HomeMy WebLinkAbout23 - Necessary Amendments to Implement the 6th Cycle Housing Element and to Place the Major General Plan Amendment on the November 5, 2024 General Election Ballot Pursuant - CorrespondenceReceived After Agenda Printed
July 23, 2024
Agenda Item No. 23
From: Biddle, Jennifer
Sent: July 19, 2024 1:45 PM
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Require vote of people to adopt NB's Housing Plan
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: James Halton <npbjim@gmail.com>
Date: 7/19/24 1:29 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Require vote of people to adopt NB's Housing Plan
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Follow the City Charter " Section 423 of the Newport Beach City Charter — the
"Greenlight provision" -- requires a vote of the people to adopt Land Use Element
Updates and Zoning Amendments — including the city's proposed Housing Plan".
Jim Halton
50 Villa Point Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
npb,iim@gmail.com
949-922-4225
From: Biddle, Jennifer
Sent: July 19, 2024 1:45 PM
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: HOUSING ELEMENT
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: John Petry <johncpetry@hotmail.com>
Date: 7/19/24 1:34 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: HOUSING ELEMENT
PMERNAL EMENWO NOT CLICK li e sender and know the
content is safe.
Please let the voters decide. Thanks
From: Biddle, Jennifer
Sent: July 19, 2024 2:45 PM
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Green light
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Bud Reveley <budreveleyPgmail.com>
Date: 7/19/24 2:28 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Green light
[EXTERNAL E
content is safe.
Allow citizens to vote for housing plan
From: Biddle, Jennifer
To: City Clerk"s Office
Subject: FW: The People of Newport Beach Must Vote on the City"s Housing Plan
Date: July 19, 2024 4:16:15 PM
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Alan Sellers <alanbsellers@gmail.com>
Date: 7/19/24 4:03 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: The People of Newport Beach Must Vote on the City's Housing Plan
EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
went is safe.
Councilmembers: Please follow the City Charter by giving the voters of Newport Beach a
voice in deciding our city's Housing Plan.
Councilmembers; PLEASE support a vote of the people this November on the city's
proposed Housing Plan.
Thank you!!
Alan Sellers
From:
Biddle, Jennifer
To:
City Clerk"s Office
Subject:
FW:
Date:
July 19, 2024 5:06:10 PM
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: ANN O NEIL <annhafeyo@aol.com>
Date: 7/19/24 4:18 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject:
EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
Fontent is safe.
(Please Put the RHNA Land Use Element on the ballot!
Thank you.
Barry & Ann O'Neil
1101 Granville Drive
Newport Beach CA
92660
Sent from my Wad
From: Biddle, Jennifer
To: City Clerk"s Office
Subject: FW: Please follow the City Charter by giving the voters of Newport Beach a voice in deciding our city's Housing
Plan.
Date: July 19, 2024 5:06:34 PM
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Bob Ehrlich <rdehrlich@icloud.com>
Date: 7/19/24 4:44 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Please follow the City Charter by giving the voters of Newport Beach a voice in
deciding our city's Housing Plan.
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and
know the content is safe.
I think it very important that we maintain our feeling as being a strong, involved community of
Newport Beach. We have a singular identity because of all of our work to have a strong government
that provides us with such strong support. We all need to continue being involved in important
decisions. Robert Ehrlich, 22 Rue Grand Ducal, 92660
From:
Biddle, Jennifer
To:
City Clerk"s Office
Subject:
FW: City Charter
Date:
July 19, 2024 7:48:44 PM
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Sue Harvey -Reese <sharveyreese@gmail.com>
Date: 7/19/24 5:27 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: City Charter
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
�fe.
Please follow the City Charter by giving the voters of Newport Beach a voice in
deciding our city's Housing Plan.
Sue and Greg Reese
Cliff drive
Sent from my Whone
From: Biddle, Jennifer
To: City Clerk"s Office
Subject: FW: City Plan on Housing
Date: July 19, 2024 7:48:53 PM
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Sharon Woodbury <sharonwoodbury222@gmail.com>
Date: 7/19/24 6:21 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: City Plan on Housing
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and
know the content is safe.
Sent from my iPhone
I don't want Noah Blum to circumvent the City Council on the Housing
Agreement!
From: Biddle, Jennifer
To: City Clerk"s Office
Subject: FW: Proposed Housing plan
Date: July 19, 2024 7:49:05 PM
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Jill Scirocco <mommatron@aol.com>
Date: 7/19/24 6:50 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Proposed Housing plan
EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
I_fe.
As residents of Newport Beach, we urge you to follow the City Charter by giving the voters of
Newport a voice in deciding the city's Housing Plan.
Section 423 of the Newport Beach City Charter, the "Greenlight provision" requires a vote of
the residents to adopt Land Use Element Updates and Zoning Amendments, this includes the
proposed Housing Plan.
We look for your compliance in this matter.
Joe and Jill Scirocco
7 Portica
Newport Coast, CA
From: Biddle, Jennifer
Sent: July 19, 2024 7:49 PM
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: voters need a voice to the planned building of apartments, condos etc.
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Pam Fossler <pamfossler@mac.com>
Date: 7/19/24 7:21 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: voters need a voice to the planned building of apartments, condos etc.
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know
the content is safe.
From: Biddle, Jennifer
Sent: July 19, 2024 7:58 PM
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Greenlight provision
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Bill Cool <billcoolcdm0bgmai1.com>
Date: 7/19/24 7:57 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncit(@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Greenlight provision
[EXTERNAL E
content is safe.
It is my understanding that there is a proposal to bypass the "Greenlight
provision" and NOT allow the citizens of Newport Beach vote on a
Housing plan that exceeds the 4,845 - unit state housing mandate.
This requires a vote of the people! There is no way that the council should
attempt to ignore the citizens right to vote on this proposal.
Taking this a step further, the city of Newport Beach should join with other like-
minded cities and draft an a state initiative that returns zoning
rights to the local communities and forbids the state government to force cities
to over develop their communities with unwanted developments.
William Cool
William Cool
430 Dahlia Ave.
Corona Del Mar, Ca. 92625
(949) 675-5122
Resident since 1968
From: Biddle, Jennifer
To: City Clerk"s Office
Subject: FW: GREENLIGHT PROVISION
Date: July 21, 2024 8:21:29 AM
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
-------- Original message --------
From: Dana Dietel <dldietel@yahoo.com>
Date: 7/20/24 2:24 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: GREENLIGHT PROVISION
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
safe.
IT IS OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE IS A PROPOSAL TO BYPASS THE "GREENLIGHT
PROVISION" AND NOT ALLOW THE CITIZENS OF NEWPORT BEACH VOTE ON A HOUSING PLAN
THAT EXCEEDS THE 4,845 - UNIT STATE HOUSING MANDATE.
THIS REQUIRES A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE! THERE IS NO WAY THAT THE COUNCIL SHOULD
ATTEMPT TO IGNORE THE CITIZENS RIGHT TO VOTE ON THIS PROPOSAL.
TAKING THIS A STEP FURTHER, THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH SHOULD JOIN WITH OTHER
LIKE-MINDED CITIES AND DRAFT A STATE INITIATIVE THAT RETURNS ZONING RIGHTS TO THE
LOCAL COMMUNITIES AND FORBIDS THE STATE GOVERNMENT TO FORCE CITIES TO DEVELOP
THEIR COMMUNITIES WITH UNWANTED DEVELOPMENTS.
THANK YOU
SINCERELY,
KURT AND DANA DIETEL
CORONA DEL MAR
From: Biddle, Jennifer
To: City Clerk"s Office
Subject: FW: Letter re Item 23 7/23/24
Date: July 22, 2024 9:22:30 AM
Attachments: SPON Letter to CC 7-22-24.odf
From: Charles Klobe <cklobe@me.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 9:23 AM
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Letter re Item 23 7/23/24
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
6
Good day,
Please accept the attached letter regarding Item 23 on the July 23, 2024 City Council
Agenda.
Thank you for your service,
Charles Klobe
Virus-free.www.avg.com
July 22, 2024
Newport Beach City Council
Regarding Ordinance Nos. 2024-16, 2024-17, and 2024-50 to 2024-57 OR 2024-58 7/23/2024
Good day Mr. Mayor and Members of the City Council,
SPON (Still Protecting Our Newport) is a 501(c)(3) non-profit dedicated to preserving and
protecting the environmental and residential qualities of Newport Beach.
All elements of the PEIR under consideration at the July 23, 2024 city council meeting are
deficient as they do not analyze the potential density bonus units allowed under state
law. Density bonus units were not analyzed and could add thousands of units above the 9,914
studied in the Draft PEIR, therefore it is deficient and must be recirculated. We therefore
preserve our rights to file a CEQA challenge to the Draft PEIR.
Thank you for your service,
Charles Klobe
President
SPON - PO Box 102 - Balboa Island, CA 92662
From: Biddle, Jennifer
To: City Clerk"s Office
Subject: FW: Put RHNA housing land use element on the Nov ballot!
Date: July 22, 2024 10:44:53 AM
From: Kate Conard <katepetry@gmail.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 10:39 AM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Put RHNA housing land use element on the Nov ballot!
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Hello City Council Members,
I am a resident of Newport Beach and property owner and am requesting you put the
RHNA housing land use element on the November Ballot. This should not be the
decision of the council members alone as it impacts all residents of Newport Beach and
should be up to the citizens to decide. If it fails, it goes back to the council anyway, so
give the people a chance to make a decision for their town (not in the interests of
developers, but of the actual residents who live, drive, go to school and work, pay taxes,
and contribute to this amazing city).
Thank you,
Kate Conard
2215 Windward Ln, Newport Beach, CA 92660
From:
Biddle, Jennifer
To:
City Clerk"s Office
Subject:
FW: CA Housing Mandate
Date:
July 22, 2024 10:48:42 AM
Importance:
High
From: David Rose <david@melroseind.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 10:47 AM
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: CA Housing Mandate
Importance: High
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
,ontent is safe.
J J L
Council Members,
It is absolutely wrong for you to decide on the above vs. putting it to a
vote of the residents of Newport Beach. I strongly urge you to put this
matter to a vote of the residents ASAP. Thank you.
Rgds,
David Rose & ARDR Realty LLC
318 Amethyst Ave.
Newport Beach, CA 92262
From: Biddle, Jennifer
To: City Clerk"s Office
Subject: FW: CA Housing Mandate - Land Use element
Date: July 22, 2024 11:00:26 AM
From: David Rose <david@melroseind.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 10:58 AM
To: O'Neill, William <woneill@newportbeachca.gov>
Cc: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: RE: CA Housing Mandate - Land Use element
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] Do mks or a hments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
HI Will,
Thanks for the prompt response. To be clearer, I'm referring to the Land
Use Element that is to be brought up a tomorrow's Council meeting. It
should be decided by a vote of the residents per Greenlight, our City
Charter Section 423; not by a majority of the Council. Trust this clarifies
my intent.
Rgds,
David
From: O'Neill, William <woneillCcDnewportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2024 10:49 AM
To: David Rose <david(@melroseind.com>
Subject: Re: CA Housing Mandate
Thanks David. The housing element was approved and certified a couple of years ago.
Mayor Will O'Neill
Newport Beach City Council
From: David Rose <david()melroseind.com>
Date: Monday, July 22, 2024 at 10:47 AM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncilCcOnewportbeachca.gov>
Subject: CA Housing Mandate
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
Council Members,
It is absolutely wrong for you to decide on the above vs. putting it to a
vote of the residents of Newport Beach. I strongly urge you to put this
matter to a vote of the residents ASAP. Thank you.
Rgds,
David Rose & ARDR Realty LLC
318 Amethyst Ave.
Newport Beach, CA 92262
From: Biddle, Jennifer
To: City Clerk"s Office
Subject: FW: RHNA on the Nov ballot
Date: July 22, 2024 11:24:26 AM
From: Alison Rubino Asher <alisonrubinoasher@gmail.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 11:22 AM
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: RHNA on the Nov ballot
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Hello City Council Members,
I am a long time resident of Newport Beach and property owner in the Bluffs and am
requesting you put the RHNA housing land use element on the November Ballot.
This should not solely be the decision of the council members alone as it impacts all
residents of Newport Beach and should be up to the citizens to decide.
