Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWITHDRAWN City Councilmember Item - Councilmember Posey - Ad CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH City Council Interoffice Communication To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Me bees From: Mike Posey, City Council Member '; Date: August 5, 2019 Subject: CITY COUNCIL MEMBER ITEM F SR THE AUGUST 5, 2019 CITY COUNCIL MEETING —ADOPTING AN ANNUAL WORK PLAN FOR THE FINANCE COMMISSION STATEMENT OF ISSUE: The City's Finance Commission as codified in the Municipal Code (Section 2.109.050) serves ,.only in an advisory capacity and not be vested with final authority in the establishment of priorities or the expenditure of funds." Additionally, the Finance Commission has the duty to: 1. Review and make recommendations regarding: a. Fiscal Policies, Financial Planning, and Funding b. Annual Adopted Budget c. Proposals related to financial matters; d. Fiscal impacts of major projects; e. Service contracts on an as-needed basis; and f. Proposed State or Federal Legislation which may impact the City's finances. 2. Perform such other duties or studies as may be directed by the City Council. I believe that it would be helpful for the Council and community would benefit from the Finance Commission following an Annual Work Plan set forth by the City Council in January of each year. This Work Plan could be amended as needed based on the Strategic Goals set forth by the City Council. Further, if the Finance Commission wished to study an area outside of the Council-adopted Work Plan, the Finance Commission could seek the permission of the Council prior to doing so. Items in the Work Plan could include: 1. Making recommendations in regards to our Unfunded Pension Liabilities and Other Post- Employment Benefits (OPEB). 2. Studying how the Cal-PERS Board's ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) 5- Year Strategic Plan may impact Cal-PERS rate of return, including extrapolating those gains or losses to Huntington Beach's Cal-PERS funds. 3. Researching funding alternatives for a Navigation Center's purchase, lease, or operations 4. Making recommendations as to AB 8's impacts on Huntington Beach's property tax receipts when compared with other large California cities (i.e. the "donor county" concept) 5. Making recommendations as to how to best maintain our infrastructure (including parks) in the long term. 6. Ensuring full cost-recovery on special events 7. Analyzing our fee schedules; and 8. Recommending new revenue opportunities. �'Lo RECOMMENDED ACTION: Direct the City Manager and the City Attorney to amend the Municipal Code Section 12.109 to reflect (generally) that the Finance Commission: 1. Advise the City Council on financial matters related to the City's finances as directed by the City Council. The scope of each task/project assigned to the Commission by the City Council will be defined by the City Council via the Council's adoption of a formal Work Plan at least once each year, but the Work Plan can be amended from time to time. Return to the City Council in 90 days with a proposed Municipal Code change. xc: Dave Kiff, Interim City Manager Travis Hopkins,Acting Assistant City Manager Robin Estanislau, City Clerk Michael Gates, City Attorney UjfTHDPA1A1A1 City of Huntington Beach File #: 19-826 MEETING DATE: 8/5/2019 Submitted by Councilmember Posey - Adopting an Annual Work Plan for the Finance Commission STATEMENT OF ISSUE: The City's Finance Commission, as codified in the Municipal Code (Section 2.109.050), serves "only in an advisory capacity and not be vested with final authority in the establishment of priorities or the expenditure of funds." Additionally, the Finance Commission has the duty to: 1. Review and make recommendations regarding: a. Fiscal Policies, Financial Planning, and Funding b. Annual Adopted Budget c. Proposals related to financial matters; d. Fiscal impacts of major projects; e. Service contracts on an as-needed basis; and f. Proposed State or Federal Legislation which may impact the City's finances. 2. Perform such other duties or studies as may be directed by the City Council. I believe that it would be helpful for the Council and the community would benefit from the Finance Commission following an Annual Work Plan set forth by the City Council in January of each year. This Work Plan could be amended as needed based on the Strategic Goals set forth by the City Council. Further, if the Finance Commission wished to study an area outside of the Council-adopted Work Plan, the Finance Commission could seek the permission of the Council prior to doing so. Items in the Work Plan could include: 1. Making recommendations in regards to our Unfunded Pension Liabilities and Other Post- Employment Benefits (OPEB). 2. Studying how the Cal-PERS Board's ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) 5-Year Strategic Plan may impact Cal-PERS rate of return, including extrapolating those gains or losses to Huntington Beach's Cal-PERS funds. 3. Researching funding alternatives for a Navigation Center's purchase, lease, or operations 4. Making recommendations as to AB 8's impacts on Huntington Beach's property tax receipts when compared with other large California cities (i.e. the "donor county" concept) 5. Making recommendations as to how to best maintain our infrastructure (including parks) in the long term. 6. Ensuring full cost-recovery on special events 7. Analyzing our fee schedules; and 8. Recommending new revenue opportunities. Direct the City Manager and the City Attorney to amend the Municipal Code Section 12.109 to reflect (generally) that the Finance Commission: City of Huntington Beach Page 1 of 2 Printed on 8/1/2019 All) „ v 1-76& 7-/M&' v powered by Legistar— File #: 19-826 MEETING DATE: 8/5/2019 1. Advise the City Council on financial matters related to the City's finances as directed by the City Council. The scope of each task/project assigned to the Commission by the City Council will be defined by the City Council via the Council's adoption of a formal Work Plan at least once each year, but the Work Plan can be amended from time to time. Return to the City Council in 90 days