Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/11/2003 - Study SessionCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH City Council Minutes Study Session March 11, 2003 - 4:00 p.m. ROLL CALL INDEX Present: Heffernan, Proctor, Ridgeway, Adams, Webb, Nichols, Mayor Bromberg Absent: None CURRENT BUSINESS 1. CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. Council Member Nichols stated that a restaurant in Corona del Mar was recently approved by the Planning Commission. He asked for an update on the status of the restaurant. Assistant City Manager Wood stated that the restaurant was not on the agenda of the Planning Commission meeting of March 6, 2003, but that she would check the prior agenda and be prepared to present the information at the regular meeting. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway asked for a clarification on the action being recommended in Item No. 14, Approval of Professional Services Agreements for Design Services for Playground Equipment. He explained that it appears that the actual purchase of the equipment is being recommended and not just the design services. City Manager Bludau stated that he was planning to continue the item at the regular meeting and confirmed that the action was not just for design services. Council Member Proctor stated that the staff report for Item No. 3, Establishment of the City Council Economic Advisory Committee, did not provide adequate information. Mayor Bromberg stated that he was planning to pull the item from the Consent Calendar at the regular meeting for discussion and report. Council Member Proctor asked that the report include information on what other jurisdictions have such committees. In reference to Item No. 21, Marinapark Resort Project, Council Member Heffernan asked if an appraisal had been conducted for the site, if an offer of a ground rent payment was a part of the earlier negotiations with Sutherland Talla Hospitality, and what the current ground rent is that's being paid by the mobile home tenants. In reference to Item No. 14, Approval of Professional Services Agreements for Design Services for Playground Equipment, Council Member Nichols stated that the playground equipment at Grant Howald Park has already been installed. Recreation Superintendent McGuire explained that the first phase of the playground equipment has been installed, but that the second phase would provide playground equipment for the tiny tots and is the subject of the agenda item. Volume 56 - Page 1 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 11, 2003 2. PRESENTATION BY SUPPUK'1'ERS UN THE UKANUE U0AS'1' K1VEN PARK. Nancy Gardner, Orange Coast River Park Committee, thanked the City Council for the opportunity to make a presentation on how the Orange Coast River Park (OCRP) can enhance the value of the community. She stated that the park can provide a nearby alternative for getting away from urban life. Ms. Gardner introduced Lena Hayashi. Using a PowerPoint presentation, Ms. Hayashi stated that the OCRP is a proposal of the Friends of the Harbors, Beaches & Parks (FHBP). She thanked the cities of Costa Mesa, Huntington Beach and Newport Beach, the County of Orange, the California State Coastal Conservancy, and the Friends of Harbors, Beaches & Parks members and donors for their assistance in creating the proposal. She stated that the FHBP is a nonprofit corporation, established in 1997, whose mission is to preserve, enhance and expand parks, trails, open space and coastal recreation facilities in Orange County. Ms. Hayashi stated that the proposal is for a 1,000 -acre park in the heart of the densely urbanized central coastal area of Orange County, along the Santa Ana River. She displayed an aerial photo of the area. Ms. Hayashi stated that most of the land is publicly owned and intended for open space purposes, and that she would be displaying a series of maps showing the proposed area. The northern end of the park is currently Fairview Park in Costa Mesa and a master park plan is being finalized. To the south of that is an area along the Santa Ana River with two bike trails, one on either side of the river. Ms. Hayashi stated that the next area is the Talbert Preserve South, which is owned by the County and was restored to native habitat in the 1980's. The second restoration phase was stopped due to the County bankruptcy in 1994. She stated that it is hoped that this project will be completed, and that it includes the site for the proposed bioremediation ponds, which could improve the water quality in the area. Ms. Hayashi continued displaying maps and photos of the proposed area for the park and stated that the southern portion includes the Banning Ranch area, which is privately owned by a group of oil companies. She stated that the Sierra Club's Banning Ranch Park & Preserve Task Force is attempting to get an assessment of the land, so that they can purchase it and include it in the OCRP. She additionally noted an area in the southern portion of the proposed park that has recently undergone a salt water marsh restoration by the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, but is currently inaccessible. Ms. Hayashi stated that the area up the coast consists of approximately 150 acres of historic wetlands and that the Huntington Beach Wetlands Conservancy is making great progress in acquiring the lands. The conservancy will then restore the area, as they have already done in the Talbert Marsh area. Ms. Hayashi displayed a map of Sunset View Park, owned by the City of Newport Beach, and stated that it will provide a staging area for entrance into the OCRP. She acknowledged the success of obtaining the CalTrans West, or Sunset Ridge, land for park use. Ms. Hayashi stated that the goals of the OCRP include restoring the historic ecological