If it fails, it goes back to the council anyway, so please give the people a chance to make
a decision for their community, (not in the interests of developers, but of the actual
residents who live, drive, go to school and work, pay taxes, and contribute to this
amazing city). Thank you,
Alison Rubino
450 Gaviota, NB, 92660
415.517.5427
Linkedin
From: Biddle, Jennifer
To: City Clerk"s Office
Subject: FW: RHNA housing land use element on the November Ballot
Date: July 22, 2024 11:40:42 AM
-----Original Message -----
From: Lindsey Coombe <lindseycoombe@gmail.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 11:38 AM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: RHNA housing land use element on the November Ballot
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Hello City Council Members,
I am a resident of Newport Beach and property owner and am requesting you put the RHNA housing land use
element on the November Ballot. This should not be the decision of the council members alone as it impacts all
residents of Newport Beach and should be up to the citizens to decide. If it fails, it goes back to the council anyway,
so give the people a chance to make a decision for their town (not in the interests of developers, but of the actual
residents who live, drive, go to school and work, pay taxes, and contribute to this amazing city).
Thank you,
Lindsey Coombe
2900 Quedada Newport Beach, CA 92660
From: Biddle, Jennifer
To: City Clerk"s Office
Subject: FW: RHNA housing for Nov Ballot
Date: July 22, 2024 1:00:18 PM
-----Original Message -----
From: Shina Hopkins <shinahopkins@yahoo.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 12:59 PM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: RHNA housing for Nov Ballot
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
Hello City Council Members,
I am a resident of Newport Beach and property owner and am requesting you put the RHNA housing land use
element on the November Ballot. This should not be the decision of the council members alone as it impacts all
residents of Newport Beach and should be up to the citizens to decide. If it fails, it goes back to the council anyway,
so give the people a chance to make a decision for their town (not in the interests of developers, but of the actual
residents who live, drive, go to school and work, pay taxes, and contribute to this amazing city).
Thank you,
Shina Hopkins
2444 Vista Nobleza, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Sent from my iPhone
From:
Biddle, Jennifer
To:
City Clerk"s Office
Subject:
FW: The Housing Plan
Date:
July 22, 2024 1:34:41 PM
From: linda.doppes@gmail.com <linda.doppes@gmail.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 1:33 PM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Cc: linda.doppes@gmail.com
Subject: The Housing Plan
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
-ontent is safe.
J i
Dear City Council Members,
I am very concerned about the significant growth of Newport Beach in the past 25 plus years that we
have lived here. Our roads are overcrowded much of the time and crime has increased significantly
since we have lived here. This decreases the desirable lifestyle of Newport Beach and one of the
reasons why we moved here.
I insist that our councilmembers follow the city charter and support a vote of the people this
November to save the beauty and appeal of our city.
Regards,
Linda Doppes
32 Deep Sea
Newport Coast, CA 92657
714-457-2651
From: Alison Rubino Asher
To: City Clerk"s Office
Subject: Fwd: RHNA on the Nov ballot
Date: July 22, 2024 1:22:20 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Hello City Clerk and City of NB Leaders,
I am a long time resident of Newport Beach and property owner in the Bluffs and am
requesting you put the RHNA housing land use element on the November Ballot.
This should not solely be the decision of the council members alone as it impacts all residents
of Newport Beach and should be up to the citizens to decide.
If it fails, it goes back to the council anyway, so please give the people a chance to make a
decision for their community, (not in the interests of developers, but of the actual residents
who live, drive, go to school and work, pay taxes, and contribute to this amazing city). Thank
you,
Alison Rubino
450 Gaviota, NB, 92660
415.517.5427
Linkedin
From: Biddle, Jennifer
To: City Clerk"s Office
Subject: FW: Let residents vote for RHNA
Date: July 22, 2024 3:14:30 PM
From: Megan King <meganekingl4@gmail.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 1:57 PM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Let residents vote for RHNA
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear City Council Members,
I am a long term resident of Newport Beach (for 12 years now) and a property owner in
Eastbluff. I am reaching out to request you put the RHNA housing land use element on
the November ballot.
This should NOT be the decision of the council members alone, as it impacts all
residents of Newport Beach and should be up to the citizens to decide.
If it fails, it will go back to the council anyways, so I am requesting that you please give
the residents of Newport Beach a chance to make a decision for their town and in the
interest of those who reside here, live in Newport, work, go to school and pay taxes here.
We appreciate you taking the time to read this as it is a priority topic for us.
Thank you,
Megan and R.J. King
2537 Bamboo Street
Newport Beach, CA 92660
From:
Biddle, Jennifer
To:
City Clerk"s Office
Subject:
FW: Housing Plans
Date:
July 22, 2024 3:28:29 PM
-----Original Message -----
From: Steve Cooper <stevecoop@roadrunner.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 2:34 PM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Housing Plans
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
I want city residents to vote on new housing plans... especially high rise hotels, condos and apartments.
Stephen Cooper
14 Cape Woodbury
Newport Beach
Sent from my iPhone
From: Brown, Leilani
To: Farris, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Keller/Anderle LLP - Newport Beach Charter Section 423
Date: July 22, 2024 3:03:10 PM
Attachments: 2024-07-22 Letter from J. Keller to Mayor W. O"Neill.odf
image001.pnno
imaae002.ona
Leilani I. Brown, MMC
City Clerk
City Clerk's Office
Office: 949-644-3005
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Serving the Public with Integrity and Professionalism
Regular Business Hours, Excluding Holidays:
Monday to Thursday: 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Friday: 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Please note that email correspondence with the City of Newport Beach, along with attachments, may be
subject to the California Public Records Act, and therefore may be subject to disclosure unless otherwise
exempt.
From: Jurjis, Seimone <sjurjis@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: July 22, 2024 3:03 PM
To: Brown, Leilani <LBrown@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: FW: Keller/Anderle LLP - Newport Beach Charter Section 423
For item #23
Seimone Jurjis
Assistant City Manager /
Director of Community Development
Community Development Department
Office: 949-644-3282
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
From: O'Neill, William <woneill(@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: July 22, 2024 2:57 PM
To: Leung, Grace <gleung(@newportbeachca.gov>; Harp, Aaron <aharp(@newportbeachca.gov>;
Summerhill, Yolanda<YSummerhillPnewportbeachca.gov>; Jurjis, Seimone
<siuriis(@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Fwd: Keller/Anderle LLP - Newport Beach Charter Section 423
Mayor Will O'Neill
woneill(@newportbeachca.gov
100 Civic Center Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Begin forwarded message:
From: Leobardo Cano <IcanoPkelleranderle.com>
Date: July 22, 2024 at 2:40:56 PM PDT
To: "O'Neill, William" <woneill(@newportbeachca.gov>
Cc: Jennifer Keller <ikeller(@kelleranderle.com>, Shaun Hoting
<shoting(@kelleranderle.com>, "Stapleton, Joe" <itapletonpnewportbeachca.gov>,
"Avery, Brad" <baver)1(@newportbeachca.gov>, "Weigand, Erik"
<eweigand(@newportbeachca.gov>, "Grant, Robyn" <rgrantPnewportbeachca.gov>,
"Blom, Noah" <NBlom(@newportbeachca.gov>, "Kleiman, Lauren"
<lkleiman(@newportbeachca.gov>, "Harp, Aaron" <aharp(@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Keller/Anderle LLP - Newport Beach Charter Section 423
ERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT
and know the content is safe.
Dear Mayor O'Neill,
Please find the attached correspondence from attorney Jennifer L. Keller.
Please feel free to let me know if you have questions.
Thank you.
Leo Cano
Paralegal
18300 Von Karman Ave., Suite 930 1 Irvine, California 92612-1057
949.476.8700 1 Fax 949.476.0900
LCano(a>kelleranderle.com I www.kelleranderle.com
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files or previous e-mail messages attached to it, may
contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering
it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of any of the information
contained in or attached to this message is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please
immediately notify us by reply e-mail at infoCcokelleranderle.com or by telephone at 949.476.8700 and destroy the original
transmission and its attachments without reading them or saving them to disk. Thank you.
Keller/AnderleLLP
BUSINESS TRIAL LAWYERS
July 22, 2024
Via E Mail
Will O'Neill, Mayor
Newport Beach City Council
100 Civic Center Drive
Newport Beach, CA 92660
woneill(c,newportbeachca. gov
Re: Voter approval of Newport Beach's Certified Sixth Cycle Housing Element under
Charter Section 423
Dear Mayor O'Neill and City Council Members:
I write on behalf of Still Protecting Our Newport ("SPON") concerning the City Council's
upcoming vote on whether to disregard Newport Beach Charter Section 423 and unilaterally approve
zoning amendments as part of the City's implementation of the Certified Sixth Cycle Housing
Element ("HE"). SPON is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit made up of responsible members of the Newport
Beach community. Since 1974, SPON has worked to protect and preserve the charm and
environment of Newport Beach. Recently, we have been told that City decisionmakers and/or staff
are questioning whether the City must schedule a vote under City Charter Section 423 to adopt the
zoning amendments. The answer is simple: Yes, Section 423 requires the City to schedule a vote.
If the City Council violates Section 423, it will fundamentally change the fabric of Newport
Beach governance, risk decertification of the City's Sixth Cycle Housing Element, and ensure
extensive litigation between the City and its residents and/or the State of California. Similarly, any
attempt to conduct a sham election under Section 423, by using ballot language that misleads
Newport Beach citizens with misrepresentations or outright falsehoods about the City's planned
zoning amendments, will violate California law and subject the City to protracted litigation.
I. Background
Newport Beach Charter Section 423 — commonly known as the "Greenlight Initiative" —
is a fundamental section of the City's Charter that requires any significant developments or change
to the City's development to be reviewed and approved by Newport Beach's citizens. Section 423
is based on Newport Beach citizens' demands for transparency into, and approval of, any plans that
would affect how Newport Beach's real estate is zoned and developed. It was enacted after voters
became alarmed by what appeared to be outsized influence by developers on the City Council.
Specifically, Section 423 states that "[v]oter approval is required for any major amendment
to the Newport Beach General Plan." A "major amendment" is one that "significantly increases"
allowed density or intensity (i.e., 100 dwelling units or more), based on the total of the (1)
Keller/Anderle LLP 1 18300 Von Karman Ave., Suite 930 1 Irvine, CA 92612-1057
949.476.8700 1 Fax 949.476.0900 1 www.kelleranderle.com
July 22, 2024
Page 2
"[i]ncreases resulting from the amendment itself," and (2) "[e]ighty percent of the increases resulting
from other amendments affecting the same neighborhood and adopted within the preceding ten
years." Section 423 further mandates that no amendment shall "take effect unless it has been
submitted to the voters and approved by a majority of those voting on it."
On September 13, 2022, the City of Newport Beach adopted the Sixth Cycle Housing
Element. The California Department of Housing and Community Development ("HCD") conducted
a review. In an October 5, 2022, letter, the HCD concluded the HE was "in full compliance with
State Housing Element Law." The HCD also concluded that "the City must continue timely and
effective implementation of all programs including ... [i]nitiating a Ballot Measure for a Charter
Section 423 Vote." (Oct. 25, 2022, HCD Ltr. at 1.)
The City's Certified Sixth Cycle Housing Element likewise recognizes that a Greenlight
Initiative vote is required to align other General Plan amendments and Zoning Code amendments
with the certified HE, and to effectuate the certified HE. As a few examples:
• "It is the duty of the City Council to place the increases in housing and the traffic generated
before the voters of Newport Beach consistent with Charter Section 423. The vote will be
scheduled in accordance with the California Elections Code and the City Charter after the
City Council carefully reviews and approves the Land Use Element amendment and Zoning
Strategies that support Policy Actions IA through 1G." (HE at 3-30 (emphasis added).)
• "For the 6th cycle Housing Element, like the 2006 vote, the City will initiate an election and
pay for all costs associated with the ballot measure. The discussion within Housing Goal #1
in Section 4 details the milestones involved in the Land Use Element amendment vote
process." (Id. (emphasis added).)
• "Based upon public comments received during the preparation of this Housing Element,
there is no public support to amend Charter Section 423 to accommodate the housing
necessary to satisfy the State RHNA mandate. The City Council publicly debated the
prospects of amending Charter Section 423 through its review of this Housing Element, and
it is universally believed that placing such a Charter amendment before the voters would be
a waste of resources. Additionally, any effort to potentially amend Charter Section 423 would
potentially and unnecessarily delay the implementation of this Housing Element. It could
create voter fatigue reducing the prospects for success of a vote for the required Land Use
Element Amendment to implement this Housing Element pursuant to Charter Section 423."
