city council district 6 v corona del mar & newport coast
council member v newport beach, california
newsletter: february 2010
Between the state and the courts I’m in a pretty crabby mood.
Having a cold doesn’t help. First in my litany of complaints:
Having gotten a number of emails from unhappy residents, and having had my own profane (on his part) run-in, I asked the city attorney if we could tighten our ordinance on solicitors which currently lets them rap on your door as late as 9 pm. Our courts, in their infinite wisdom, have determined that any restriction earlier than 9 pm offends the first amendment. Now why 8 would offend more than 9, I don’t know, but such is the law (which, you will recall, Mr. Bumble declared an ass). The council has asked the city attorney to come back with anything that might help. Meanwhile, if you post a “No Soliciting” sign, nobody should come to your door–not pushy magazine salesmen, not eager-to-please candidates–no one. We also asked our attorneys to look at publications, etc., thrown on doorsteps. While we are waiting an answer on that one, you can go to www.ecocycle.org/junkmail
for some ideas.
Gripe #2: The state, which not even in jest can I accuse of infinite wisdom or even severely limited smarts most of the time, has a new plan for all marinas of ten boats or more. The motive is good–clean water–but the method . . . Under this new plan, marinas would be responsible for daily observation of the water and the boaters to assure good boating practices are taking place. They have to take water quality and sediment samples which must be analyzed by a lab, do monthly reports, quantify everything for an annual report–the list goes on and on. Estimated cost to the marinas in our harbor–$7.5 million/year. Here’s my problem: At the end of a couple of years, we’ll have spent lots of money, we’ll have lots of data (which we already have) and virtually no improvement in water quality. We’ll be following this as it goes through the public comment period in the hopes that we can make it more sensible.
The state budget nightmare continues, showing a $14.4 billion shortfall in 2010-11 and with similar amounts in the succeeding years. This means the state will once again be casting its covetous eye on city revenues. The recently-issued city Comprehensive Annual Financial Report estimates that such raids have cost Newport Beach taxpayers in excess of $89 million since 1993. We will work with other cities to forestall negative state actions.
EARLY RETIREMENT–WHAT IT MEANS
With revenues still limping, the city offered early retirement to a number of employees. Each department reviewed its needs so that any departures wouldn’t be crippling, but centuries of experience and knowledge walked out with these people. The good news is that there will be significant savings at a time when every dollar counts, and that on a day-to-day basis residents shouldn’t notice a difference. However, where the difference will be felt is in the extraneous happenings such as a big storm when the quick cleanup that General Services, for example, has always prided itself on, will not be as quick.
Bayside Drive has one lane closed while OCSD improves the sewer system. This means that those of us who prefer the scenic route will be detoured at Carnation to PCH. Unfortunately, the city will be doing some repaving in that section of town which means that there will be some slowing there as well, although I have been assured that lanes will remain open and that there will be flag men (I know it should be flag people, but it sounds like a cult) helping out. The signals at Marguerite and Poppy will be seeing a few more cars as a result.
FUTURE TOPIC SUGGESTIONS
This is a two-way process, so please don’t hesitate to contact me with your ideas and opinions.
Council Member Nancy Gardner
QUALITY OF LIFE Advocate FOR NEWPORT BEACH
City of Newport Beach | 3300 Newport Blvd | Newport Beach, CA 92663
Phone: 949.644.3004 | EMAIL: email@example.com
Copyright 2010 v Nancy Gardner v All Rights Reserved