staircase, to extend a seamless passageway to the coast For inlanders and to create an oasis of tranquility for residents and visitors. She stated that the ecological staircase consists of the surf zone, the beach, the dunes, the intertidal river, the marshes, the willow forest, the grassland and scrub, the Volume 56 - Page 2 INDEX Orange Coast River Park (62) City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 11, 2003 INDEX riparian and the vernal pools. She stated that the area has varied habitat and the opportunity to restore it should not be missed. Additionally, the opportunity for public access would be priceless. Ms. Hayashi displayed a map showing the access points from the major streets to the park and the staging areas, which would include parking and restrooms. She stated that some of these are already in place. She additionally pointed out the locations where park access is constrained. She stated that the purpose of the OCRP Committee is to provide continuity for the open space designations and restorations that are taking place. She displayed photos, which showed what the area could look like. She stated that some of the many benefits of the OCRP include greater public access and visitor enjoyment, and enhanced flora and fauna. She stated that studies have shown that isolated parks do not have the habitat value of a larger piece of land. She listed some of the other benefits of the OCRP concept. Ms. Hayashi stated that the cost of the park, who would pay for it and how long it would take to complete are remaining issues. She stated that the park could cost $20 to $100 million, with each agency sharing in the cost of ownership and management. She noted that State and Federal grants would likely pay for most of the cost, and that much of the park is already underway with the Fairview Park and Talbert Preserve already in place, and the progress mentioned earlier of the Huntington Beach Wetlands Conservancy. Ms. Hayashi stated that the initial purpose of the OCRP Committee has been accomplished. Ideas were presented and feedback was received, and the plan document was finalized and submitted for preliminary approval to the agencies involved. She stated that the OCRP Committee will now work on obtaining the commitment of a contact person from the three cities and the County, and move forward with the concept plan. Ms. Gardner noted that the contact person will help with communication and provide for a group effort as the bond funds are sought. Ms. Hayashi stated that the basic premise of the OCRP is for the agencies to retain ownership and authority of their own parks, but to work in partnership for management of the OCRP. Mayor Bromberg noted that it's an interesting concept to develop a park that borders three cities. Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway asked if the City's plan for an active park at the CalTrans West site is inconsistent with the OCRP plans. Ms. Gardner stated that it is not and supports the concept of having consistent management of the entire area. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway confirmed with City Attorney Burnham that giving money to the FHBP doesn't impair his ability to discuss the issue at the current meeting. Mayor Bromberg stated that he's a member of the FHBP. City Attorney Burnham confirmed that he is not on the Board of Directors and stated that he is also not impaired from discussing the issue. Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway stated that approximately two - thirds of the Banning Ranch area is expected to be dedicated to open space. He stated that money could be saved by not trying to purchase the land and, instead, trying to work Volume 56 - Page 3 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 11, 2003 through the process. Ms. Gardner stated that they are more concerned about the wetlands and the bluffs and not so much the mesa, although they would prefer the entire area to be a part of the OCRP. Ms. Gardner stated that they are expecting to open the communication channels with the developer again. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway encouraged it and acknowledged those involved with the OCRP concept. Mayor Bromberg asked Ms. Gardner for her expectations from the City of Newport Beach, other than the commitment of a contact person. Ms. Gardner stated that the City has already given money, but that any kind of endorsement of the project and participation in the grant process would be appreciated. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway suggested that the City Manager designate a contact person from the City. City Manager Bludau confirmed that the City Council agrees to the concept of the OCRP. Ms. Gardner stated that the next step will be to get the master plan finalized. City Manager Bludau confirmed with Ms. Gardner that her committee already has someone who is working on the grants. Council Member Proctor stated that he owns property in the area and asked for a clarification on his participation. City Attorney Burnham stated that since it is only the concept that is being discussed, his participation is not a problem. Council Member Proctor stated that he supports the concept of the OCRP. Council Member Webb asked if an active park could be included in the plans for the Banning Ranch area. Ms. Gardner stated that compromises will be expected along the way and that it is possible. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway reminded Ms. Gardner that active parks need parking, and that parking is also needed for the OCRP. Philip Bettencourt, on behalf of the Banning Ranch property owners, stated that the Banning Ranch entitlement process has been on hold but that the existing plan does set aside approximately 200 acres, or half of the area, for open space and habitat restoration. He stated that there is agreement on the trail network on the bluff face, the protection of the two arroyos and the restoration of the wetlands. Mr. Bettencourt stated that having the FHBP involved in the planning process is supported, but that the rights of the property owners must also be remembered. He concluded his comments by stating that they want to work together with the FHBP. Tom Billings acknowledged the efforts of those involved with the OCRP and hoped that the plans would continue to move forward. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway stated that the City has sixteen oil wells in the area and due to the revenue generated, will do everything to protect the asset. INDEX 3. RECENT MUNICIPAL ELECTION — CONSIDERATION OF NEW Election ELECTION REGULATIONS. Regulations (39) City Attorney Burnham stated that staff has attempted to provide some concepts for consideration in response to the issues that arose before and during Volume 56 - Page 4 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 11, 2003 INDEX the recent municipal election. He stated that the concepts were derived during discussions with Council Member Heffernan and Special Elections Counsel Dana Reed. He stated that in developing and proposing the concepts, two principles guided the discussions. These included addressing the issues that seemed to be relevant to the municipal campaign in a meaningful way and presenting concepts that are consistent with, and permitted by, recent court rulings related to campaign regulations. As a summarization of the concepts, City Attorney Burnham stated that the first concept would require that candidates personally approve the text of mass communications that would be intended to influence voters. The second proposal is to expand the City's current regulations that require candidates to file mass mailings with the City Clerk, to also file the text of phone conversations and media spots. City Attorney Burnham stated that the third proposal is to modify current City regulations to make it clear that the $500 campaign contribution limit applies to everyone, including those functioning as intermediaries. The fourth recommendation is to consider auditing all candidate and committee campaign finances, receipts and expenditures. City Attorney Burnham stated that two other concepts deal with the disclosure of campaign solicitations and personal services provided by persons that were applicants for, or would benefit from, contracts or grants. The final, and seventh, suggestion is to require that candidates and treasurers undergo mandatory training to ensure that they know the laws and legal requirements. Council Member Adams asked if the second concept to expand the filing of publications and communication with the City Clerk would include the content of websites and e- mails. City Attorney Burnham stated that since a website would be accessible by everyone, there would probably not be the need to disclose the content of the information. Council Member Adams stated that by not including website content in the filing requirements, an opponent would have to monitor the various websites instead of relying on a single source. City Attorney Burnham clarified that mass e- mailing would be included in the requirements and the concept of including website information could also be considered. Council Member Adams asked how the materials that are disseminated on behalf of a candidate without the candidate's knowledge would be handled. City Attorney Burnham stated that the candidate would not be responsible for submitting such information to the City Clerk. Council Member Adams asked if the current regulations address unofficial campaigning, such as someone posting signs on behalf of a candidate without their knowledge or participation. Mr. Reed stated that if it's an expenditure of $1000 or more in any calendar year, it would have to be reported by the person making the expenditure. Council Member Adams explained that he's concerned about people finding ways around the rules and conducting independent campaign activities that wouldn't be reportable or fall under any of the regulations. City Attorney Burnham agreed and Mr. Reed added that independent expenditures are proliferating in virtually every jurisdiction that has contribution limits. Mr. Reed pointed out that it is reportable if the cumulative amount reaches $1000 in any calendar year. Council Member Webb asked if this would require the contributor to register with the Secretary of State and the City Clerk. Mr. Reed stated that registering with the Secretary of State is only required of recipient committees, which are Volume 56 - Page 5 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 11, 2003 INDEX those that raise money from third parties to make political contributions. He added that a recipient committee does have to file Form 461, the major donor form. Mayor Bromberg asked how unauthorized expenditures are handled. Mr. Reed stated that the first concept presented by City Attorney Burnham would require a candidate to personally approve the messages being sent out by that candidate's controlled committee. It is not expected that a candidate would have any control over what third parties do for, or against, his or her campaign. City Attorney Burnham noted that there will always be ways for people who are interested in influencing the outcome of an election to work outside the scope of the regulations. Council Member Proctor asked for additional clarification on the concept that would require applicants for grants or contracts to disclose the identity of campaign contribution solicitors. Mr. Reed stated that existing State law currently requires this of appointed officials and that staff is recommending that the same requirement be considered for