(Id.)
• "All sites proposed for rezoning through implementation of Policy Actions IA through IF
provided in Section 4 of this Housing Element will require a companion Land Use Element
amendment that will be subject to a vote of the electorate pursuant to Charter Section 423.
The City will initiate an election and conduct community outreach to educate the public on
the benefits of higher density housing and pay for all costs associated with the ballot
measure(s). The table below presents a timeline for the process including the vote. If the vote
fails, the City will propose alternative Policy Actions and call for a second election. If the
Keller/Anderle LLP 1 18300 Von Karman Ave., Suite 930 1 Irvine, CA 92612-1057
949.476.8700 1 Fax 949.476.0900 1 www.kelleranderle.com
July 22, 2024
Page 3
second vote fails to pass, the City Council will seek a legal opinion from the State Attorney
General's Office as to how to proceed." (Id. at 4-3 (emphasis added).)
• "Policy Action 3N: Housing Impact Studies The City will continue to study housing impacts
of proposed larger -scale, significant commercial/industrial projects during the development
review process. Prior to project approval, a housing impact assessment shall be developed
by the City with the active involvement of the developer. Such assessment shall indicate the
magnitude of jobs to be created by the project, where housing opportunities are expected to
be available, and what measures (public and private) are requisite, if any, to ensure an
adequate supply of housing for the projected labor force of the project and any restrictions
on development due to the City `Charter Section 423'. The City will continue to implement
such program as major commercial/industrial projects are submitted to the City in the 6th
Cycle." (Id. at 4-17).
(See also HE at 3-28, 3-29, and 3-30.)
The need for a Greenlight Initiative vote was reiterated at the April 18, 2024, Planning
Commission meeting, the staff report for which confirmed that "the proposed General Plan Land
Use Element amendments would not take effect unless it has been submitted to the voters and
approved by a majority of those voting on it." Indeed, as recently as June 2024, Newport Beach's
own mayor publicly promised a Section 423 vote would take place to allow Newport Beach's
citizens to decide whether to approve the Land Use Element Update and Zoning Amendments.
According to the last published City Council meeting schedule, the City Council is expected
to consider adopting the required steps to implement the approved Housing Element Land Use
Element, Zoning Amendments, and certify the Program EIR on July 23, 2024, or as soon thereafter
as may be heard. Nevertheless, we understand that City decisionmakers and/or staff, including the
City Manager, have recently questioned whether a Charter Section 423 vote is required for the City
to adopt the Land Use Element and Zoning Amendments. To that end, Attachment O to the Agenda
for the July 23, 2024, City Council meeting proposes seeking an amendment to the HE that would
allow the City to evade the required Section 423 vote. The City s recent position contradicts the
numerous public statements from City officials over the past year.
II. Section 423 prevents the City from adopting major amendments to the General
Plan, which includes amending the General Plan to authorize thousands of new
housing units.
It is clear that a Section 423 vote is required for the City to adopt the Land Use Element
Update and Zoning Amendments, in order to implement the HE. Indeed, for nearly two years, the
City and HCD consistently interpreted Charter Section 423 to require that the HE implementation
plans be put to a vote. Moreover, California law requires complying with Section 423 here, as
California courts give great deference to voter -approved initiatives, and regularly reject efforts to
block popular votes. See, e.g., Associated Home Builders etc., Inc. v. City of Livermore, 18 Cal. 3d
582 (1976) (when weighing the tradeoffs associated with local voter initiative power, courts are
obligated to resolve doubts in favor of the exercise of the right whenever possible); California
Keller/Anderle LLP 1 18300 Von Karman Ave., Suite 930 1 Irvine, CA 92612-1057
949.476.8700 1 Fax 949.476.0900 1 www.kelleranderle.com
July 22, 2024
Page 4
Cannabis Coal. v. City of Upland, 3 Cal. 5th 924, 933 (2017) (noting same); Brookside Invs., Ltd. v.
City of El Monte, 5 Cal. App. 5th 540, 552 (2016) ("the exercise of the initiative power is entitled to
`significant weight and deference by the courts."'). Further, absent a finding of clear invalidity,
courts typically handle disputes about the effect of voter approvals and disapprovals after the vote
occurs. Brosnahan v. Eu, 31 Cal.3d 1, 4 (1982) ("it is usually more appropriate to review
constitutional and other challenges to ballot propositions or initiative measures after an election
rather than to disrupt the electoral process by preventing the exercise of the people's franchise, in
the absence of some clear showing of invalidity."); Legislature v Deukmejian, 34 Cal. 3d 658 (1983)
(same).
Given this dispositive judicial precedent, and the City's previous admissions that a vote under
Section 423 is required to adopt the Land Use Element Update and Zoning Amendments, the City
must submit these amendments to the citizens of Newport Beach for a vote. Any attempt to
circumvent Section 423 will be rejected by the court.
Moreover, even if voters disapprove the City's proposed Land Use Element and Zoning
Amendments, the City could still adopt a different, "by -right" housing program (as suggested by
HCD) for the RHNA-required units only, which the City could use to satisfy the HE and comply
with RHNA. Alternatively —as the City recognizes in the HE —the City could revise the General
Plan and Zoning Amendments and seek a second Section 423 vote; and the City could request an
opinion from the State Attorney General's Office if that second vote fails. In short, there is no excuse
for failing to submit these amendments to the voters under Section 423.
Further, the City is required to implement its Sixth Cycle Housing Element, which itself has
a multiple page discussion of how Charter Section 423 applies to the forthcoming Land Use Element
Update and Zoning Amendment, and how the Sixth Cycle Housing Element could be implemented
under Section 423. See, e.g., HE at p. 4-3 (implementation action for Housing Policy 1.1 includes a
vote of the electorate pursuant to Charter Section 423"). Since the City's Sixth Cycle Housing
Element was approved by HCD, the City is required to implement it strictly.
Finally, the City's Land Use Element Update and Zoning Amendments deviate substantially
from the certified HE by excluding from the residential unit allocations for each sub -area both
density bonus units and accessory dwelling units. The state mandate requires 4,845 units, while the
proposed Land Use Element Update and Zoning Amendments seek to add between 8,000 and 10,000
units, more than double the state mandate. Nowhere does the certified HE recognize that density
bonus and/or by -right units would be permitted above and beyond the RHNA allocations in the HE,
including the subtotals in each Focus Area. The City's residents therefore have an absolute right to
consider (and approve) any amendment that has the potential to far exceed the City's Sixth Cycle
RHNA mandate and drastically alter the character of Newport Beach.
Keller/Anderle LLP 1 18300 Von Karman Ave., Suite 930 1 Irvine, CA 92612-1057
949.476.8700 1 Fax 949.476.0900 1 www.kelleranderle.com
July 22, 2024
Page 5
III. The California Department of Housing and Community Development will review
the Land Use Element Update and Zoning Amendments for Consistency with the
Certified HE.
Any attempts by the City to shirk its obligations under the HE as submitted to the HCD—
including any attempts to avoid a Section 423 vote —will trigger a re -review by the HCD and
possible decertification of the HE. As HCD stated in its October 5 Letter:
Government Code section 65585(i) grants HCD authority to review any action or
failure to act by a local government that it determines is inconsistent with an adopted
housing element or housing element law. This includes failure to implement
program actions included in the housing element. HCD may revoke housing
element compliance if the local government's actions do not comply with state law.
(Oct. 25, 2022, HCD Ltr. at 2 (emphasis added).) As explained above, one of the programs the City
submitted to the HCD and that the HCD specifically identified in its letter was "Policy Action I to
1F (Adequate Sites to Accommodate the 2021- 2029 RHNA), Initiating a Ballot Measure for a
Charter Section 423 Vote by September 2023." (Id. at 1.) HCD is therefore required to "review any
action or failure to act" that is inconsistent with a local agency's adopted housing element or State
Housing Element Law generally, "including any failure to implement a [rezoning program]."
If the City fails to act, or acts in a manner inconsistent with the programs and plans of the
certified HE, it will almost certainly be met with written findings from HCD detailing those
violations. Here, if the City Council adopted a zoning ordinance that was wholly inconsistent with
its Housing Element, or failed to do so by the February 2025 deadline, HCD could "de -certify" the
City's Housing Element. HCD has established precedent for this in other jurisdictions that failed to
timely adopt rezoning ordinances. See, HCD, Portola Valley Housing Element Implementation —
Corrective Action Letter (Feb. 5, 2023), available at https://www.hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/
files/docs/planning-and-community/HAU/portola-valley-corr-action- 020524.pdf ("Based upon
communications received from the Town that it does not intend to adopt required rezones until late
March of 2024, HCD finds that the Town has failed to implement these program actions within the
statutorily required timeframe.").
The City should therefore submit the Land Use Element Update and Zoning Amendments to
a vote under Section 423, or risk the HCD's decertification of the City's HE and possible litigation
with the State of California.
IV. The California Department of Housing and Community Development will likely
object to transferring units from one Focus Area to another Focus Area.
HCD is already likely to object to the Land Use Element Update and Zoning Amendments
if the City proceeds to reallocate units from one Focus Area to another Focus Area. HCD has
consistently maintained that California's affirmatively furthering fair housing ("AFFH") law
requires cities to disperse affordable units throughout the community, as opposed to concentrating
new units (including affordable units) in one area of the City. (See, e.g., HCD, AB 686 Summary of
Keller/Anderle LLP 1 18300 Von Karman Ave., Suite 930 1 Irvine, CA 92612-1057
949.476.8700 1 Fax 949.476.0900 1 www.kelleranderle.com
July 22, 2024
Page 6
Requirements in Housing Element Law (Apr. 23, 2020) (Cities must "[e]nsure that sites zoned to
accommodate housing for lower -income households are not concentrated in lower resource areas
and segregated concentrated areas of poverty, but rather dispersed throughout the community,
including in areas with access to greater resources, amenities, and opportunity." (emphasis added).)
For example, if a city proposed to concentrate the vast majority of new RHNA units in one
area of the City, HCD typically disapproves that HE as a discriminatory practice which conflicts
with AFFH mandates. Here, HCD expressly required and the City confirmed in its certified HE that
both market rate and affordable housing units would be dispersed throughout the City, as specified
for each Focus Area. While HCD could overlook de minimus or even modest modifications of the
sub -area development capacities as compared to those in the City's certified HE, any Land Use
Element Update and Zoning Amendments that allow the City to transfer an unlimited number of
market rate or affordable units in one geographic sub -area would not pass muster with HCD, based
on HCD's track record of rejecting housing elements that allow for concentration, rather than
dispersal, of housing units.
V. Any attempt to conduct a sham election under Section 423 based on false or
misleading ballot statements violates California law.
Based on the published agenda for the City Council's July 23, 2024, meeting, the City
Council appears ready to consider conducting an election under Section 423 using proposed ballot
language that violates California law. California's Elections Code § 13119(c), mandates that any
statement of a measure submitted to voters "shall be a true and impartial synopsis of the purpose of
the proposed measure, and shall be in language that is neither argumentative nor likely to create
prejudice for or against the measure." (Emphases added.) The proposed Section 423 ballot
measure posted as Attachment G to Item 23 on the Council's July 23 agenda is argumentative, highly
inflammatory, and so overtly biased it appears to have been drafted by the developers themselves.
The language of the proposed ballot initiative states:
Shall the General Plan's Land Use Element be amended so the City of Newport
Beach can avoid fines of up to $600,000 per month, losing local control over land
use decisions, suspension of authority to issue building permits, and access to state
funding, by adding the following State of California mandated residential housing
opportunity units in Coyote Canyon (1,530), Dover-Westcliff (521), West Newport
Mesa (1,107), the Airport Area (2,577), and Newport Center (2,439)?
(July 23, 2024, City Council Agenda, Item 23, Att. G, at 23-258 ("Proposed Initiative").) The
Proposed Initiative's language is not true or impartial. The Proposed Initiative suggests the City will
be subjected to fines if a citizen votes "no." This is false, however, as there are numerous options
for the City if citizens reject the Proposed Initiative before the City would begin incurring fines.
