HomeMy WebLinkAboutIV(b)_Additional Materials Received_MosherSeptember 4, 2024, GPAC Agenda Item IV.b Comments
The following comments on items on the Newport Beach General Plan Advisory Committee agenda are
submitted by: Jim Mosher (jimmosher@yahoo.com ), 2210 Private Road, Newport Beach 92660
(949-548-6229)
Item IV.b. Vision Statement Progress Draft
In my earlier comments, found on page 23 of Attachment 2, I criticized the sub-items listed under
the “guiding principles” in the original draft as not being phrased as principles, but rather seemed
to be statements of desired outcomes that might more appropriately belong in the vision
statement. As a result, I see everything that appeared under “Guiding Principles” has been
renamed “Guiding Values and Priorities.”
I am not sure I see the logic of that. Based on a review of other cities’ general plans, this would
place Newport Beach in a tiny minority of GPAC’s that attempt to articulate the general principles
underpinning their policy recommendations, yet are reluctant to call them principles. In fact some,
even before attempting to formulate a vision for their city, have adopted principles to guide their
general plan update process (as opposed to its product) – see, for example,Oakland, whose
process guiding principles we might be wise to review.
Regarding the draft Vision Statement, on page 28 of Attachment 2, I notice GPUSC member
Brown was concerned that the statement “seems to be a discussion of what has been done in the
past,” rather than a “future vision.” I think this is explained in the preceding paragraph, which says
“The Vision Statement provides a conceptual picture of a future Newport Beach in the year 2050.”
So, like the current Vision Statement, it is looking backwards by design. However, I had the same
reaction when I read it. So, for those us who skipped over the introduction, I think it would be very
helpful to edit the proposed Vision Statement so it begins “Newport Beach in 2050 is renowned
as a …”
Beyond that, I think other improvements could be made to the wording, but as I indicated in my
prior comments, it has to first be ensured that the statement reflects the vision of the full GPAC,
and ideally of the community at large. The Vision subcommittee can work on the presentation and
wording, but as to the content, it needs direction from all.
Returning to the principles, I think it is important to have both principles guiding the update
process and overarching principles guiding the content of the policy recommendations. And to
me, the guiding principles should be at a very high level, creating a framework, or kind of
underlying philosophy, within which the goals and policies of the individual elements all fit. Those
elements can contain their own more specific priorities, goals and policies, and will ideally
indicate the broader principles that guided their creation.
Of the general plans I examined, I found Humboldt County articulated a number of principles in
this vein. For example, their Chapter 1 sets forth such guiding principles as “Ensure that public
policy is reflective of the needs of the citizenry of a democratic society as expressed by the
citizens themselves” and “Adhere to practical strategies that can be implemented utilizing
constructive cooperation and common sense.” Their general plan is also interesting in that it has
Public Guide and Governance Policy chapters that, like those entitled “elements,” contain their
own goals, policies and implementation measures for such things as continued public
General Plan Advisory Committee - September 4, 2024 IV.b - Additional Materials Received
September 4, 2024, GPAC agenda Item IV.b comments - Jim Mosher Page 2 of 2
engagement and how the planning process and planning commission will function.Culver City
(among others?) also has a Governance and Leadership Element (in addition to Guiding
Principles) within their very recently adopted general plan.
I have previously mentioned the Town of Gridley, for which (unlike Humboldt County and Culver
City) the goals, policies and implementation strategies sections of each of its general plan
elements (look under “Planning Services”) is preceded by a list of the Guiding Principles that their
creation followed. That repetition seems important to me to ensure the principles are not
something relegated to a vision statement and subsequently ignored.
To reiterate my comments in Attachment 2, most of the “Guiding Principles,” now proposed to be
re-branded “Guiding Values and Priorities,” in the draft document being reviewed here strike me
as fragments from a vision statement or goals that belong in the individual elements. Most don’t
seem to be stating a sweeping philosophy the community hopes will underpin and tie together
everything in those individual elements. In addition, they are presented without evidence they
have been widely discussed or agreed to, and despite being very numerous, they fail to provide
guidance on many issues where guidance is needed, such as the community’s wishes with
respect to supporting tourism or businesses.
As a result, I continue to think this document needs a lot of work, and I hope it will get some
direction from the GPAC as a whole. Whatever results, I think it needs to be reviewed by the City
Council so that the policy development guided by the vision, values and priorities it presents (or
guiding principles, if those are restored) isn’t a wasted effort.
General Plan Advisory Committee - September 4, 2024 IV.b - Additional Materials Received