with a proposed Municipal Code change. City of Huntington Beach Page 2 of 2 Printed on 8/1/2019 powered by Legistar- Esparza, Patty From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Friday, August 02, 2019 8:10 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: Keep the Finance Commission the way it is AGENDA COMMENT From:Taylor Haug<hb.city.tax@gmail.com> Sent: Friday,August 02, 2019 7:33 AM To:CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Keep the Finance Commission the way it is I urge City Council to no recommend action on 19-826 proposed by Mr. Posey. These people are nominated by you, the City Council, and surve a purpose to the people you serve. PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE ITS POWER. Thank you, Renato SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Fleet Data: Agenda Item No.: Esparza, Patty From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Friday, August 02, 2019 8:10 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: Do Not Remove Power From the Finance Commision AGENDA COMMENT -----Original Message----- From: Taylor Haug <taylorhaug@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, August 02, 2019 5:07 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Do Not Remove Power From the Finance Commision It was evident the citizens of HB, you all represent, wanted to keep the Finance Commission as is from the blowback on the June 3rd proposed ordinance. Why is Mr. Posey trying to do more of the same? It makes no sense. I urge you to please keep the Commission as is. Tax paying Homeowner, Taylor SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Date: Agenda Ibm NO., a —� ' Esparza, Patty From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Friday, August 02, 2019 9:39 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: Proposed change to Financial Commission responsibilities AGENDA COMMENT -----Original Message----- From: Shammy Dingus<shammyd@mac.com> Sent: Friday, August 02, 2019 9:31 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Proposed change to Financial Commission responsibilities Dear Council Members: The proposed changes to the city Municipal Code regarding the scope of responsibilities of the Financial Commission are absolutely unacceptable. The council already has enough influence on the Commission through its power to make the appointments. The council certainly has the right to ignore the advice of the Finance Commission, but it should NOT have the right to SILENCE them, or curtail their ability to investigate ALL the implications of financial decisions. In this respect the Finance Commission provides an important oversight function on behalf of residents. Just the suggestion of quashing that voice is suspicious. It's very hard to understand how these proposed changes would benefit the RESIDENTS of the city. Carolyn "Shammy" Dingus 8932 Modesto Circle, Unit 1209E Huntington Beach, CA 92646 shammyd@mac.com SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date:'. f --=� Agenda item NO., 6 1 Esparza, Patty From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Friday, August 02, 2019 12:51 PM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: Financial Commission Importance: High AGENDA COMMENT From: Gary Tarkington <garytarkington@msn.com> Sent: Friday, August 02, 2019 12:30 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Financial Commission Importance: High To the Huntington Beach City council, I am very angry the Michael Posey thinks that it is a good idea to restrict the Financial Commission to have NO POWER UNLESS DIRECTED BY AT LEAST 4 CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS!! This is a direct assault on the citizens of HB. Posey wants to TAKE AWAY transparency and TAKE AWAY citizen input....this is disgraceful!! I implore you NOT TO LET THIS HAPPEN!! Ann Tarkington Huntington Beach SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date:_ O - S -/9 Agenda Item No.,• i Esparza, Patty From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Friday, August 02, 2019 12:52 PM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: City Finance committee AGENDA COMMENT From: Mike Mengel <mjmengell@verizon.net> Sent: Friday, August 02, 2019 12:21 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: City Finance committee Esteemed members of the Huntington Beach City Council, Regarding Item 22 of the City Council Agenda for Monday 8/5/2019, 1 would encourage you to vote against this item The Finance Committee serves an important role in the city's governance by providing an independent view of city finances and provides an important level of transparency to city government. City Council already is viewed with a heavy level of suspicion in the way it conducts its business, and any attempt to add additional secrecy or reduced transparency is just poor governance. The city council cannot suffer from any more mistrust. Voting yes on this agenda item will just increase the mistrust. Michael Mengel 16581 Grunion Lane #304 Huntington Beach, CA 92649 mimengel1(@-verizon.net (714) 846-7196 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Dte: Agenda Item No. �-• — i Switzer, Donna From: Jerry Barry <jbatgma@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 9:22 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Item fir&22 "I urge you to oppose Agenda Item nd 22. Both items will cause irreparable harm to the citizens of Huntington Beach". -Jerry B. SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meebng Date: /2 Agenda Item No.- 1 Switzer, Donna From: Rita Barry <rrbarrylS@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 9:41 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: oppose item)-1& 22- I urge you to oppose items &�- They are not good for the city and I oppose their passage. Rita Barry Resident of HB for over 50 years! Sent from my Whone 31,-'PPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meebng Date: 8/57// l Agenda Item No.