Additionally, this language improperly conflates the requirement that the City adhere to California
law regarding additional housing with the Council's desire to increase development far beyond what
the State requires. Specifically, California mandates 4,845 units, while the Proposed Initiative seeks
to add 8,174 units, nearly double the State's mandate. The Proposed Initiative's language deceives
Newport Beach's voters by suggesting that the additional development beyond the 4,845 required is
Keller/Anderle LLP 1 18300 Von Karman Ave., Suite 930 1 Irvine, CA 92612-1057
949.476.8700 1 Fax 949.476.0900 1 www.kelleranderle.com
July 22, 2024
Page 7
necessary to avoid the City's being fined. This is false and misleading, in plain violation of
California Elections Code § 13119(c.
The Proposed Initiative's language is also argumentative and likely to create prejudice in
favor of the Proposed Initiative, which also violates the Elections Code. For example, the language
contains inflammatory and incendiary commentary about the "parade of horribles" that will befall
the City and its residents if the voters reject the Proposed Initiative, i.e., that Newport Beach will be
fined and will "los[e] local control over land use decisions," have its "authority to issue building
permits" suspended, and lose "access to state funding." Beyond just being misleading (at best), this
language is crafted with the sole purpose of frightening the average voter into believing that they
must approve the Proposed Initiative or will lose all control over future land use decisions in Newport
Beach. This language presents voters with a false dichotomy designed to cause alarm over Newport
Beach's autonomy if they do not capitulate to the developers and approve the Proposed Initiative.
Given the overtly prejudicial language, the Proposed Initiative is unlawful under Elections Code §
13119(c).
If the City Council elects to disregard its obligations under Section 423 and unilaterally approves the
proposed Land Use Element Update and Zoning Amendments, it will fundamentally change the
fabric of Newport Beach governance, risk decertification of the City's Sixth Cycle Housing Element,
and ensure extensive litigation between the City and its residents and/or the State of California. To
that end, given that the language of Section 423 is clearly applicable here and the California case law
is diapositive, if the City Council refuses to submit these amendments to a vote under Section 423,
SPON will file a lawsuit seeking to compel a vote under Section 423 and enjoin the City's
implementing its Land Use Element Update and Zoning Amendments. Likewise, if the City Council
complies with its Section 423 obligations in bad faith by submitting a ballot initiative to the voters
like the Proposed Initiative, containing argumentative, misleading, and incendiary language, SPON
(and/or other concerned citizens and groups) will file a lawsuit, in which it is confident it will prevail.
Neither the courts nor the voters will appreciate being lied to.
In sum, California law and Section 423 require the City Council to submit its proposed Land
Use Element Update and Zoning Amendments to the voters, and to do so in an honest, objective,
and impartial manner. While SPON would rather work with the City Council to achieve the state -
mandated developments while complying with Section 423, if the City Council does not comply
with its legal obligations willingly, we will seek the courts' intervention to require the City Council's
compliance. This would, among other things, be an unfortunate waste of taxpayer funds.
Sincerely,
KELLER/ANDERLE LLP
Jennifer L. Keller
Keller/Anderle LLP 1 18300 Von Karman Ave., Suite 930 1 Irvine, CA 92612-1057
949.476.8700 1 Fax 949.476.0900 1 www.kelleranderle.com
July 22, 2024
Page 8
cc: Joe Stapleton(jstapleton(a�ne)Uortbeachca.gov)
Brad Avery (baveryknewportbeachca.gov)
Erik Weigand (eweigandgnewportbeachca.gov)
Robyn Grant (rfzrantknewportbeachca.gov)
Noah Blom (nblom(&newportbeachca.gov)
Lauren Kleiman (lkleimangnewportbeachca.gov)
Aaron Harp (aharR@newportbeachca.gov)
Keller/Anderle LLP 1 18300 Von Karman Ave., Suite 930 1 Irvine, CA 92612-1057
949.476.8700 1 Fax 949.476.0900 1 www.kelleranderle.com
From: Biddle, Jennifer
To: City Clerk"s Office
Subject: FW: Housing Plan agenda item 23 for meeting 7/23/24
Date: July 22, 2024 4:32:50 PM
-----Original Message -----
From: Marilee Schneider <marileeschl@gmail.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 4:25 PM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Housing Plan agenda item 23 for meeting 7/23/24
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe.
My husband and I would like to see a vote on the November ballot for the housing plan.
Thank you,
Marilee and Doug Schneider
Sent from my iPhone
From: Lisa Sutton
To: Dept - City Council; City Clerk"s Office
Subject: Citizen public comments on 7/23/24 City Council Meeting agenda noted below.
Date: July 22, 2024 4:51:18 PM
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
safe.
Please see my my comments to City Council on the item noted below (agenda item
on City Council Meeting agenda 7/23/24)
XVIII. PUBLIC HEARING (As noted on pages 14,15 & 16 of the City Council
agenda for said meeting)
23. Ordinance Nos. 2024-16 and 2024-17, and Resolution Nos. 2024-50 to 2024-57
for the Necessary Amendments to Implement the 6th Cycle Housing Element and to
Place the Major General Plan Amendment on the November 5, 2024 General Election
Ballot Pursuant to City Charter Section 423; or Resolution No. 2024-58 to Initiate an
Amendment to the 6th Cycle Housing Element
To Newport Beach City Council and City Clerk,
I am asking the City Council to support a housing plan that limits/caps the zoning of new
housing units within the City of Newport Beach, like many other Orange County cities have
done — per Jeff Herdman's recent letter in stunewsnewpt.com. Throughout the General
Plan and Housing Element Certification process, the citizens of Newport Beach were told
that the new housing element and General Plan Update would be on the November ballot
for a vote. As a resident and registered voter of our city, it is my voter right to request that
our City Council allow the citizens of Newport Beach to vote this November on the city's
proposed housing plan/General Plan Update ( as required by our city charter.) To do
anything other than allow our citizens to vote would be misleading and just not right.
Our vote is important for the principles of Democracy.
This general plan process and the State RHNA housing mandates are a complicated and
confusing subject for our residents. I have watched many City Council, Planning
Commission, Advisory Committee to GP, and General Plan update meetings pertaining to
the General Plan updates and Housing element proposals leading up to the Final
Adopted and Certified 6th Cycle Housing Element (September 13, 2022)
Despite all the effort to communicate to our Newport Beach residents, most people in our
City and almost all of my neighbors have absolutely no idea about the sheer number of
housing units being proposed or the proposed locations of these new dwelling units. In
addition, most citizens have no knowledge of or foresight of the potential degrading and
irreversible negative impacts this will have on public safety/crime, our quality of life, traffic
congestion/noise, parking, and eventually government cost of support services to
accommodate the added dwelling unit potential (resulting population increase) in our
certified submitted housing element. Despite all the work and time in these City meetings ---
the elephant in the room is where are the affordable units going to be built......... The real
need is to figure out how the forced affordable units will be met, in addition to where and
what developer is willing to build them. The current proposed updated GP does not
guarantee affordable units will be built, and unfortunately could result in an even higher
potential ultimate development count if not met and certified. I worked for one of the largest
private residential developers in the US, and affordable units are a nightmare to pencil out
as a builder. ADU's will not solve this problem. ADU's in high density areas of CDM will
most likely ruin our already overly crowded neighborhoods and the City's aggressive
support of 4++ ADU possibilities that our city currently allows as approvable development
options will have unintended negative consequences. Parking is a nightmare and
beginning to become unmanageable, especially during peak tourist and visitor months
coupled with construction activity and home deliveries. Our City can't manage what is has
going on now; I can't imagine what it will look like under the new development targets.
History is filled with evidence of citizen apathy and ignorance surrounding significant
decisions made that have irreversible negative impacts on our lives and our natural
environment. As a community we cannot afford to not get this right. We should allow for
careful consideration from our citizens, and despite all the effort the city says it has put into
educating the community — it is a failure when most people are ignorant on this very
important and impactful subject. As an example, the City Manager's update in the July 5th
and July 19th Newport Beach Independent have absolutely no mention of the General Plan
Update nor the important City Council meeting being held on July 23, 2024 to consider
input and/or a vote on this subject matter. ADU's are mentioned, but not the General Plan
or Community outreach on the potential 19,000+ dwelling units that could ruin our City
forever.
Lisa Sutton (20+ year homeowner and long term resident of Corona Del Mar, CA)
From: Biddle, Jennifer
To: City Clerk"s Office
Subject: FW: Citizen public comments on 7/23/24 City Council Meeting agenda noted below.
Date: July 22, 2024 4:51:41 PM
From: Lisa Sutton <lasutton25@yahoo.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 4:51 PM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>; City Clerk's Office
<CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Citizen public comments on 7/23/24 City Council Meeting agenda noted below.
ERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
is safe.
Please see my my comments to City Council on the item noted below (agenda item
on City Council Meeting agenda 7/23/24)
XVIII. PUBLIC HEARING (As noted on pages 14,15 & 16 of the City Council
agenda for said meeting)
23. Ordinance Nos. 2024-16 and 2024-17, and Resolution Nos. 2024-50 to 2024-57
for the Necessary Amendments to Implement the 6th Cycle Housing Element and to
Place the Major General Plan Amendment on the November 5, 2024 General Election
Ballot Pursuant to City Charter Section 423; or Resolution No. 2024-58 to Initiate an
Amendment to the 6th Cycle Housing Element
To Newport Beach City Council and City Clerk,
I am asking the City Council to support a housing plan that limits/caps the zoning of new
housing units within the City of Newport Beach, like many other Orange County cities have
done — per Jeff Herdman's recent letter in stunewsnewpt.com. Throughout the General
Plan and Housing Element Certification process, the citizens of Newport Beach were told
that the new housing element and General Plan Update would be on the November ballot
for a vote. As a resident and registered voter of our city, it is my voter right to request that
our City Council allow the citizens of Newport Beach to vote this November on the city's
proposed housing plan/General Plan Update ( as required by our city charter.) To do
anything other than allow our citizens to vote would be misleading and just not right.
Our vote is important for the principles of Democracy.
This general plan process and the State RHNA housing mandates are a complicated and
confusing subject for our residents. I have watched many City Council, Planning
Commission, Advisory Committee to GP, and General Plan update meetings pertaining to
the General Plan updates and Housing element proposals leading up to the Final
Adopted and Certified 6th Cycle Housing Element (September 13, 2022)
Despite all the effort to communicate to our Newport Beach residents, most people in our
City and almost all of my neighbors have absolutely no idea about the sheer number of
housing units being proposed or the proposed locations of these new dwelling units. In
addition, most citizens have no knowledge of or foresight of the potential degrading and
irreversible negative impacts this will have on public safety/crime, our quality of life, traffic
congestion/noise, parking, and eventually government cost of support services to
accommodate the added dwelling unit potential (resulting population increase) in our
certified submitted housing element. Despite all the work and time in these City meetings ---
the elephant in the room is where are the affordable units going to be built......... The real
need is to figure out how the forced affordable units will be met, in addition to where and
what developer is willing to build them. The current proposed updated GP does not
guarantee affordable units will be built, and unfortunately could result in an even higher
potential ultimate development count if not met and certified. I worked for one of the largest
private residential developers in the US, and affordable units are a nightmare to pencil out
as a builder. ADU's will not solve this problem. ADU's in high density areas of CDM will
most likely ruin our already overly crowded neighborhoods and the City's aggressive
support of 4++ ADU possibilities that our city currently allows as approvable development
options will have unintended negative consequences. Parking is a nightmare and
beginning to become unmanageable, especially during peak tourist and visitor months
coupled with construction activity and home deliveries. Our City can't manage what is has
going on now; I can't imagine what it will look like under the new development targets.
History is filled with evidence of citizen apathy and ignorance surrounding significant
decisions made that have irreversible negative impacts on our lives and our natural
environment. As a community we cannot afford to not get this right. We should allow for
careful consideration from our citizens, and despite all the effort the city says it has put into
educating the community — it is a failure when most people are ignorant on this very
important and impactful subject. As an example, the City Manager's update in the July 5th
and July 19th Newport Beach Independent have absolutely no mention of the General Plan
Update nor the important City Council meeting being held on July 23, 2024 to consider
input and/or a vote on this subject matter. ADU's are mentioned, but not the General Plan
or Community outreach on the potential 19,000+ dwelling units that could ruin our City
forever.
