 meeting that are concerning and I would like to suggest that you seek additional information before acting on any of the three. #1 Mr. Peotter is proposing a ballot issue for November that will require voter approval before issuing `certificates of participation'. This may sound like a good idea, but it is actually a terrible proposal because it ties the hands of future councils and will likely cost the city quite a bit of money. Not one other city in America does this. A certificate of participation (COP) is a bit like arranging a mortgage. Unlike General Obligation bonds, COP debt does not involve an increase in taxes and by law, payments are included in the city budgeting process. Like our own mortgages, a COP is used to pay for something big that the city has decided to finance instead of paying cash for. We used a COP to pay for the main library and have used this only 3 times in the last 25 years. If we do this, we would be the only jurisdiction in California and to my knowledge the only jurisdiction in all of America who has. If nobody else is doing this, doesn't that give you pause to think that it may not be a good idea? No one knows what the future will bring. We can afford to pay cash for big projects now, but what if we have to respond to an earthquake or tsunami and have to rebuild major parts of the city? Puerto Rico is an example of what happens when there isn't enough money to rebuild. Imagine if rebuilding bids have to be confirmed with an election? Bids would be over six months old and would expire, subjecting the city to additional risk or the bids would be padded 30% to allow for the lengthy time of the vote. This is universally considered a bad financial business practice, but the Gang of 4 wishes to do it. Keeping the option of a COP is perhaps a bit like having a credit card available to use in case of an emergency. This is being pushed forward without any input from the Finance Committee or any meaningful input from independent financial experts. May I suggest that this get deferred from this meeting until a later meeting in order to allow a better understanding of the ramifications? It does not appear to have been thoroughly vetted for unintended consequences in the future. #2 Mr. Peotter is proposing selling the land that is currently leased to the new Lido House Hotel. This is the old city hall site and we will be getting revenue from this property for decades to come, which will only increase over time. We don't need the money now for our budget, so why would we even consider selling this property vs adding its revenue to our budget ad infinitum? could understand this if we had a crushing need for money, but we don't. Like any investment property, the benefits of a fixed stream of income seems to me to outweigh any short term benefit. Again, may I suggest a thorough review of the pros/cons by the Finance Committee or an outside financial expert? #3 There is a proposal to eliminate any councilpersons from being on the city finance committee. Since it seems to me that having councilpersons more knowledgeable about city finances (rather than less) is a good thing, this is a rather puzzling proposal. I cannot see any benefit to changing the composition of the finance committee but I can certainly see a downside. May I suggest that you let this proposal ferment a bit longer as well? Thank you, Susan Skinner P] Received After Agenda Printed June 12, 2018 Closed Session and Item No. 28 and 25 From: aw13973@gmail.com Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2018 4:16 PM To: Dept - City Council Cc: patty white Subject: Proposals Dear City Council Members, I am a resident of Newport Beach. I do not agree that we should sell the land that used to be Old City Hall. The rental income is good and it can only become more valuable in time. I do not think the Certification of Participation (COP) should be on the ballot in November. We need to consider each project as it happens. We do not need to be the ONLY jurisdiction in California to do this. Managing these COP's would be most difficult and should be done only when necessary. This would be a costly election requirement. City council members should be on the City Finance Committee. They have knowledge of the finances of the city and their input is important. There is no reason to change the composition of the finance committee. Please consider my input, as a resident of Newport Beach, Ca. Patty White 2027 Port Weybridge Newport Beach, Ca 92660 1 Received After Agenda Printed June 12, 2018 Item No. 28 & 25 From: Carol Hartman <carol_hartman@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2018 2:45 PM To: Dept - City Council Subject: Council meeting issues To the Newport City Council, We are aware that there are several issues to be addressed at the June 12, 2018 council meeting. All of those proposed seem not to make any sense, such as instigating a COP, that no other city in America has, selling the land that the city owns and receives lease money that will increase with time and adds to our city finances, and having a city finance committee without a council member on it is a very bad idea. That committee should be very intelligent with no one person choosing the committee members,that is our money that we pay with our taxes. Terry and Carol Hartman 414 Plata Newport Beach, California 92660 Received After Agenda Printed June 12, 2018 Item No. 25 Nelson, Jennifer From: George Lesley <GLesley@glesley-cpa.com> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2018 4:31 PM To: Peotter, Scott Cc: Dept - City Council Subject: RE: Proposed change in the structure of the Newport Beach Finance Committee Thank you for responding I I understand the structure of the Committee. I know 2 of the Citizen members and I hold them in high regard. But, the members will change overtime. I oppose the change in the structure because the Council members must be accountable to us --the citizens. We elected them; we did not elect the private citizens. There is no assurance that the citizen Committee members are not/would not be affected by political and other and biases. The Council members must answer to us on a regular basis. I believe the City