elected officials. Council Member Proctor asked for further explanation of the concept. City Attorney Burnham explained that the disclosure would be made at the time that the City Council would be considering a grant or contract, and only if the solicitor would be benefiting from the grant or contract. Council Member Heffernan stated that he could provide an example from the recent campaign and noted the firefighters union that provided funding for City Council candidates. He asked if those council members would have to abstain from voting on the firefighters' contract when it was presented to the City Council. City Attorney Burnham stated that there could be a requirement that distinguishes disclosure from recusal. Additionally, he stated that there could possibly be a requirement for disclosure of solicitations by the person who benefits by the action of the City Council. Council Member Heffernan confirmed that the regulation being presented for consideration would be for disclosure only. City Attorney Burnham pointed out that a contribution of $500, or less, does not create the appearance of a conflict of interest and would, therefore, not justify a recusal. Council Member Nichols asked for a clarification on when a person is considered an intermediary. Mr. Reed stated that there is little experience among the jurisdictions with regard to implementing contribution limits on intermediaries. He noted that the City of Los Angeles felt that they had a problem with people who are active in political campaigns and then, later, try to influence the action of the person they helped to elect. Mr. Reed stated that after years of study, the City of Los Angeles will be implementing a regulation that will require such persons to disclose their activity to the elected official. He stated that in some instances, there will also be a requirement for the elected official not to participate in the matter. Council Member Webb asked if a solicitor were later to be competing with others for a grant and staff recommended that the grant be awarded to the solicitor, if particular council members would have to recuse themselves. Mr. Reed stated that the City of Los Angeles ordinance does not apply when the competitive bidding process has been used. Council Member Webb stated that it might not Volume 56 - Page 6 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 11, 2003 INDEX necessarily be through competitive bidding, that it might be staff making an evaluation and a recommendation to the City Council. City Attorney Burnham stated that the City of Los Angeles has established a threshold for when disclosure or recusal would apply. He added that the concept would apply to individuals who have acted as intermediaries or who have actively solicited contributions, and not to those who have just made contributions themselves. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway stated that the Levine Bill already seems to address the issue. Mr. Reed stated that the Levine Bill is a part of the Political Reform Act (PRA) and applies to public officials who are in appointed positions. Specifically, such officials may not participate in matters where a contributor of more than $250 in any calendar year is a party or participant. He, additionally, noted that a participant is considered anyone who is involved in the project itself and that the contribution total is cumulative. Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway confirmed with City Attorney Burnham that elected officials have a broader spectrum of people they can receive contributions from due to the first amendment. Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway asked for a clarification of the second concept. City Attorney Burnham stated that the filing of communications would be expanded to include more than just mailings and that it would be required contemporaneously with the distribution, rather than within two hours. Mr. Reed stated that websites are difficult to include in the requirement because they are accessible to the public 24 hours a day. Council Member Adams stated that the content of a website can be changed at any time and shouldn't be dismissed. Mr. Reed stated that it could be included if that is the direction of the City Council. City Attorney Burnham agreed that it could be looked at. Council Member Adams stated it should be included since an opposing candidate can't be expected to monitor a website 24 hours a day. Council Member Nichols asked for a clarification on the proposal to limit contributions made by intermediaries. City Attorney Burnham stated that the proposal is not to change the City's current limit of $500, but to make it clear that an intermediary could not make a contribution of more than $500. For example, two people could make direct contributions of $500 each to a candidate, but they could not make the contribution to an intermediary who would then be making a contribution of $1000 to the candidate. City Attorney Burnham added that this does not prohibit solicitation of contributions. Mr. Reed stated that a person becomes an intermediary when he or she receives contributions from a third party and co- mingles it with his or her own funds to make a contribution to a candidate. Council Member Nichols confirmed that intermediaries are currently allowed to make contributions above the campaign limits by State law. City Attorney Burnham stated that State law does not address municipal campaign contribution limits and staff is suggesting that the City Council consider a modification to the City's regulations to prohibit any individual from contributing more than $500 to a candidate. Council Member Nichols provided an example of a husband and wife contributing $1000 to a candidate. Mr. Reed stated that if both parties signed the check, it would be