Lisa Sutton (20+ year homeowner and long term resident of Corona Del Mar, CA)
From: Biddle, Jennifer
Sent: July 22, 2024 5:14 PM
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Public Comments July 25 Agenda Item XVIII. #23
From: Karen Tringali <karen tringali@msn.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 5:13 PM
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Public Comments July 25 Agenda Item XVIII. #23
OT CLICK Links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
On Tuesday July 25 you will be discussing the merits of two options that pertain to the
Adopted and Certified 6th Housing Element. As I understand the context:
Option 1: Pursuant to our City Charter, this housing element triggers the thresholds of
density and traffic and thereby requires voter approval before it can be adopted into the
General Plan's Land Use Element.
Option 2: Amend the Housing Element language to remove the voter approval requirement
so that City Council can make the decision.
Given the magnitude of the State's mandated allotment for Newport Beach, the
complexities and timeline required to obtain the State's certification of the Newport Beach
Housing Element and the risk that NB voters don't understand all intricacies noted above,
Council may well decide to take that responsibility out of voters' hands and make the call
absent a public vote.
Governance is a messy process and not every voter is on the "winning" side. And the
consequences of a public vote can be dire in some cases. But Newport Beach has laws on
its books and we are a city which prides itself for upholding the rule of law.
I believe that a public hearing on whether to set aside the law "just for this special case"
creates a precedence we may well regret the next time something "complex" may need a
vote of the people.
I have no interest in seeing our population swell by another 30-40K over the next decade or
so, but I also believe that as voters we have the right to make a decision and have the
responsibility to live with the outcome.
Having a public hearing on this important exception to an existing law at this time in the
process is alarming and unnerving. But it is the law we have today.
Xaren-Yingali"
Corona del Mar
From: Biddle, Jennifer
Sent: July 22, 2024 5:12 PM
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Support for City Council to Approve General Plan
From: Mark McCormick <markmc22@yahoo.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 5:11 PM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Support for City Council to Approve General Plan
NOT CRC17717 3r attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
Dear Newport Beach City Council,
For the sake of our community character and local control, the City Council should formally adopt its
General Plan Update on July 23rd.
As required by law, the Newport Beach City Council on September 13, 2022 approved the Newport
Beach Housing Element. California law forced Newport Beach to create a plan to accommodate new
housing within the City. The City spent years working with the community to comply with state
mandates by focusing future housing in job centers, like the Airport Area, not neighborhoods. The City
also simultaneously and vigorously fought these mandates in Sacramento. But those challenges — and
those of dozens of other cities — have failed in both Sacramento and in the courts.
With that said, the approved housing plan was the culmination of efforts by a 30-member General Plan
Advisory Committee, the Planning Commission and the City Council in over more than a dozen public
meetings. Now, almost two years later, and as a result of another extensive public review process, the
Council will be fulfilling its obligation in adopting mandatory measures designed to implement the
existing Housing Element.
In fact, in this case, failure to adopt this citizen -driven plan on July 23 risks losing all local control on
housing - including current restrictions on height, density and traffic trips. More on that in a minute.
Some have opined that approval of the implementing elements should be on the upcoming November
ballot. While that approach is certainly available, it is not required. Indeed, as a non -required step, it
would be immensely risky. If a ballot measure fails, the State takes over our planning and we will lose
local control almost immediately. We lose all local control and our community character could crumble.
We cannot let this be our future and we cannot let our community's character be left to chance or
Sacramento bureaucrats. With all of that in mind, I would respectfully recommend that the City Council
formally on its own action adopt the required General Plan updates on July 23rd. Let's trust citizen -
driven planning and our local elected leaders over Sacramento bureaucrats.
Sincerely,
Mark McCormick
5 Veneto
Newport Coast, CA
92657
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 8:03 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Follow the City Charter.... & Noah Blom RESIGN NOW
From: Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle@newportbeachca.cIov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 8:02:59 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: FW: Follow the City Charter.... & Noah Blom RESIGN NOW
From: nospam181@yahoo.com <nospam181@yahoo.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 6:42 PM
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Follow the City Charter.... & Noah Blom RESIGN NOW
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Follow the City Charter. We are in charge here, You are our employees, government
workers. We decide by vote.
NOAH BLOM HAS TO GO ..... this Smug Elitist government bureaucRAT has no Right to
do what he is doing. RESIGN NOW or you will be removed by election Noah Blom
Citizen of Newport Beach, CA
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 8:03 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Housing plan
From: Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 8:02:43 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Housing plan
-----Original Message -----
From: cherie batcheller <cheriebatcheller3@gmail.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 6:30 PM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Housing plan
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Please let us follow the city charter and vote in november on the housing plan!!! This is our right!
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 8:04 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: RHNA Housing
From: Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 8:03:39 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: RHNA Housing
-----Original Message -----
From: Carla Castellucci Gmail <carlaicastellucci@gmail.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 8:35 PM
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: RHNA Housing
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Hello City Council Members,
I am a resident of Newport Beach and property owner and am requesting you put the RHNA housing
land use element on the November Ballot. This should not be the decision of the council members alone
as it impacts all residents of Newport Beach and should be up to the citizens to decide. If it fails, it goes
back to the council anyway, so please give residents a chance to make a decision for their town (not in
the interests of developers, but of the actual residents who live, drive, go to school and work, pay taxes,
and contribute to this amazing city).
Thank you,
Carla and Rob Castellucci
2644 Vista Ornada, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Carla Castellucci
Director, Revenue Operations
www.cvent.com
P:571.830.2269 1 M: 703.798.1594
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 8:03 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: RHNA housing land use element on the November Ballot
From: Biddle, Jennifer <]Biddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 8:03:22 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: FW: RHNA housing land use element on the November Ballot
From: Stephanie Hopkins <stevie.m.hop@gmail.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 7:21 PM
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: RHNA housing land use element on the November Ballot
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK link ou recognize the sender and know the
Hello City Council Members,
I am a resident of Newport Beach and property owner and am requesting you put the RHNA
housing land use element on the November Ballot. This should not be the decision of the
council members alone as it impacts all residents of Newport Beach and should be up to
the citizens to decide. If it fails, it goes back to the council anyway, so give the people a
chance to make a decision for their town (not in the interests of developers, but of the
actual residents who live, drive, go to school and work, pay taxes, and contribute to this
amazing city).
Thankyou,
Stephanie Hopkins
2906 Quedada, Newport Beach, CA 92660
Stephanie Hopkins
Sales, West Coast
Seychelles and BC Footwear
stevie.m.hODR-amail.com
Cell: (714) 501-9280
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 8:05 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Do the right thing
Importance: High
From: Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle(a@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 8:04:57 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: FW: Do the right thing
From: Janice Carsten <ianice@Icarsten.com>
Sent: July 23, 2024 7:25 AM
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Do the right thing
Importance: High
[EXTER L] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
It is your legal and moral duty to follow the City Charter and give the voters of Newport Beach a
voice in deciding our city's Housing Plan. Please put the Newport Beach Hosing initiative on the
ballet so that Newport Beach citizens can vote on the city's Housing Plan, which affects us all.
Thank you,
Jan & Jeff Carstren
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 8:05 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Housing
From: Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 8:04:32 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Housing
-----Original Message -----
From: MIKE GROFF <groffmanl@aol.com>
Sent: July 23, 2024 7:09 AM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Housing
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Council, please support staying with the city charter requiring major housing decisions to be voted
on by the residents of Newport Beach.
22 year homeowner owner.
Thank you.
Mike Groff
319 Alvarado Place
Newport Beach
Sent from my iPhone
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 8:04 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Support for City Council to Approve the General Plan
From: Biddle, Jennifer <]Biddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 8:04:03 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: FW: Support for City Council to Approve the General Plan
From: Greg Reed <greg@goldenbearequities.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 11:21 PM
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Support for City Council to Approve the General Plan
[EXTERNAL E
content is safe.
Dear Newport Beach City Council,
I am writing to advocate for the adoption of the General Plan Update on July 23rd to
safeguard our community character and retain local control.
The Newport Beach City Council approved the Housing Element on September 13, 2022, in
response to state mandates. This plan, developed with significant community
engagement, focuses future housing development in job centers like the Airport Area
rather than in residential neighborhoods. Despite numerous efforts to contest these
mandates in Sacramento, those challenges have been unsuccessful.
The approved housing plan is the product of extensive collaboration among a 30-member
General Plan Advisory Committee, the Planning Commission, and the City Council, with
more than a dozen public meetings held. Now, nearly two years later, and following
another rigorous public review process, the Council is prepared to adopt the necessary
measures to implement the Housing Element.
Failure to adopt this plan on July 23rd risks losing local control over housing, including
current restrictions on height, density, and traffic trips. Some have suggested that the
implementing elements be put on the November ballot. However, this step is not required
and poses significant risks. If the ballot measure fails, the State will assume control of our
planning, leading to an immediate loss of local authority and a potential erosion of our
community character.
Therefore, I strongly recommend that the City Council adopt the General Plan updates on
July 23rd. Let us trust in citizen -driven planning and our local elected leaders rather than
Sacramento bureaucrats. The last thing our amazing city needs is Sacramento controlling
or dictating any element of the general plan.
I'm humbled and blessed to live in the greatest city in California and I trust the City Council
will keep it that way for decades to come in part by approving the general plan on July 23rd.
Thank you for your time and efforts.
Sincerely,
Gregory I. Reed
1113 Kings Rd
Newport Beach, Ca 92663
949 275 6939
July 23, 2024, City Council Agenda Comments
The following comment on an item on the Newport Beach City Council agenda are submitted by:
Jim Mosher (iimmosherCa_ yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660 (949-548-6229)
Item 23. Ordinance Nos. 2024-16 and 2024-17, and Resolution Nos.
2024-50 to 2024-57 for the Necessary Amendments to Implement the
6th Cycle Housing Element and to Place the Major General Plan
Amendment on the November 5, 2024 General Election Ballot
Pursuant to City Charter Section 423; or Resolution No. 2024-58 to
Initiate an Amendment to the 6th Cycle Housing Element
Given the length of the agenda, the normal Monday at 5:00 p.m. courtesy deadline for
submitting comments passed before I could complete my thoughts about several items,
including Item 23.
I would like to add this supplement to my previous comments about the Greenlight vote and
what is wrong with it, and suggest an improved ballot label.
On page 3-30 of Section 3 (Housing Constraints and Resources) of our certified 6th Cycle
Housing Element correctly states that "It is the duty of the City Council to place the increases in
housing and the traffic generated before the voters of Newport Beach consistent with Charter
Section 423." And Charter Section 423 certainly seems to require voters to be asked to approve
General Plan amendments that will allow increases in traffic or housing or commercial
development above the thresholds stated in it. Indeed, the stated purpose of Section 423 (see
the attachment on page 12 of City Council Policy A-18) is "to give the voters the power to
prevent Newport Beach from becoming a traffic -congested city, by requiring their
approval for any change to the City's General Plan that may significantly increase
allowed traffic."
Yet, the proposed ballot label does not inform voters that in this case they are being asked to
approve not only a housing increase over the threshold, but also traffic increases over the peak
hour trip threshold.
The traffic impact may possibly be addressed in a future City Attorney's impartial analysis, but
so far, it is revealed only in Table 3 on page 23-11 of the present staff report, and it amounts to
allowing up to an anticipated 3,270 new a.m. peak hour trips, and 4,169 new p.m. peak hour
trips (compared to the Section 423 threshold of anything more than 100 new peak hour trips
being significant).
This can be compared to the previous Section 423 votes in the 24 years since Greenlight's
adoption in 2000, of which, to the best of my recollection there has been only four (of which only
Measure V passed):
• Measure G (Resolution No. 2001-67) - the Koll Center expansion proposal
• Measure L (Resolution No. 2004-69) - the Sutherland Talla Hospitality, Marina Park
Resort and Community Plan proposal
• Measure V (Resolution No. 2006-77) - the comprehensive General Plan update
• Measure Y (Resolution No. 2014-68) - the Land Use Element refresh
July 23, 2024, City Council agenda Item 23 comment - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 3
As can be seen from the resolutions, the ballot labels for the first two of these did not mention
traffic impacts, but the latter two City -initiated General Plan amendments, which are most similar
to the present extensive Land Use Element changes, did (albeit in terms of "average daily
vehicle trips" rather than in terms of Section 423's "peak hour trips").
Measure V in 2006:
MEASURE
Amendment of the Newport Beach General Plan, Land Use Element
Shall the Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan be
amended to provide for a reduction of non-residential development
square footage by 375.782 square feet, while concurrently
increasing the number of residential dwelling units by 138 knits,
resulting in a reduction of an estimated 2,922 average dally vehicle
trips?