will benefit from continuing to have The City's perspective and history (via the Council Committee members). Furthermore, my instinct tells me that an all private citizen Committee is just too many eggs in one basket. George M. Lesley glesley@glesley-cpa.com *Please note my email address has changed to glesley@glesley-cpa.com Unless the above message ("this message") expressly provides that the statements contained therein ("the statement s") are intended to constitute written tax advice within the meaning of IRS Circular 230 §10.37, the sender intends by this message to communicate general information for discussion purposes only, and you should not, therefore, inter pret the statements to be written tax advice or rely on the statements for any purpose. The sender will conclude that you have understood and acknowledged this important cautionary notice unless you communicate to the sender any questions you may have in a direct electronic reply From: Peotter, Scott <speotter@newportbeachca.gov> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2018 3:22 PM To: George Lesley <GLesley@glesley-cpa.com> Subject: Re: Proposed change in the structure of the Newport Beach Finance Committee George, my thoughts on the Finance Committee: FINANCE COMMITTEE RESTRUCTURING Currently the Finance Committee is made up of 3 council members and 4 citizens (each appointed by and representing the 4 council members not on the finance committee). We have some very talented citizen members of the finance committee and we are blessed to have many talented financial people in our city. The proposed restructuring would replace the 3 council members with 3 more citizen members appointed by the 3 council members removed. Our other commissions are 100% citizens committees as well, all meetings advertised and available to the public, as is the Finance Committee. Currently with the council members on the Finance Committee, I find that staff listens to their direction more than the other members of the committee. That makes sense since after all they will be making the final decision on whatever the topic is. Remember the Finance Committee can only give recommendations to the council. This means that the talents and experience of the rest of the committee are not heard in the fullest. It also means that the committee is political since you have 3 politicians on it. I feel that with this all citizens committee, there will be better input to the council from the talented citizens of Newport Beach than we get today and without the politics. SCOTT PEOTTER NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL Representing the 6th District From: George Lesley <GLesley@glesley-cpa.com> Sent: Monday, June 11, 2018 10:35:27 AM To: Dept - City Council Subject: Proposed change in the structure of the Newport Beach Finance Committee I have read the Staff report on this proposal, including the purpose and responsibilities of the Finance Committee. I urge you to vote for no change in the current Finance Committee structure. ➢ City Council members are accountable to the citizens of Newport Beach. We know who they are and when they meet. The Council has specific meeting requirements and dates ➢ Finance Committee members do not appear to have a regular meeting schedule, and I don't see any disclosure of their names or anything about them. Yes, I know they are appointed by the Council ➢ City Council provides opportunity to speak at the regular City Council meetings on any topic. We citizens would not have any such opportunity if the Committee would be all private citizens ➢ Obviously, the Finance Committee is extremely important. We cannot afford to lose touch and all control over their decisions and recommendation. Remember, Newport Beach belongs to it's citizens. The decisions on this proposal should be based on what is best for us, the citizens. This proposal is illogical and I don't trust it. I say positively and absolutely NO on this proposal. Thank you. George M. Lesley glesley@glesley-cpa.com *Please note my email address has changed to glesley@glesley-cpa.com Unless the above message ("this message") expressly provides that the statements contained therein ("the statement s") are intended to constitute written tax advice within the meaning of IRS Circular 230 §10.37, the sender intends by this message to communicate general information for discussion purposes only, and you should not, therefore, inter pret the statements to be written tax advice or rely on the statements for any purpose. The sender will conclude that you have understood and acknowledged this important cautionary notice unless you communicate to the sender any questions you may have in a direct electronic reply 3 Received After Agenda Printed June 12, 2018 Item No. 28 & 25 From: Sue Costanzo <suesviews52@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2018 9:14 AM To: Dept - City Council Subject: COPS and eliminating Councilmen from Finance committees Dear City leaders These are 2 very bad and very poorly thought out ideas. If "anything" we want more and more to help with finance details as well as our committees to come to creative consensus on major projects as well as any emergencies that should arise. To enact a COPS program is just stupid! Who are you all representing?! It certainly is not the Citizens of Newport Beach and Corona del mar, Newport Coast! Think again .... then let's have a serious meeting with citizens on what is really applicable to resolving our future finance needs! Also ... this city is going crazy with approved building permits! To allow all these condo projects is insane! I used to be able to come up my street and actually get onto PCH! NOW there is no driving PCH ... it is always too crowded and dangerous. I won't even walk the dogs along there with the insane traffic conditions. So congratulations for becoming Laguna Beach and joining the insanity of uncontrolled traffic jams and accidents as well as unsafe pedestrian situations! Stupid is doing what Laguna Beach has .... and not recognizing it! STOP giving the Irvine company approvals when you sacrifice our quality of life and safety ... once and for all!!! Susan and James Costanzo Corona del mar