Laserfiche WebLink
April 24, 2018, City Council Agenda Item 10 Comments - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 4 <br />City" know Commission staff would oppose such a bill at the Commission's February meeting in <br />Cambria, even before it was introduced. This is surely information Mr. Schmitz would have <br />been aware of, but chose not to share with the Council, on March 27. <br />It is understandable that Mr. Schmitz would not have conveyed this information to the Council, <br />since it would have meant there would have been no contract for him, but I cannot see it as <br />behavior that should be rewarded. <br />I find it unfortunate that under the terms approved on March 27 the City Manager has to give Mr. <br />Schmitz seven days' notice, and pay him an additional $4,000 to get out of the contract. <br />I will very much look forward to seeing the "reports, Documents and other information developed <br />or accumulated in the performance of this Agreement, whether in draft or final form," which he is <br />required to deliver to the City in response. <br />In view of his generally misinformed presentations to the City Council, the Chamber Marine <br />Committee and the Coastal Commission, I don't expect to see much in return for the $40,000 or <br />more we will have spent on this for him alone — which makes me wonder what we got in return <br />for the $800,000 or so we have paid him on other contracts (apparently starting with Item 17 at <br />the Council's June 8, 2010, meeting). <br />Indeed, my impression, is he has, strangely, only the loosest familiarity with the Coastal Act, <br />perhaps best exemplified by promoting a bill that would add "Newport Beach" to only one of the <br />three places in the Act where the list of ports having special privileges is mentioned. <br />But the misinformation goes well beyond that. Mr. Schmitz seems to have created the <br />impression that a PMP was needed to simplify dredging of the harbor's navigation channels, <br />when in fact dredging approved by the Army Corps of Engineers has always been exempt from <br />Coastal Act permitting requirements — and dredging around private docks is already covered by <br />a general permit. He similarly promised the Council that under a PMP none of the City <br />approvals could be appealed to the Commission, when that is clearly not what the Coastal Act <br />says. And on and on and on. Not to mention that he was singularly ineffective and unprepared <br />in speaking to the Commission. <br />Takeaways <br />The number one takeaway from this fiasco would seem to be a city should not introduce <br />legislation without thoroughly thinking through why it is needed, why it is being proposed in the <br />form it is, what the costs and savings would be, and without having credible responses to the <br />arguments that might be raised against it. <br />The number two takeaway, at least in my mind, is that continuing to push to have the Coastal <br />Act amended to allow a PMP for Newport Beach is not only an utter waste of money, but will <br />further damage the City's relationship with the Coastal Commission. <br />