Measure Y in 2014:
MEASURE
Amendment of the Newport Beach General Plan, Land Use Element
Shall the Land Use Element of the Newport Beach General Plan be
amended to provide for a reduction of non-residential development
square footage by 375,782 square feet, while concurrently
increasing the number of residential dwelling units by 138 units,
resulting in a reduction of an estimated 2,922 average daily vehicle
trips?
YES
NO
YES
O
In my previous comment I suggested the ballot label proposed for the present measure seemed
biased in favor of a "yes" vote, and did not seem to comport with the Elections Code Subsection
13119 c requirement to "be a true and impartial synopsis of the purpose of the proposed
measure, and shall be in language that is neither argumentative nor likely to create prejudice for
or against the measure."
I failed to suggest an alternative.
July 23, 2024, City Council agenda Item 23 comment - Jim Mosher Page 3 of 3
Considering the present proposal is certainly not the one and only way of meeting the City's
RHNA requirement, and that the sanctions that might result from a "no" vote are speculative and
not certain (and could eventually happen even with a "yes" vote), I believe something like the
following 75 words would be less argumentative or prejudicial, and more in keeping with the way
Measures V and Y were presented, :
"Shall the General Plan's Land Use Element be amended by adding housing
opportunity units in Coyote Canyon (1,530), Dover-Westcliff (521), West Newport Mesa
(1,107), the Airport Area (2,577), and Newport Center (2,439), potentially generating
3,270 new a.m. and 4,169 p.m. peak hour trips, as a way of fulfilling the City's
state -mandated Regional Housing Needs Allocation, and as may be needed to avoid
state sanctions against the City?"
Or, if the Council, rather cynically, can suggest it is OK to mention the citizens' overarching
interest in traffic when the prediction is the measure it wants a "yes" vote on will result in a
reduction, but not when it will result in an increase, something like the following would, at least,
be less prejudicial:
"Shall the General Plan's Land Use Element be amended by adding residential housing
opportunity units in the Housing Element's Coyote Canyon (1,530), Dover-Westcliff
(521), West Newport Mesa (1,107), the Airport Area (2,577), and Newport Center (2,439)
focus areas, as a way of fulfilling the City of Newport Beach's State of California
mandated Regional Housing Needs Allocation, and as may be needed to avoid state
sanctions against the City?"
I suspect it is beyond the powers of the Council to dictate the exact language of the ballot label.
But the Council does have the power to put it on the ballot or not, and I would think it can wait
until it has something better (and less likely to invite a challenge) to consider.
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 10:49 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: I support adopting the General Plan update.
From: Ant miller <millerant9660)gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 10:49:00 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: I support adopting the General Plan update.
RNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
City Councilmembers:
I am writing to ask that the City Council vote to adopt the General Plan update at TONIGHT's meeting,
July 23, 2024.
This is SO IMPORTANT for those of us who live here and love the community the way it is. The people of
Newport Beach have been personally involved in this for several years and TONIGHT it is time to
approve it and move on.
I am in support of the General Plan. Please vote to adopt tonight.
Sincerely,
P.D. Miller
miIlerant966@gmail.com
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 10:30 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: meeting tonight concerning housing expansion decisions
From: Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 10:30:15 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: meeting tonight concerning housing expansion decisions
-----Original Message -----
From: Lynn Friedman <haus2ful@gmail.com>
Sent: July 23, 2024 10:28 AM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: meeting tonight concerning housing expansion decisions
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear City Council Members,
Thank you for doing your job and representing us, the constituents of the City of Newport Beach.
We have been given a requirement by the state to build more than 4,800 more homes. A huge amount
and more than our city can handle well.
I agree to fight to lessen the number we build her in our city.
I do NOT agree that it is up to the City Council to determine what his built but it is up to the residents to
decide. We, the residents, need to vote to make the decision, not you. Do NOT eliminate Greenlight
and take the power into your own hands. That is NOT how our city has run or should run in the future.
Thank you for listening and representing us, the constituents of NB.
Lynn Friedman
3704 Channel PI
NB 92663
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 9:59 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Voting
From: Biddle, Jennifer <]Biddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 9:59:17 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: FW: Voting
From: Elisabeth Hau <jetski1458@yahoo.com>
Sent: July 23, 2024 9:45 AM
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Voting
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICKi}IIFF91111IMchments unless you recognize the sender and know the
Good Morning,
I'm supporting a vote of the people of Newport Beach in Nov. on the City's proposed housing plan. Again
a insincere politician like Noah Blum want's to take away our right to vote on the housing plan. He must
have deep pockets. I hope all of our Council members will do the right thing, and preserve and protect our
precious community. And not give way to personal gains, circumvent the City Charter for Housing
Planing. I also know so do my friends not to vote for Noah Blum.
Have a nice day
Elisabeth Hau 949.642.0665
Change your Water, Change your Life!
www.HauWaterHelps.com
Order your free 14 page EBOOK
watch a video: www.kangendemo.com
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 9:30 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Please approve General Plan Update on July 23rd
From: Kari M <portskari5@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 9:28:48 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Please approve General Plan Update on July 23rd
RNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
Dear City Council.
As a long-time Newport Beach resident who loves living here, I urge the City Council to approve the
General Plan tonight, July 23. It is time to move forward with our General Plan and formally put in the
safeguards that will preserve our community character and make sure we do not lose control to the
Sacramento bureaucrats and risk having the state mandate high density, high-rise projects in Newport
Beach.
Kari M.
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 9:17 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Housing Plan
From: Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 9:17:10 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Housing Plan
-----Original Message -----
From: Laurie Graves <laurie.p.graves@gmail.com>
Sent: July 23, 2024 9:10 AM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Housing Plan
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Newport Beach City Council
We have the right to vote on the housing plan.
Please put it on the November ballot.
Laurie Graves
Sent from my iPhone
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 9:17 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: City Housing Plan
From: Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 9:16:52 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: FW: City Housing Plan
From: Jeffrey Long <Detroit195@iCloud.com>
Sent: July 22, 2024 1:32 PM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: City Housing Plan
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK Links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Please follow the City Charter. We should be allowed to vote on this in November
concerning the city's Housing Plan.
Sincerely,
Jeffrey Long
21 Lochmoor Lane
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Mobile 949.278.0004
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 8:46 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Right to Vote
From: Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 8:46:15 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Right to Vote
-----Original Message -----
From: Wendy Franked <weafrank@road run ner.com>
Sent: July 23, 2024 8:17 AM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Right to Vote
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
City Council,
We support to have the right to vote. Our city council has become draconian, to use their word
describing the state, to make all decisions in this city without regarding all residents. Our city council
does not represent all residents and we want the right to vote.
Wendy Frankel
131 39th Street
Newport Beach
Sent from my iPhone
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 12:56 PM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Support for City Council to Adopt General Plan
From: Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 12:56:04 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Support for City Council to Adopt General Plan
-----Original Message -----
From: Brian Sperry <brian.sperrv@me.com>
Sent: July 23, 2024 12:54 PM
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Support for City Council to Adopt General Plan
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Dear Newport Beach City Council,
I urge you to adopt the General Plan Update on July 23rd to preserve our community's character and
maintain local control over housing decisions.
As you are aware, the Newport Beach City Council approved the Housing Element on September 13,
2022, as required by California law. This plan was formulated over several years with extensive
community input to comply with state mandates, directing future housing development to job centers
such as the Airport Area rather than neighborhoods. Despite significant efforts to challenge these
mandates in Sacramento, these challenges have not been successful.
The housing plan reflects the collaborative efforts of a 30-member General Plan Advisory Committee, the
Planning Commission, and the City Council, who engaged in over a dozen public meetings. Now, nearly
two years later, following a comprehensive public review process, the Council is poised to adopt the
mandatory measures to implement the Housing Element.
Failing to adopt this citizen -driven plan on July 23rd risks losing all local control over housing, including
existing restrictions on height, density, and traffic trips. While some have proposed placing the
implementing elements on the November ballot, this is not a required step and introduces unnecessary
risks. Should the ballot measure fail, the State will take over our planning, resulting in an immediate loss
of local control and a potential degradation of our community character.
Therefore, I respectfully recommend that the City Council adopt the General Plan updates on July 23rd.
We should place our trust in citizen -driven planning and our locally elected leaders over state
bureaucrats.
Sincerely,
Brian Sperry
Newport Beach Resident & Homeowner
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 11:23 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Support for City Council to Approve General Plan
From: Biddle, Jennifer <]Biddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 11:22:44 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: FW: Support for City Council to Approve General Plan
From: John Pomer <johnpomer@gmail.com>
Sent: July 23, 2024 11:18 AM
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Support for City Council to Approve General Plan
[EXTERNAL E
content is safe.
Dear Newport Beach City Council,
I am writing to express my support for the adoption of the General Plan Update on July 23rd to ensure
the preservation of our community character and local control.
On September 13, 2022, the Newport Beach City Council approved the Newport Beach Housing
Element, as required by California law. This plan was developed with extensive community input to
comply with state mandates, focusing future housing in job centers like the Airport Area rather than
neighborhoods. Despite numerous attempts to challenge these mandates in Sacramento, these efforts
have failed both legislatively and in the courts.
The housing plan is the result of the work of a 30-member General Plan Advisory Committee, the
Planning Commission, and the City Council, all of whom participated in more than a dozen public
meetings. Now, almost two years later, following another comprehensive public review process, the
Council is ready to adopt the mandatory measures to implement the Housing Element.
Failure to adopt this citizen -driven plan on July 23rd risks losing all local control over housing, including
current restrictions on height, density, and traffic trips. While some have suggested placing the
implementing elements on the November ballot, this is an unnecessary and risky step. If the ballot
measure fails, the State will take over our planning, and we will lose local control almost immediately,
jeopardizing our community character.
To avoid this outcome, I respectfully recommend that the City Council adopt the required General Plan
updates on July 23rd. Let's place our trust in citizen -driven planning and our local elected leaders over
state control.
Thank you for your time and commitment to our community.
John Pomer
949-887-0959
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 11:22 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: General plan update
From: Biddle, Jennifer <]Biddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 11:22:01 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: FW: General plan update
From: papazisjn@gmail.com <papazisjn@gmail.com>
Sent: July 23, 2024 10:41 AM
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: General plan update
[EXTERNAL E
content is safe.
Dear Newport Beach City Council,
I urge you to formally adopt the General Plan Update on July 23rd to preserve our community character
and maintain local control.
On September 13, 2022, the Newport Beach City Council approved the Newport Beach Housing
Element, as mandated by California law. This plan was developed over several years with significant
community input to comply with state mandates, focusing future housing in job centers like the Airport
Area rather than neighborhoods. Despite extensive efforts to challenge these mandates in Sacramento,
these challenges have been unsuccessful.
The housing plan is the result of efforts by a 30-member General Plan Advisory Committee, the Planning
Commission, and the City Council, all of whom participated in over a dozen public meetings. Now,
almost two years later, after another extensive public review process, the Council is ready to adopt the
necessary measures to implement the Housing Element.
Failure to adopt this plan on July 23rd risks losing all local control over housing, including current
restrictions on height, density, and traffic trips. Some have suggested placing the implementing
elements on the November ballot, but this is a risky and unnecessary step. If the ballot measure fails,
the State will take over our planning, and we will lose local control almost immediately, putting our
community character at risk.
To prevent such a future, I respectfully recommend that the City Council adopt the required General
Plan updates on July 23rd. Let's trust in citizen -driven planning and our local elected leaders.
Sincerely,
James Papazis
Sent from James Papazis's Phone
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 2:22 PM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Agenda Item No. 23 Housing Element Implementation
Attachments: R Rubino —Letter to City Council_Agenda Item 23 Houuing Element.pdf
From: Ron Rubino <ron(a)eastblufP.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 2:21:55 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>; Dept - City Council
<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Cc: Zdeba, Benjamin <bzdeba@newportbeachca.gov>; Murillo, Jaime <JMurillo@newportbeachca.gov>;
Jurjis, Seimone <siuriis@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Agenda Item No. 23 Housing Element Implementation
[EXTERN
content is
Good afternoon City Clerk and City Council members.
erand know the
This is Ron Rubino. I have been a HOA Board Director of the Eastbluff Homeowners'
Community Association for 10 years and Newport Beach resident for 37 years with my wife
Sharon Esterley. I am sending this email to express recommendations for the decision tonight on
the Housing Element issue Agenda Item #23.