- i Switzer, Donna From: Janet Bean <janetbeandesigns@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 6:30 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Opposition to Agenda Item�Xand 22 As a concerned citizen of Huntington Beach, some of the current members on the council are out to undermine the hard working individuals of this once great town. Please vote in opposition to Agenda Item ands Thank you, Janet Janet Bean Designs and Services 714-362-7899 Creating unique pieces of jewelry and uniting couples in matrimony with love and under the watchful eyes of my guardian angels. Janet Bean Designs and Janet Bean Wedding Off iciant on Facebook SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meetng Date: FS 1 s11�2 ,agenda Item No.-- c� I Switzer, Donna From: Dombo,Johanna Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 7:44 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: AGENDA COMMENT -----Original Message----- From: Kathleen Brown <heykathybrown@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 9:49 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: I am writing to urge you.to fight items-rand 22 this Monday. They both sound corrupt! Thank you, Kathleen Brown Sent from my iPhone SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: Y/5-// Agenda Item No.- o%2 0`07' 1 Switzer, Donna From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 7:47 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: City Council meeting, Agenda Item #22 - Finance Commission AGENDA COMMENT From: Gino J. Bruno <gbruno@socal.rr.com> Sent: Saturday, August 03, 2019 3:31 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Cc: Kiff, Dave <dave.kiff@surfcity-hb.org>; Gates, Michael <Michael.Gates@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: City Council meeting, Agenda Item #22 - Finance Commission City Council Members: Please leave our Finance Commission alone! The City's Finance Commission is established by our Municipal Code (Section 2.109.030) which lays out its purpose: "The Finance Commission shall act in an advisory capacity to the City Council in matters pertaining to financial planning." HBMC Section 2.109.40 is also pretty clear about what its duties are, namely: SUPPLEMENTAL "A. Review and make recommendations regarding: COMMUNICATION "1. Fiscal Policies, Financial Planning and Funding; Meeting Date: 2f'Jr�L1 "2. Annual adopted budget; "3. Proposals related to financial matters; Agenda Item No., 'A. Fiscal impacts of major projects; "5. Service contracts on an as-needed basis; and "6. Proposed State or Federal Legislation which impacts the City's finances. "B. Perform such other duties or studies as may be directed by the City Council. " As I envision it, the Finance Commission is akin to the Orange County Grand Jury, in the sense that it serves as (i) a citizens' watchdog over the City's finances, and (ii) it can investigate and analyze any topic it wants related to our City's finances. Then, it makes its findings and recommendations to the City Council. The City Council then can either (a) adopt the findings and recommendations as presented, or (b) modify or amend the recommendations, and adopt the recommendations as modified or amended, or (c) deny the recommendations entirely. It's up to the City Council. The proposal of Council Member Posey on Monday's City Council meeting Agenda would emasculate the duties of the Finance Commission as laid out in the Code, and limit those duties to only following the dictates of at least four City Council members. The "watchdog" days of the citizens' Finance Commission would be over, and the Commission would be exclusively under the control and direction of the City Council majority. 1 Mr. Posey's desire to have the Council adopt a formal Work Plan at least once a year for projects to be addressed by the Finance Commission clearly may be done under the current Section 2.109.40.B. Don't restrict, hamper, limit or constrain the work of the citizens' Finance Commission. Leave the Finance Commission alone! Gino J. Bruno Huntington Beach 2 Switzer, Donna From: Dombo,Johanna Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 11:04 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy;CITY COPCN L Subject: FW:Agenda items 21,22 Or August 5 meeting AGENDA COMMENT From: Nancy Buchoz<nancybuchoz@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday,August 05,2019 11:01 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:Agenda items 21,22 for August 5 meeting Dear Mayor Peterson and City Council Members, I am writing to share my opposition for the following agenda items at tonights city council meeting. I oppose agenda ite�2-f because I believe that CCA's can put the city in a position of potential financial risk because of the enormous costs to create such programs and the liability which would fall on the taxpayers if such contracts were to go bad. Which is always possible. Also, agenda item 21 can't promise that it will actually add additional green energy. Finally, I oppose this agenda item on the basis it would create more government and thus the potential for more utility rates. I believe it could jeopardize tax paying citizens with too much risk. I dont believe it would benefit our city at this time if a Secondly I also oppose agenda item 2 n�e basis I believe it would create less transparency in an area of our city government that frankly needs it the most! A pre conceived work plan would eliminate the ability for oversight and participation by the Finance commission which is in place to do just that, BE AN OVERSIGHT AND KEEP THE CITYS FINANCES PROTECTED. Please continue to allow the Finance Commission to do its appointed job of helping keep the city on the right track financially. The commissioners are citizens appointed by Council members so it makes no sense to cut off their involvement by having a system that is unable to be advised upon. Thank you for the consideration to these two agenda items. We appreciate your service. SUPPLEMENTAL Respectfully, COMMUNICATION Nancy Buchoz Meeftg Date: V5111 Agenda bm 14o., GI- <32 Switzer, Donna From: Sylvia Calhoun <skc347@yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 11:41 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Agenda item>Zand 22 Please OPPOSE agenda items and 221 Sylvia Calhoun. Resident since 1982. We need more simple and more transparent, not less! Thank you. Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: Agenda Mem No.- Switzer, Donna From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 10:47 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW:AGENDA ITEM,71 and ITEM 22 AGENDA COMMENT From:Alina Clougherty<alina_clougherty@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 10:46 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council urfcity=hb.org> Subject:AGENDA ITEM 21 and ITEM 22 Dear Mayor Peterson and City Council: I would like for you to vote No on the two agenda items: #21 and #22 slated for Monday's city council meeting. I have read up on these issues and it is a bad idea for our city. Both take away citizen oversight on very important issues that impact our lives. Again, please vote No on Item #21 and #2Z.,' Thank you, Alina Clougherty SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meetlng Agenda Rem No.: i Switzer, Donna From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 11:39 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW:Agenda 21 & 22 AGENDA COMMENT -----Original Message----- From: Marietta Daedelow<spide4@aol.com> Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 11:32 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Agenda-24&22 I urge you to oppose agenda items24433. Both items will cause irreparable harm to the citizens of Huntington Beach. Thank You, Marietta Daedelow Sent from my Whone SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: 5�/S// Agenda ftem No.' i Switzer, Donna From: Billg-Primary <Billg@socal.rr.com> Sent: Sunday,August 04, 2019 1:03 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: OPPOSED TO AGENDA ITEM and 22 Huntington Beach City Council, I urge altmembers of the Huntington Beach City Council to oppose Agenda ItemsI' ands These items will cause irreparable harm to the citizens of Huntington Beach. Respectfully, Bill Gailing O Virus-free. www.avast.com SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Agenda ftem No.- Switzer, Donna From: Susan Gary <susangaryphotos@aol.com> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 9:18 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Agenda Items 2,k�and 22 Dear Mayor Peterson and Council Members, I am writing to urge that you OPPOSE Agenda Items 21 and 22 and will provide more information below. AGENDA ITEM 21- Feasibility Study for Community Choice Energy (aka CCA) I had hoped this item would have permanently"died" a couple years ago when, following a Study Session, it was exposed that CCA's are not only a BAD idea for cities, but frankly very dangerous. Since the time of that Study Session, I have been following this topic very closely and can report that there is yet to be even one success among cities who have attempted this massive city-government-expansion. Cities continue to expose and reject this bad idea especially knowing that the only winners in the newest cottage industry of CCA's are the Consultants, Attorneys and, of course, Southern California Edison who conveniently get out of all their bad contracts and transfers the bad-contracts to cities who adopt CCA's. At the end of the day, cities who adopt CCA's are left with: 1. A whole new EXPANDED layer of city government. 2. No additional "green" energy(since CCA's are merely a transfer of paper-certificates from one agency to another). 3. Potential loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars of start up funding and bad contracts. But perhaps the single most important reason to oppose even the mere idea of a CCA is the fact that NO City Council should given more ability to RAISE OUR UTILITY RATES.....PERIOD! There is absolutely no positive reason to shift the current Southern California Edison responsibility to city staff and City Council unless the end-goal is seeking a new"Slush Fund". May I remind all of you that the recent council majority vote to purchase the Pipeline building, without proper due diligence has landed the city in a lawsuit.....I think it is safe to say that neither City Council nor staff should be afforded additional expansion or responsibility for ANYTHING, let alone something that could permanently jeopardize the citi n_s__of Huntington Beach. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS CONCEPT. AGENDA ITEM 22-Adopt Annual Work Plan for Finance Commission 1 As I previous wrote to you after the last attempt to destroy the Finance Commission, I find it hard to believe that we have arrived at a point where certain council would be advocating for LESS transparency and LESS oversight. As someone who attends most Finance Commission and many other meetings, it is apparent that there is simply NO WAY to articulate an annual work plan unless the goal is to neuter and silence this commission! If we are truly interested, as a city, in operating efficiently and transparently, all options for oversight must be "on the table" at all times! Whether or not a given council choses to look at the material coming from Finance Commission is and always has been optional, but to pre-identify a Work Plan is the complete rem 1'1;ENIEWA;k.d participation in the finances of our city which should be the MOST TRANSPARENT aspe b p NVeoeltit, I URGE ALLOFYOURTO OPPOSETHIS DANGEROUS PRECIDENT. V1I��I1IL�rrMA,�i !! Respectfully, Meeting Date. /s//2 Jon and Susan Gary Sent from my iPhone Agenda trim No.