Hello again!

The City Council is back in action tomorrow night and so am I. Thankfully, we’ve got a short but eventful agenda for tomorrow night.

First, right of the bat, Harper Watch continues! Remember way back in February when he said he would be stepping down? Well, maybe he’s had second thoughts, because we’re all the way to June and he’s still on the masthead. And Zooming in from Carson City, no less.

Quick election aside: whether he goes sooner or later though doesn’t seem to matter as, unlike fellow incumbents John Stephens (Mayor), Loren Gameros (District 2) and Jeff Harlan (District 6), Council Member Harper hasn’t pulled papers to run again. The 2024 election is already looking to be relatively interesting thanks to James Peters throwing his hat into the ring for Mayor. If it is the same James Peters quoted in this Orange County Register piece from 2022, then we will have an interesting election indeed. Mr. Peters looks to be, ahem, passionate about election integrity. Meanwhile, Council Member Harper may be breathing easier knowing that Mike Buley, a local attorney, has thrown his hat into the the ring for his seat. Mr. Buley’s Facebook page suggests he’s a pretty conservative guy. So at least we know it won’t be a liberal lovefest in 2024.

Back to the agenda.

Other than the consent calendar, which I’ll have a bit of a follow up piece on tomorrow, there are only three items of significant business: first, the reauthorization of the business improvement area that underpins Travel Costa Mesa; second, the authorization of the changes to the One Metro West development agreement that was discussed and approved at the Planning Commission level; and third, the 2024-2025 operating and capital improvement budget.

Regarding the business improvement area, or BIA, there isn’t much to say about this one. For those of you who are not familiar, the BIA is basically a city/trade organization that collects funds from participating hotels and uses them to promote tourism through Travel Costa Mesa. This approval is effectively a legally mandated formality that cities must go through every year to levy the annual assessment associated with a BIA. This one should sail through with little fanfare.

Which is great because I’m sure the next item, the updates to the One Metro West development agreement requested by its developer, Rose Equities, will likely be very contentious indeed. I’ve already discussed my thoughts on this one when it came up at the Planning Commission and I don’t have much to add to those thoughts now. I am curious, however, to see how many people show up to protest the development, specifically its request that its approval ordinances be altered to remove the public vote condition under Measure Y.

When I wrote about it a few weeks ago, I mused that one reason why getting too worked up over the exemption from Measure Y’s public vote requirement was that, if we were going to be sticklers, Rose Equities could just withdraw and re-apply the project under the new Measure K rules (which do not require a public vote). However, looking at it again, the case is even simpler than that: One Metro West was never entitled under Measure Y. In fact, the enabling ordinances that would have permitted One Metro West to gain its entitlements were never formally adopted by the City Council, as they were conditional on OMW gaining public approval under Measure Y. It is that condition of ordinance approval, not Measure Y itself, that the City Council is seeking to change, which is perfectly within its power to do.

But anyway, I expect this one to bring the emotions into the chamber. It will pass, likely over Harper’s no-vote.

And finally, the City Council will get its first, full look at the 2024-2025 operating budget. Followers of this blog know that, per the norm, they’ve already gotten to take peek in a prior study session. Since that time, I was heartened to hear at the last Parks and Community Services Commission meeting that some of the commissioners were sympathetic to the issues I raised about the dismal state of our parks funding. In fact, PACS Commissioner Shayanne Wright took issue with the lack of prioritization of neighborhood parks projects and specifically recommended that about $400,000 worth of those projects — including Harper Park and Marina View Park — be funded in this year’s Capital Improvement Program, rather than waiting until 2025-2026.

Now, where oh where could the City Council see Commissioner Wright’s comments? Sadly, the PACS Commission’s recommendations were reduced to a single line, buried deep within the Agenda Report: “The PACS Commission recommended to the City Council to prioritize the following parks CIP projects: Gisler Park, Harper Park, Lions Park, and Marina View Park.” Given that the PACS Commission reviewed the CIP for a solid hour and half, I don’t think this one-liner really does its feedback justice. And unsurprisingly, not only does the Agenda Report not address the concerns about park funding raised at the PACS Commission, the proposed CIP completely ignores its recommendations. Not a single one of the projects listed by Commissioner Wright — all of which were approved for 2024-2025 in last year’s budget, but were taken off by staff — was brought into the proposed CIP budget that was included in the Agenda packet for this meeting.

Hopefully members of the City Council do their own due diligence and go watch the tape of the PACS Commission meeting. Maybe then they can get a better understanding of what the Commissioners discussed. It is the City Council’s own commission, after all.