I recommend the City Council vote to approve "Option No 2", which removes the need for
Charter Section 423 voter approval of the implementation plan.
The letter that follows provides an explanation of my thoughts on the matter and research I
completed. I believe the City's Planning Department has done an excellent job navigating the
City Council and residents through the General Plan and Housing Element processes. It is a very
complex undertaking and the many public committee meetings and workshops are appreciated.
The units mandated under the State's RHNA mandate and the various income levels is a real
challenge in our city of high land values and no open land for new tracts. We are now in a
"redevelopment" mode and creative solutions are required.
As you will read in my attached letter, I favor exploring alternatives for site
specific affordable housing projects, use process improvements and simplification for city
permits for affordable units, (like the current ADU's processes), reduce permit fees, and
inclusionary affordable housing requirement for projects of 50 or more units. Exclusive use of
density bonus to provide an incentive for the private sector to include affordable units is
problematic and results in an increased number of units across the board.
Thank you for considering my input.
IROTV
Ron Rubino
Ron Rubino and Sharon Esterley
2845 Alta Vista Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
July 23, 2024
Dear NB Friends and Neighbors,
I have followed the development of the City's General Plan and related Housing Element for the
past 4 years. Recently I have reviewed and asked knowledgeable people their opinion and
insights into how the final Housing Element numbers of units were determined and allocated to
each planning zone. I had questions regarding the units considered in the "pipeline" and the
impact on total units by density bonuses. I wanted to have a clear understanding of what the
potential total units were being approved in the General Plan.
There is a City Council meeting tonight to consider approval steps to implement the Housing
Element. The staff report and attachments are available online at the city's web site.
7/23/2024 City Council Meeting
o Study Session will begin at 4:00 p.m.
o Closed Session will follow Study Session
o Regular meeting will begin at 6:00 p.m.
I encourage all Newport resident to read this material and express your view to the City Council.
The approval of the final "Housing Element Implementation Plan" is under discussion. The City
Council is also asked to determine if a ballot measure under City Charter 423 (Greenlight) is
required.
I have reviewed prior city reports, attended General Plan workshops, discussed pros and cons of
voting or not voting on the final Housing Element with experience city staff and city council
members. My most recent effort was a workshop meeting with City Planning staff to gain a
better understanding of the State mandate deadlines for completion, penalties for
noncompliance, rationale on the "buffer units" and application of the "high -density bonus
units" in our plan.
Ron Rubino and Sharon Esterley
2845 Alta Vista Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
This review has convinced me to request the City Council vote to approve "Option No 2",
which removes the need for Charter Section 423 voter approval of the implementation plan.
This action is needed to complete the Housing Element and file with the state in time to meet
mandated completion dates for our 2021 to 2029 - 6th cycle General Plan Update. Missing this
deadline to avoid potential penalties and further loss of local control.
The General Plan Update and Housing Element are required to meet state mandates aimed to
increase affordable housing in all California cities. Newport Beach was assigned a new potential
housing unit goal of 4,485 RHMA mandated units. Over the past 4 yes public workshop and
City Council study sessions have been conducted and they resulted in adoption of the Newport
Beach Housing Element for 2021-2029 on September 13, 2022. Our City's plan approved by the
state provides a list of potential development sites in different zones of the city. The breakdown
of units by income categories approved by the City and State for Newport Beach as part of the
Housing Element after extensive public participation is:
1,456 Very low-income residents (VL) 1,456
930 units for low- income residents (L) 930
1,050 units for moderate income residents (M)
1,409 units for above -moderate income residents (AM)
Total 4,845 units
The deadline to complete the remaining implementation plan details and file with the State is
mid Feb 2025. The planning zones and unit allocations were previously approved by City
Council after extensive public participation. The city will be compliant with the State mandate
if the Implementation Plan being considered tonight is approved, finished and submitted to the
State by the mid -February deadline..
Ron Rubino and Sharon Esterley
2845 Alta Vista Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
I now have a better understanding of the logic which city staff has used to create the proposed
number of units and categories of affordability. The city does get credit for existing new housing
units described as the "pipeline.' The pipeline units do not increase State -mandated units.
They decrease all units across the board, but have a limited impact on the affordable categories,
leaving 2,707 affordable units remaining that must be accommodated and planned for.
These projects can potentially reduce the number of new housing units needed but must
include affordable housing at the units assigned to the zone in which they are permitted. If the
required affordable units are not in these developments, they remain a mandate and must be
allocated within the remaining units to make up the shortfall.
The city must show the state they have adequate units in the plan to reach very low (VL), low
(L), and moderate (M) priced affordable priced unit goals. An annual status report must be
submitted to the State to report progress, and if it is viewed by the State that the remaining
proposed units cannot be achieve in the housing planning cycle, the State Housing authorities
can rule the City's plan is out of compliance and require an amendment to the General Plan and
Housing Element under tight time constraint. If the city does not comply severe financial and
operational penalties can be imposed.
At this time new proposed development projects in Newport Beach are not required to include
affordable VL, L and M priced units. Newport Beach does not have a minimum inclusionary
requirement for affordable units in new development projects. The use of density bonus" is
the state's prescribed methodology to give an incentive for the private sector to include these
affordable units. This has the result of increasing the total number of units to gain required
affordable unit such as when density of 50 units per acre is increased 50% to 75 units per acre.
The city's charter requirement (Greenlight) for a ballot measure for voter approval of residential
construction of 100 units or more creates a timing problem. If residents vote no on the plan,
Ron Rubino and Sharon Esterley
2845 Alta Vista Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
insufficient time exists to amend the plan with public input and council approvals and have a
second election.
City staff has included "Option No. 2" in the agenda staff report. This approach approves the
necessary implementation requirements, but also includes a finding which makes the final
implementation steps a " Narrowly Focused Amendment" and makes charter section 423
voter approval not required.
Many residents are opposed to not having the entire Housing Element plan approved by voters.
I understand the desire to retain local control that was achieved by the Green light iniatives. I
now have come to realize that ballot approval of the Housing Element implementation plan is
not required. If a no vote were to result, there is not sufficient time to modify the plan, conduct
public hearings and conduct a second ballot measure. At that point, the noncompliance
penalties would apply and that is an extremely bad result for our city. The State has reported
extension of time to submit the completed Housing Element Plan will not be granted.
I also now believe the state's RHNA imposed mandate is a permanent land use requirement and
the community needs to find different methods to review projects and encourage VL, L and M
priced units to be included. Not approving and filing an approved "General Plan Housing
Element" to implement the 6th Cycle Housing Element would make the city noncompliant. The
State imposed penalties would apply and could result in the "Builders' Remedy" being
activated. This would result in automatic approval of building permit applications, even if they
do not comply with City zoning, setback, height regulations and design guidelines. This
unchecked building permit process under the Builders" Remedy would result in housing plans
being implemented which residents and the city would normally oppose.
Ron Rubino and Sharon Esterley
2845 Alta Vista Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
This is "Catch 22" for the city. While a ballot measure was a hard-fought victory for residents
in the past, the new state managed general plan process and required RHMA units makes this
not feasible for this final Housing Element Implementation Plan approval.
I believe the City Council in the future could create incentives for VL, L and M priced affordable
housing at specific sites in our development plan that would reduce the need to rely on density
bonus units incentive. This includes a minimum inclusion requirement for all large projects over
50 units. This is an action the community should investigate and encourage. I believe the
exclusive use of bonus density units as an incentive for moderate priced units is not adequate
and problematic. It results in more across the board units being built than the city can
comfortably absorb and support in a planning cycle.
It would be helpful if City Planning staff and Council members explain to the public this is a State
caused emergency and we do not want the Builders' Solution under any circumstance to apply.
Further, as units are approved for VL, L and M priced units, the bonus density is less likely to be
used. I agree with stated strategies in the Housing Element including incentives for affordable
housing need to be utilized, identifying specific projects to an individual location, streamlining
permit process and reducing fees for affordable housing projects, obtaining funding/financial
assistance and creating private sector workforce housing projects using permit fees and private
donations to get started.
I recommend residents attend Tuesday's city council work session at 4 pm to see if staff and city
council address these issues and the need to finalize the Housing Element Implementation Plan.
Thank you.
Ron Rubino
2845 Alta Vista Dr
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Board of Director member for 10 years
Eastbluff Homeowners Community Association
NB Homeowner 37 Years
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 2:22 PM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Agenda Item No. 23 Housing Element Implementation
Attachments: R Rubino —Letter to City Council_Agenda Item 23 Houuing Element.pdf
From: Ron Rubino <ron(a)eastblufP.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 2:21:55 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>; Dept - City Council
<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Cc: Zdeba, Benjamin <bzdeba@newportbeachca.gov>; Murillo, Jaime <JMurillo@newportbeachca.gov>;
Jurjis, Seimone <siuriis@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Agenda Item No. 23 Housing Element Implementation
[EXTERN
content is
Good afternoon City Clerk and City Council members.
erand know the
This is Ron Rubino. I have been a HOA Board Director of the Eastbluff Homeowners'
Community Association for 10 years and Newport Beach resident for 37 years with my wife
Sharon Esterley. I am sending this email to express recommendations for the decision tonight on
the Housing Element issue Agenda Item #23.
I recommend the City Council vote to approve "Option No 2", which removes the need for
Charter Section 423 voter approval of the implementation plan.
The letter that follows provides an explanation of my thoughts on the matter and research I
completed. I believe the City's Planning Department has done an excellent job navigating the
City Council and residents through the General Plan and Housing Element processes. It is a very
complex undertaking and the many public committee meetings and workshops are appreciated.
The units mandated under the State's RHNA mandate and the various income levels is a real
challenge in our city of high land values and no open land for new tracts. We are now in a
"redevelopment" mode and creative solutions are required.
As you will read in my attached letter, I favor exploring alternatives for site
specific affordable housing projects, use process improvements and simplification for city
permits for affordable units, (like the current ADU's processes), reduce permit fees, and
inclusionary affordable housing requirement for projects of 50 or more units. Exclusive use of
density bonus to provide an incentive for the private sector to include affordable units is
problematic and results in an increased number of units across the board.
Thank you for considering my input.
IROTV
Ron Rubino
Ron Rubino and Sharon Esterley
2845 Alta Vista Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
July 23, 2024
Dear NB Friends and Neighbors,
I have followed the development of the City's General Plan and related Housing Element for the
past 4 years. Recently I have reviewed and asked knowledgeable people their opinion and
insights into how the final Housing Element numbers of units were determined and allocated to
each planning zone. I had questions regarding the units considered in the "pipeline" and the
impact on total units by density bonuses. I wanted to have a clear understanding of what the
potential total units were being approved in the General Plan.
There is a City Council meeting tonight to consider approval steps to implement the Housing
Element. The staff report and attachments are available online at the city's web site.
7/23/2024 City Council Meeting
o Study Session will begin at 4:00 p.m.
o Closed Session will follow Study Session
o Regular meeting will begin at 6:00 p.m.
I encourage all Newport resident to read this material and express your view to the City Council.
The approval of the final "Housing Element Implementation Plan" is under discussion. The City
Council is also asked to determine if a ballot measure under City Charter 423 (Greenlight) is
required.
I have reviewed prior city reports, attended General Plan workshops, discussed pros and cons of
voting or not voting on the final Housing Element with experience city staff and city council
members. My most recent effort was a workshop meeting with City Planning staff to gain a
better understanding of the State mandate deadlines for completion, penalties for
noncompliance, rationale on the "buffer units" and application of the "high -density bonus
units" in our plan.
Ron Rubino and Sharon Esterley
2845 Alta Vista Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
This review has convinced me to request the City Council vote to approve "Option No 2",
which removes the need for Charter Section 423 voter approval of the implementation plan.
This action is needed to complete the Housing Element and file with the state in time to meet
mandated completion dates for our 2021 to 2029 - 6th cycle General Plan Update. Missing this
deadline to avoid potential penalties and further loss of local control.