- 2 1 22Cp t Switzer, Donna From: Nancy Griley <nangriley@gmail.com> Sent: Monday,August 05, 2019 8:39 AM To: citycouncil@hermosocli org; CITY COUNCIL Subject: No on items 2�and 22 Dear City Council, I am a concerned citizen and property owner in Hermosa Beach. I'm writing to urge you to vote No on Agenda item a feasibility study for CCA. This was addressed in the past and it is still a bad idea. Do not waste the money. In addition, I urge you to vote no on Item 2 regarding the Finance Committee. Thank you, Nancy Griley 120 28th St Hermosa Beach CA 90254 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Agenda ham NO.' a� Switzer, Donna From: William Hennerty Jr. <billhennerty@yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday,August 04, 2019 11:59 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Oppose items - and 22. City Council, I am emailing you to let you know that I am oppose items W and 22. Thank you, William Hennerty Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Matt Date:_ S/S//9 Agenda Mem f4m—� /GI— 92 1 Switzer, Donna From: Mary Hiber <beachldy53@aol.com> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 6:24 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: OPPOSE AGENDA ITEMS � AND #22! ATTENTION ALL CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS! I oppose both agenda items#21 and #22 because neither one is fiscally wise for our community. We don't need our city controlling our SCE billing and pricing-]-do not see any reason to make any changes with out city Finance Committee, as they are doing very well and no changes are necessary. Sincerely, Mary L. Hiber 50 year resident of Huntington Beach Sent from my iPad SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meebng Dato: Agenda item No.: i Switzer, Donna From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 12:01 PM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM #21 AND #22 AGENDA COMMENT From:Sherrey Hollander<quantum_sherrey@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, August OS, 2019 11:59 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org; Subject: CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM-#21-AND 22 Dear Mayor and Huntington Beach City Council Members, I am writing to urge that you OPPOSE Agenda Items 21 and 22 and will provide more information below. AGENDA ITEM 21 - Feasibility Study for Community Choice Energy (aka CCA) I had hoped this item would have permanently "died" a couple years ago when, following a Study Session, it was exposed that CCA's are not only a BAD idea for cities, but frankly very dangerous. Since the time of that Study Session, I have been following this topic very closely and can report that there is yet to be even one success among cities who have attempted this massive city-government-expansion. Cities continue to expose and reject this bad idea especially knowing that the only winners in the newest cottage industry of CCA's are the Consultants, Attorneys and, of course, Southern California Edison who conveniently get out of all their bad contracts and transfers the bad-contracts to cities who adopt CCA's. At the end of the day, cities who adopt CCA's are left with: 1. A whole new EXPANDED layer of city government. 2. No additional "green" energy (since CCA's are merely a transfer of paper-certificates from one agency to another). 3. Potential loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars of start up funding and bad contracts. But perhaps the single most important reason to oppose even the mere idea of a CCA is the fact that NO City Council should given more ability to RAISE OUR UTILITY RATES.....PERIOD! There is absolutely no positive reason to shift the current Southern California Edison responsibility to city staff and City Council unless the end-goal is seeking a new "Slush Fund". May I remind all of you that the recent council majority vote to purchase the Pipeline building, without proper due diligence has landed the city in a lawsuit.....I think it is safe to say that neither City Council nor staff should be afforded additional expansion or responsibility for ANYTHING, let alone something that could permanently jeopardize the citizens of Huntington Beach. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS CONCEPT. AGENDA ITEM 22 - Adopt Annual Work Plan for Finance Commission As I previous wrote to you after the last attempt to destroy the Finance Commission, I find it hard to believe that we have arrived at a point where certain council would be advocating for LESS transparency and LESS 1 oversight. As someone who attends most Finance Commission and many other meetings, it is apparent that there is simply NO WAY to articulate an annual work plan unless the goal is to neuter and silence this commission! If we are truly interested, as a city, in operating efficiently and transparently, all options for oversight must be "on the table" at all times! Whether or not a given council choses to look at the material coming from Finance Commission is and always has been optional, but to pre-identify a Work Plan is the complete removal of citizen oversight and participation in the finances of our city which should be the MOST TRANSPARENT aspect of any government entity. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS PRECIDENT. Sherrey Hollander, Huntington Beach resident SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Data: Ws/1 I Agenda Item No.: 2 Switzer, Donna From: Dombo,Johanna Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 9:41 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy;CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW:I strongly Oppose Agenda Items 21 and 22 AGENDA COMMENT SUPPLEMENTAL From: Lily Jacinto<lilycabrera@msn.com> COMMUNICATION Sent: Monday,August 05, 2019 9:29 AM Mee19 DO: &15_11c� To:CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: I strongly Oppose Agenda Items 21 and 22 Agenda bm No.• A*a7— $z� Dear Mayor Peterson and Council Members, I am writing to urge that you OPPOSE Agenda Items 21 and 22. AGENDA ITEM 21 - Feasibility Study for Community Choice Energy(aka CCA) I had hoped this item would have permanently "died" following a Study Session, it was exposed that CCA's are not only a BAD idea for cities, but frankly very dangerous. There is yet to be even one success among cities who have attempted this massive city-government-expansion. Cities continue to expose and reject this bad idea knowing that the only winners of CCA's are the Consultants,Attorneys and, of course, Southern California Edison who conveniently get out of all their bad contracts and transfers the bad-contracts to cities who adopt CCA's. At the end of the day, cities who adopt CCA's are left with: 1. A whole new EXPANDED layer of city government. 2. No additional "green" energy(since CCA's are merely a transfer of paper-certificates from one agency to another). 