permitted. Council Member Heffernan referred to the proposal to require filing of communications with the City Clerk concurrently with distribution, and asked how distributions that occur during nonbusiness hours would be handled. Volume 56 - Page 7 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 11, 2003 INDEX Mr. Reed stated that requiring disclosure prior to distribution is prohibited and, therefore, the City Clerk would need to provide a location for drop -offs of such communications. City Attorney Burnham added that it would be prohibited to disallow the distribution of the communication if the City Clerk's office is not open. Council Member Heffernan stated that the proposal wouldn't work in "leveling the playing field" since opponents would not be able to view the information until the City Clerk's office reopened. Mr. Reed suggested that using the internet for disclosure could also be considered. Mayor Pro Tern Ridgeway stated that it would be impossible to level the playing field. The filing of the communication doesn't disclose the type of distribution that was done, which doesn't provide the ability for the opponent to respond. He pointed to examples of late night or election day campaigning. Mayor Bromberg confirmed with City Attorney Burnham that the staff proposals for City Council consideration are meant to provide the legal issues involved with implementing such regulations. Council Member Proctor referred to the disclosure of campaign solicitations and asked if the concept would apply to a grant applicant who solicited more than $500 for a candidate. City Attorney Burnham stated that such a person would need to disclose their activity. Mr. Reed added that the burden for disclosure would be on the applicant, not on the elected official. Council Member Heffernan stated that his reason for bringing the issue of election regulations to the City Council for discussion was to attempt to add some integrity to the system. He stated that voter turnout is decreasing and it's probably because the voters don't trust politicians. He stated that this perception needs to be changed and that it's a problem that's not unique to Newport Beach. Mayor Bromberg stated that he doesn't feel that voters don't go to the polls because they don't trust their elected officials. He stated that those that don't trust their elected officials are in the minority and that a more likely reason for low voter turnout is apathy. Mayor Bromberg stated that there is a high level of integrity in Newport Beach government. Council Member Adams agreed and stated that if the voters don't like what they see, it should be a reason for them to get out and vote. Council Member Heffernan disagreed and stated that people don't vote because they feel their vote doesn't count. He stated that the perception needs to be changed and there's an opportunity for the City to do something. Council Member Adams stated that it's wrong to think that an individual vote doesn't count and that it indicates a misunderstanding of the system. Tom Billings thanked the City Council for addressing the issue, and stated that ethics also needs to be addressed. He stated that a group of concerned citizens have developed the Campaign Reform and Ethics (CARE) Code. Mr. Billings provided a handout with information on the CARE Code, which was put together by the group with input from similar organizations outside of Newport Volume 56 - Page 8 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 11, 2003 1111791 beach. He stated that the overriding purpose of CARP: is to set ethical benchmarks for candidate conduct in elections. He stated that some of the proposals discussed earlier in the meeting are covered in the CARE Code. Specifically, the CARE Code limits campaign expenditures to $15,000 per candidate. He stated that the CARE Code also prohibits an incumbent candidate from using his or her City position or City resources for campaign purposes. Mr. Billings stated that the CARE Code also addresses ethics by asking each candidate to voluntarily agree to honesty and fairness, responsibility, and respect and compassion. Ann Watt stated that she's a citizen who feels that the campaign issue is important and goes to the heart of the country's Constitution. She thanked those involved with having the issue brought before the City Council and stated that the money granted to the Airport Working Group (AWG), the Citizens for Jobs & the Economy (CJ &E) and the Orange County Regional Airport Authority (OCRAA) provides an example that something needs to be done. She specifically noted Dave Ellis, the director of AWG, and his involvement with the campaigns of some of the council members. Council Member Adams pointed out that Mr. Ellis was not his campaign manager during the 1998 election. Ms. Watt stated that the City of Newport Beach is powerful and influenced the County's decision regarding the John Wayne Airport settlement agreement. Ms. Watt stated that Mr. Ellis benefited from the money granted to AWG and there's a perception that it's a payback. She stated that certain council members should have recused themselves from voting. She requested that the City not grant salaries to organizations such as OCRAA, because it would be unclear who the employee would be influenced by. Philip Arst, spokesperson for Greenlight, referred to Greenlight's correspondence of March 7, 2003, and stated that the PRA and the City's campaign contribution regulations are clear, cover many of the issues being discussed and have mechanisms for enforcement. Mr. Arst stated that regarding the proposal to require filing of all communications, Greenlight is suggesting that each candidate receive a page on the City's website for their use. He stated that no regulation will ever work perfectly, but leveling the playing field