The General Plan Update and Housing Element are required to meet state mandates aimed to
increase affordable housing in all California cities. Newport Beach was assigned a new potential
housing unit goal of 4,485 RHMA mandated units. Over the past 4 yes public workshop and
City Council study sessions have been conducted and they resulted in adoption of the Newport
Beach Housing Element for 2021-2029 on September 13, 2022. Our City's plan approved by the
state provides a list of potential development sites in different zones of the city. The breakdown
of units by income categories approved by the City and State for Newport Beach as part of the
Housing Element after extensive public participation is:
1,456 Very low-income residents (VL) 1,456
930 units for low- income residents (L) 930
1,050 units for moderate income residents (M)
1,409 units for above -moderate income residents (AM)
Total 4,845 units
The deadline to complete the remaining implementation plan details and file with the State is
mid Feb 2025. The planning zones and unit allocations were previously approved by City
Council after extensive public participation. The city will be compliant with the State mandate
if the Implementation Plan being considered tonight is approved, finished and submitted to the
State by the mid -February deadline..
Ron Rubino and Sharon Esterley
2845 Alta Vista Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
I now have a better understanding of the logic which city staff has used to create the proposed
number of units and categories of affordability. The city does get credit for existing new housing
units described as the "pipeline.' The pipeline units do not increase State -mandated units.
They decrease all units across the board, but have a limited impact on the affordable categories,
leaving 2,707 affordable units remaining that must be accommodated and planned for.
These projects can potentially reduce the number of new housing units needed but must
include affordable housing at the units assigned to the zone in which they are permitted. If the
required affordable units are not in these developments, they remain a mandate and must be
allocated within the remaining units to make up the shortfall.
The city must show the state they have adequate units in the plan to reach very low (VL), low
(L), and moderate (M) priced affordable priced unit goals. An annual status report must be
submitted to the State to report progress, and if it is viewed by the State that the remaining
proposed units cannot be achieve in the housing planning cycle, the State Housing authorities
can rule the City's plan is out of compliance and require an amendment to the General Plan and
Housing Element under tight time constraint. If the city does not comply severe financial and
operational penalties can be imposed.
At this time new proposed development projects in Newport Beach are not required to include
affordable VL, L and M priced units. Newport Beach does not have a minimum inclusionary
requirement for affordable units in new development projects. The use of density bonus" is
the state's prescribed methodology to give an incentive for the private sector to include these
affordable units. This has the result of increasing the total number of units to gain required
affordable unit such as when density of 50 units per acre is increased 50% to 75 units per acre.
The city's charter requirement (Greenlight) for a ballot measure for voter approval of residential
construction of 100 units or more creates a timing problem. If residents vote no on the plan,
Ron Rubino and Sharon Esterley
2845 Alta Vista Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
insufficient time exists to amend the plan with public input and council approvals and have a
second election.
City staff has included "Option No. 2" in the agenda staff report. This approach approves the
necessary implementation requirements, but also includes a finding which makes the final
implementation steps a " Narrowly Focused Amendment" and makes charter section 423
voter approval not required.
Many residents are opposed to not having the entire Housing Element plan approved by voters.
I understand the desire to retain local control that was achieved by the Green light iniatives. I
now have come to realize that ballot approval of the Housing Element implementation plan is
not required. If a no vote were to result, there is not sufficient time to modify the plan, conduct
public hearings and conduct a second ballot measure. At that point, the noncompliance
penalties would apply and that is an extremely bad result for our city. The State has reported
extension of time to submit the completed Housing Element Plan will not be granted.
I also now believe the state's RHNA imposed mandate is a permanent land use requirement and
the community needs to find different methods to review projects and encourage VL, L and M
priced units to be included. Not approving and filing an approved "General Plan Housing
Element" to implement the 6th Cycle Housing Element would make the city noncompliant. The
State imposed penalties would apply and could result in the "Builders' Remedy" being
activated. This would result in automatic approval of building permit applications, even if they
do not comply with City zoning, setback, height regulations and design guidelines. This
unchecked building permit process under the Builders" Remedy would result in housing plans
being implemented which residents and the city would normally oppose.
Ron Rubino and Sharon Esterley
2845 Alta Vista Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
This is "Catch 22" for the city. While a ballot measure was a hard-fought victory for residents
in the past, the new state managed general plan process and required RHMA units makes this
not feasible for this final Housing Element Implementation Plan approval.
I believe the City Council in the future could create incentives for VL, L and M priced affordable
housing at specific sites in our development plan that would reduce the need to rely on density
bonus units incentive. This includes a minimum inclusion requirement for all large projects over
50 units. This is an action the community should investigate and encourage. I believe the
exclusive use of bonus density units as an incentive for moderate priced units is not adequate
and problematic. It results in more across the board units being built than the city can
comfortably absorb and support in a planning cycle.
It would be helpful if City Planning staff and Council members explain to the public this is a State
caused emergency and we do not want the Builders' Solution under any circumstance to apply.
Further, as units are approved for VL, L and M priced units, the bonus density is less likely to be
used. I agree with stated strategies in the Housing Element including incentives for affordable
housing need to be utilized, identifying specific projects to an individual location, streamlining
permit process and reducing fees for affordable housing projects, obtaining funding/financial
assistance and creating private sector workforce housing projects using permit fees and private
donations to get started.
I recommend residents attend Tuesday's city council work session at 4 pm to see if staff and city
council address these issues and the need to finalize the Housing Element Implementation Plan.
Thank you.
Ron Rubino
2845 Alta Vista Dr
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Board of Director member for 10 years
Eastbluff Homeowners Community Association
NB Homeowner 37 Years
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 23, 2024 3:12 PM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Rite t vote
From: Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2024 3:11:36 PM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Rite t vote
-----Original Message -----
From: Alice rosellini <rwindway@yahoo.com>
Sent: July 23, 2024 1:59 PM
To: Dept - City Council<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Rite t vote
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
I agree citizens of Newport have he ringer to decide as SOON suggests A Rosellini. 1629Antigua Way
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 24, 2024 8:14 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Support for City Council to Approve the General Plan
From: Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2024 8:13:32 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: FW: Support for City Council to Approve the General Plan
From: Tim Smith <tim@timsmithgroup.com>
Sent: July 23, 2024 7:51 PM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Support for City Council to Approve the General Plan
[EXTERNAL E
content is safe.
Dear Newport Beach City Council,
I am writing to express my strong support for the adoption of the General Plan Update on July 23rd to
maintain our community's character and local control over housing.
On September 13, 2022, the Newport Beach City Council approved the Housing Element in compliance
with California law. This plan, developed with extensive community input, directs future housing
development to job centers like the Airport Area rather than residential neighborhoods. Despite
concerted efforts to challenge these mandates in Sacramento, those efforts have been unsuccessful.
The approved housing plan is the culmination of extensive work by a 30-member General Plan Advisory
Committee, the Planning Commission, and the City Council, with more than a dozen public meetings held.
Now, nearly two years later, following another thorough public review process, the Council is ready to
adopt the mandatory measures to implement the Housing Element.
Failure to adopt this plan on July 23rd risks losing all local control over housing, including current
restrictions on height, density, and traffic trips. While some have suggested putting the implementing
elements on the November ballot, this step is not required and presents significant risks. If the ballot
measure fails, the State will take over our planning, leading to an immediate loss of local control and a
potential disruption of our community character.
To prevent this outcome, I respectfully recommend that the City Council adopt the General Plan updates
on July 23rd. Let us trust in citizen -driven planning and our local elected leaders over state control.
Sincerely,
Tim Smith
TIM SMITH CALRE #01346878
Principal, Tim Smith Real Estate Group
949.678.1070
tim(c_)timsmithgroup.com
timsmithrealestategroup.com
Facebook I Instagram I YouTube I Linkedln
840 Newport Center Drive #100
Newport Beach, CA 92660
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 24, 2024 8:14 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Biom
From: Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2024 8:13:52 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: Biom
-----Original Message -----
From: Kathleen O'Meara <komeara2001@yahoo.com>
Sent: July 23, 2024 7:58 PM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: Biom
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Please do not let Councilman Biom take away our right to vote on Housing Plans.
Thank you,
Kathleen O'Meara
12 Saint Pierre.
Sent from my iPhone
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 24, 2024 8:14 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: July 23 Council Vote -Housing Element
From: Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2024 8:14:11 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office
Subject: FW: July 23 Council Vote -Housing Element
-----Original Message -----
From: Ruth Kobayashi <ruthkobayashi@gmail.com>
Sent: July 23, 2024 8:07 PM
To: Dept - City Council <CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: July 23 Council Vote -Housing Element
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Council members,
Thank you for doing your very best to protect Newport Beach from Sacramento. To me, it was as simple
as that, even in the face of a very difficult vote.
I'm grateful for your love for our city.
Sincerely,
Ruth
iPhone Photographer
From: City Clerk's Office
Sent: July 24, 2024 8:15 AM
To: Mulvey, Jennifer
Subject: FW: housing plan
From: Biddle, Jennifer <JBiddle@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2024 8:15:02 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)
To: City Clerk's Office <CityClerk@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: FW: housing plan
From: Linda Watkins <Lnda@leadershipfortoday.com>
Sent: July 24, 2024 8:11 AM
To: O'Neill, William <woneill@newportbeachca.gov>; Dept - City Council
<CityCouncil@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: RE: housing plan
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK Links or attachments unless you recognize the sender and kn
gfe.
Dear Will and Council!
FYI
When the general plan first began, I attended all the meetings of the committee. I spoke up when the
subject was community outreach because I could see that the consulting company hired did not have a
clue what it would take to get the involvement of Newport residents needed for a serious endeavor. I
also attended the monthly education meetings sponsored by SPON with experts on general plan
development and representatives of other cities talking about their good and bad experiences. Brea, for
example, went all out in getting community involvement. Then came Covid and a shutdown of meetings
and some health issues for me. I did not pick up the thread again until now.
As a caring city resident I can say I never received a notice, an email or information about an event
regarding the general plan thereafter. With Seimone's listing of numbers in rebuttal to my comments,
no mention of quality, attendance or if it satisfied a desire for significant involvement of the community
—just numbers. I doubt he has any idea of the transparency required to be an inclusive city in today's
digital world. It isn't easy to keep an open and learning mindset today. Because my job has been helping
leaders be more effective and personally successful, I try to keep up and I know.
Jim Campbell once told me that the work load in the planning department, makes it impossible for them
to reach out to others or go to conferences for new ideas. Unfortunately, that is very short sighted.
Efficient perhaps but short sighted!
Linda Watkins
Executive Coach
(888) 721-0873
linda@leadershipfortoday.com
Leaders hipForToday.com
From: O'Neill, William <woneill@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2024 9:39 AM
To: Linda Watkins <linda@leadershipfortoday.com>
Subject: Re: housing plan
Yes, unanimously means that Joyvoted for it too.
The City Council agenda item 23 is what you're asking about:
https://newportbeach.legistarl.com/newportbeach/meetings/2024/7/3978_A City Council, _24-
07-23_ Age nda.pdf?id=c331334e-3c30-48cb-9025-853b412427dd
Will O'Neill
Newport Beach Mayor
From: Linda Watkins <linda leader shipfortoday.com>
Date: Friday, July 19, 2024 at 9:24 AM
To: O'Neill, William <woneill@newportbeachca.gov>
Subject: RE: housing plan
[EXTERP
content is
sender and know the
What is the council voting on this next Tuesday? I was involved and attending general plan meetings
early on pre-Covid but have not been involved since. Stu News seems to refer to the issue as Housing
element amendments. Is that the terminology you prefer? What is the problem from your point of
view? I expect unanimously means it would be everyone on council including Joy.
Linda Watkins
Executive Coach
(888) 721-0873
lindana leadershipfortoday.com
Leaders hipForToday.com
From: O'Neill, William <woneill@newportbeachca.gov>
Sent: Friday, July 19, 2024 9:01 AM
To: Linda Watkins <Lnda@leadershipfortoday.com>
Subject: Re: housing plan
The Housing Element was approved by the Council (unanimously, including Brenner) and certified by the
state's agency almost two years
ago: https://www.newportbeachca.gov/government/departments/community-development/planning-
division/general-plan-codes-and-regulations/general-plan-update/housing-element-screencheck-draft-
march-10-2020
Mayor Will O'Neill
woneill@newportbeachca.gov
100 Civic Center Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
On Jul 19, 2024, at 8:57 AM, Linda Watkins <Lnda@leadershipfortoday.com> wrote:
[EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT CLICK Links or attachments unless you recognize the
If all else fails to rewrite the NB housing plan to a more realistic number, please vote to
allow the residents to vote. It would be lovely if the residents actually had a choice.
Linda Watkins
Executive Coach
<image001.jpg>
(888) 721-0873
lindaro)leadershipfortoday.com
Leaders hipForToday.com