3. Potential loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars of start up funding and bad contracts. The most important reason to oppose the idea of a CCA is the fact that NO City Council should given more ability to RAISE OUR UTILITY RATES! There is no positive reason to shift the current Southern California Edison responsibility to city staff and City Council unless the end-goal is seeking a new "Slush Fund". The recent council majority vote to purchase the Pipeline building, without proper due diligence has landed the city in a lawsuit, City Council nor staff should be given additional responsibility for ANYTHING, let alone something that could permanently jeopardize the citizens of Huntington Beach. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS CONCEPT AGENDA ITEM 22 Adopt Annual Work Plan for Finance Commission i At a time when our financial resources are stretched, partially as a result of the poor decision making of this council,the proposal to "gut"the very commission charged with citizen review and oversight of our city's finances is brought forward? Interesting timing. If we are truly interested, as a city, in operating efficiently and transparently, all options for oversight must be "on the table" at all times! Whether or not a given council choses to look at the material coming from Finance Commission is and always has been optional, but to pre-identify a Work Plan is the complete removal of citizen oversight and participation in the finances of our city which should be the MOST TRANSPARENT aspect of any government entity. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS PRECIDENT. Respectfully, Lily Jacinto Sent from my iPad 2 Switzer, Donna ow FTEMMIAL. From: Jan Kubica <hbjan98@yahoo.com> COM MUNICAMN Sent: Sunday,August 04, 2019 3:01 PM To:To: CITY COUNCIL i—� Meeting Date: __ L Subject: Agenda Items,21 &22 Agenda Derr,No,; Dear Mayor Peterson and Council Members, I am writing to urge that you OPPOSE Agenda Item and�2d will provide more information below. AGENDA ITEM 21 - Feasibility Study for Community Choice Energy(aka CCA) I had hoped this item would have permanently "died" a couple years ago when, following a Study Session, it was exposed that CCA's are not only a BAD idea for cities, but frankly very dangerous. Since the time of that Study Session, I have been following this topic very closely and can report that there is yet to be even one success among cities who have attempted this massive city-government-expansion. Cities continue to expose and reject this bad idea especially knowing that the only winners in the newest cottage industry of CCA's are the Consultants, Attorneys and, of course, Southern California Edison who conveniently get out of all their bad contracts and transfers the bad-contracts to cities who adopt CCA's. At the end of the day, cities who adopt CCA's are left with: 1. A whole new EXPANDED layer of city government. 2. No additional "green" energy (since CCA's are merely a transfer of paper-certificates from one agency to another). 3. Potential loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars of start up funding and bad contracts. But perhaps the single most important reason to oppose even the mere idea of a CCA is the fact that NO City Council should given more ability to RAISE OUR UTILITY RATES.....PERIOD! There is absolutely no positive reason to shift the current Southern California Edison responsibility to city staff and City Council unless the end-goal is seeking a new "Slush Fund". May I remind all of you that the recent council majority vote to purchase the Pipeline building, without proper due diligence has landed the city in a lawsuit.....I think it is safe to say that neither City Council nor staff should be afforded additional expansion or responsibility for ANYTHING, let alone something that could permanently jeopardize the citizens of Huntington Beach. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS CONCEPT. AGENDA ITEM 22 - Adopt Annual Work Plan for Finance Commission As I previous wrote to you after the last attempt to destroy the Finance Commission, I find it hard to believe that we have arrived at a point where certain council would be advocating for LESS transparency and oversight. As someone who attends most Finance Commission and many other meetings, it is apparent that there is simply NO WAY to articulate an annual work plan unless the goal is to neuter and silence this commission! If we are truly interested, as a city, in operating efficiently and transparently, all options for oversight must be "on the table" at all times! Whether or not a given council chooses to look at the material coming from Finance Commission is and always has been optional, but to pre-identify a Work Plan is the complete removal of citizen oversight and participation in the finances of our city which should be the MOST TRANSPARENT aspect of any government entity. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS PRECEDENT. 1 Respectfully, Jan Kubica z Switzer, Donna From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 11:04 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: OPPOSE Agenda Items 21 and 22 SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA COMMENT COMMUNICATION From: Mary Lou <smithsurfermom@gmail.com> Meeting Date: Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 10:58 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surf6ty-hb.org> Subject: OPPOSE Agenda Itemsz4-an 22 Agenda Item No,- Dear Mayor Peterson and Council Members, I am writing to urge you to OPPOSE Agenda Items 21 and 22 for the reasons listed below. AGENDA ITEM 21 - Feasibility Study for Community Choice Energy (aka CCA) I had hoped this item would have permanently "died" a couple years ago when, following a Study Session, it was exposed that CCA's are not only a BAD idea for cities, but in fact, very dangerous. Since the time of that Study Session, I have been following this topic very closely and can report that there is yet to be even one success among cities who have attempted this massive city-government-expansion. Cities continue to expose and reject this bad idea especially knowing that the only winners in the newest cottage industry of CCA's are the Consultants, Attorneys and, of course, Southern California Edison who conveniently get out of all their bad contracts and transfers the bad-contracts to cities who adopt CCA's. At the end of the day, cities who adopt CCA's are left with: 1. A whole new EXPANDED layer of city government ... no one needs or wants this! 2. No additional "green" energy (since CCA's are merely a transfer of paper-certificates from one agency to another). 