should be strived for and is the reason why Greenlight is recommending that the City Charter be changed to hold elections by district. He stated that it will reduce the amount of money spent on campaigns. Mr. Arst stated that he disagrees with the proposal to restrict intermediaries from providing funding to candidates. He stated that it restricts the ability of residents to unite and solicit contributions. Mr. Arst stated that he has the highest regard for the City's police and fire departments, but feels that there is a conflict of interest when they support candidates. Dolores Otting stated that she ran for the City Council in a previous election and was interviewed by the fire union. She stated that the police groups did not interview her and she has heard of similar complaints from other candidates. Ms. Otting stated that if they are going to support a candidate, they should have to interview all of the candidates. She additionally noted that the message being sent out when the fire and police associations support a particular Volume 56 - Page 9 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 11, 2003 INDEX candidate is that the streets will be safe if that candidate is elected. She commended Council Member Heffernan for his efforts. Bernie Svalstad asked how violations would be enforced and suggested that they be handled by the City instead of by the district attorney or a special prosecutor. City Attorney Burnham stated that the City's campaign contribution ordinance is clear on who can enforce the regulations. He stated that an appointed city attorney should not have the authority to do so since he or she is an at -will employee, can be dismissed at any time and may not aggressively pursue a violation. Mayor Bromberg thanked the speakers. He stated that he disagrees with limiting the amount of money a candidate can raise. He also disagreed with holding elections by district because the citizens look to all of the council members to take care of their concerns. Additionally, Mayor Bromberg stated that he was told that the fire and police groups provided every candidate with the opportunity for an interview in the recent election. Of the proposals offered by staff, Council Member Adams stated that he supports the idea of training for candidates and treasurers. He also expressed his support for updating the filing of communications to include all forms of communication, and to do so electronically. He stated that the other proposals need further investigation and discussion before he could support them. Mayor Bromberg agreed with Council Member Adams' comments. Council Member Heffernan stated that one of the most important issues is full disclosure between campaign contributions and later votes, although he doesn't necessarily support recusal. He stated that the implementation of the new ordinance in Los Angeles should be investigated by the City. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway stated that he also supports the two items supported by Council Member Adams, and that he is interested in seeing what happens with the new regulations in Los Angeles. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway noted that although the issues involving Mr. Ellis may have prompted a look at the City's campaign regulations, it should be clear that the City Council did not hire Mr. Ellis. He stated that money was given to AWG, but not to Mr. Ellis. Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway additionally stated that he does not support elections by district since many issues are city -wide issues and the voters should be able to vote for all of their representatives. Lastly, Mayor Pro Tem Ridgeway stated that he felt that the recent campaigns were run with integrity and he disagrees with limiting campaign expenditures. Council Member Nichols stated that there were problems in the recent campaign and that they were structural, not minor. He stated that there should be full disclosure of communications and contributions. He also supported pursuing and discussing the proposals further. Council Member Webb agreed with the two items supported by Council Member Adams. He stated that he didn't quite understand the difference in what would be accomplished by the disclosure of campaign solicitations and personal services, as outlined by City Attorney, and suggested that they could possibly be Volume 56 - Page 10 City of Newport Beach Study Session Minutes March 11, 2003 INDEX combined. Council Member Webb supported council members being voted on city -wide since they represent the entire city. Council Member Heffernan asked if staff had enough direction. Mayor Bromberg stated that the consensus seems to be for support of the second and seventh proposals presented by the City Attorney. Council Member Heffernan stated that he would still like to see the fifth proposal pursued, that an audit of the AWG grant did show that Mr. Ellis was paid $435,000 and his campaign involvement should have been disclosed. Mayor Bromberg stated that it provides an example of how someone can be compromised. He stated that just because a grant was given to a third party and they hire someone who was involved with a council member's campaign doesn't mean that there is anything unethical happening. City Attorney Burnham stated that it might be appropriate for the City to follow the implementation of the ordinance in Los Angeles, and return with additional information on the fifth and sixth proposals based on the concerns heard at the meeting. PUBLIC COMMENTS — None. ADJOURNMENT — at 6:12 p.m. The agenda for the Study Session was posted on March 5, 2003, at 4:15 p.m. on the City Hall Bulletin Board located outside of the City of Newport Beach Administration Building. Recording Secre ary J OF NEl�$ `City Clerk o CRH 1A Volume 56 - Page 11