3. Potential loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars of start up funding and bad contracts. But perhaps the single most important reason to oppose even the mere idea of a CCA is the fact that NO City Council should given more ability to RAISE OUR UTILITY RATES.....PERIOD! There is absolutely no positive reason to shift the current Southern California Edison responsibility to city staff and the City Council unless the end goal is seeking a new "Slush Fund". May I remind all of you that the recent council majority vote to purchase the Pipeline building, without proper due diligence has landed the city in a lawsuit. I think it is safe to say that neither City Council nor staff should be afforded additional expansion or responsibility for ANYTHING, let alone something that could permanently jeopardize the citizens of Huntington Beach. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS CONCEPT. AGENDA ITEM 22 -Adopt Annual Work Plan for Finance Commission I find it hard to believe that we have arrived at a point where certain council members would be advocating for LESS transparency and LESS oversight. As someone who attends most Finance Commission and many other meetings, it is apparent that there is simply NO WAY to articulate an annual work plan unless the goal is to neuter and silence this commission! If we are truly interested, as a city, in operating efficiently and transparently, all options for oversight must be "on the table" at all times! Whether or not a given council chooses to look at the material coming from Finance Commission is and always has been optional. In no way should they pre-identify a Work Plan as then, that is the complete removal of citizen oversight and participation in the finances of our city which should be the MOST TRANSPARENT aspect of any government entity. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS PRECEDENT. Respectfully, Mary Lou Shlaudeman i Switzer, Donna From: Susan Matthewson <matthewson.susanl@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 3:23 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Opposition to Agenda Item and 22 Please vote to oppose these two items.They are not good for the city of HB or its residents. Sent from my iPhone SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meefing Date: Agenda Item Plo., i Switzer, Donna From: Gab <gabriela_menendez@yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 2:14 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Opposing agenda items 21 and 22 Dear Mayor Peterson and Council Members, I am writing to urge that you OPPOSE Agenda Items 21 and 22 and will provide more information below. AGENDA ITEM 21 - Feasibility Study for Community Choice Energy(aka CCA) I had hoped this item would have permanently "died" a couple years ago when, following a Study Session, it was exposed that CCA's are not only a BAD idea for cities, but frankly very dangerous. Since the time of that Study Session, I have been following this topic very closely and can report that there is yet to be even one success among cities who have attempted this massive city-government-expansion. Cities continue to expose and reject this bad idea especially knowing that the only winners in the newest cottage industry of CCA's are the Consultants, Attorneys and, of course, Southern California Edison who conveniently get out of all their bad contracts and transfers the bad-contracts to cities who adopt CCA's. At the end of the day, cities who adopt CCA's are left with: 1. A whole new EXPANDED layer of city government. 2.No additional "green" energy(since CCA's are merely a transfer of paper-certificates from one agency to another). 3. Potential loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars of start up funding and bad contracts. But perhaps the single most important reason to oppose even the mere idea of a CCA is the fact that NO City Council should given more ability to RAISE OUR UTILITY RATES.....PERIOD! There is absolutely no positive reason to shift the current Southern California Edison responsibility to city staff and City Council unless the end-goal is seeking a new "Slush Fund". May I remind all of you that the recent council majority vote to purchase the Pipeline building, without proper due diligence has landed the city in a lawsuit.....I think it is safe to say that neither City Council nor staff should be afforded additional expansion or responsibility for ANYTHING, let alone something that could permanently jeopardize the citizens of Huntington Beach. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS CONCEPT. AGENDA ITEM 22 - Adopt Annual Work Plan for Finance Commission As I previous wrote to you after the last attempt to destroy the Finance Commission, I find it hard to believe that we have arrived at a point where certain council would be advocating for LESS transparency and LESS oversight. As someone who attends most Finance Commission and many other meetings, it is apparent that there is simply NO WAY to articulate an annual work plan unless the goal is to neuter and silence this commission! If we are truly interested, as a city, in operating efficiently and transparently, all options for oversight must be "on the table" at all times! Whether or not a given council choses to look at the material coming from Finance Commission is and always has been optional,but to pre-identify a Work Plan is the complete removal of citizen oversight and participation in the finances of our city which should be the MOST TRANSPARENT aspect of any government entity. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS PRECIDENT. Respectfully, i Gabriela Menendez. SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Mae"Date: Agenda kem No.: 2 Switzer, Donna From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 7:43 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW:-2-1,22 AGENDA COMMENT From: Mrdi<mrdi2003@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 6:19 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:--L 22 NO on 2-9 and 22. Local homeowner Mrdi SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: 2151/ 1�--- Agenda Item No., i Switzer, Donna From: Russell Neal <russneal@ieee.org> Sent: Sunday,August 04, 2019 1:02 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Agenda Items 2Yand 22 I oppose th e to CCA under it72''and any back door attempt to weaken the citizens' finance commission under item 22. Russ Neal Huntington Beach SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Mae"Date• 9/6/197 Agenda 1Wm No: a1;l /'7- g.2C0 1 Switzer, Donna From: Dorothy Newbrough <dnewbr@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday,August 04, 2019 11:59 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Agenda Items,9andD I am requesting you OPPOSE Agenda item and 22. a residents of Huntington Beach voted you into office....listen to us. Dorothy Newbrough SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meetlng Date:_ B/.g//GI Agenda Item No.; /I-1?2Lo Switzer, Donna From: SHARON OTT <ottcamp@verizon.net> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 4:16 PM�� To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: NO ON AGENDA ITEM AND ITEM 22 LEASE Dear Mayor Peterson and City Council: I am writing todaa>to express my opposition and ask for your"No"vote on two agenda items on Monday's city council meeting: Agenda Item� and Agenda Item 22. Both these it2l"ems have been discussed before and,I thought,deemed not worthy of future consideration.And yet,here we are again, with agendas and,frankly,personal vendettas being pursued. With respect to Agenda Item 2 1-Feasibility Study for Community Choice Energy: I attended the meetings held several years ago.And I thought this idea was put to bed and acknowledged that: 1.Although good-intentioned,this idea would not increase the use of green energy,but simply transfer the certificates of purchase from one agency to another. 2.CCA would increase the size and scope of our city government at a time when you should be addressing many,more pressing issues that require resources-both from a financial standpoint as well as an energy perspective.Those more pressing issues,where your energy would be better spent include: infrastructure costs that are unable to keep up with the needs,the failed purchase of a building to be used as a"Navigation"Center,the Ascon toxic waste dump,the mitigation of which is causing many health related issues to your constituents in Southeast Huntington Beach,The tank farm property,where a medium density,mixed use building project next door-and separated simply by a chain link fence to the previously mentioned Ascon toxic waste site is being pushed through our city at the speed of a bullet train. And yet,several of you choose an item of great significance in which to invest your time,ignoring all the above.You propose to have the city relieve Southern California Edison of their historical duty of billing your constituents for their electricity use. Which brings me to question, WHY?Why is it that several of you deem this as so important?I can think of no other reason than to think that you are looking for additional sources of revenue for our city.And frankly,after the"Navigation"Center fiasco,where none of you listened when Mayor Peterson at the meeting informed you of an alternate solution that would have fulfilled our obligation to Judge Carter without spending OUR$2.7MM,I do not trust your judgement currently with financial matters.I need to see this council begin making better financial decisions before considering a system whereby you will have control over our energy billing. I apologize for being so blunt.But you need to prove yourself more capaple-than_y_ou have. Which segues perfectly into my opposition of the next agenda item-Agenda Item 2 Adopt Annual Work Plan for Finance Commission. At a time when our financial resources are stretched,partially as a result of the poor decision making of this council,the proposal to "gut"the very commission charged with citizen review and oversight of our city's finances is brought forward?Interesting timing. At an Ascon meeting at Edison High School I took the time to speak with a council member that I have grown to greatly respect. I expressed my concern that a city council would take ANY action to limit the voice of citizens in our city government-especially when it relates to financial issues.This council member agreed and supported the idea of increased citizen involvement-not less.The reality is that the citizen members of the Finance Commission act on behalf of everyone in the city-council members and citizens alike-to create a city government that operates in a fiscally responsible manner. They simply look for ways to save money and present those ideas to you seven.They understand they have no policy-making role.I urge you not to limit their role at a time when we need to find ways to streamline our operations and spend our money in responsible ways. Additionally,I am greatly concerned what message this action will send to the citizen participants on every other board and commission. Why would anyone want to be nominated to a board or commission if they knew their actions would be limited and their opinions not considered.No,this is not the message you should be sending-now or ever. Lastly,I am greatly concerned that this issue has become simply a personality issue.As elected members of our city you are leaders. 1 Leaders should rise above pettiness and personality conflicts-not create or inflame them.If you disagree with a member of a commission your job should not be to succumb to that pettiness-but be a leader and rise above it. I encourage all of you to work with the Finance Commission and make the citizen oversight and transparency stronger-not weaker. Regards, Sharon Ott SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Me.01 Date:_ ?15//7 Agenda Item No.- d,2 2 Switzer, Donna From: Madeline Pacilio-Brand <mpaciliobrand@yahoo.com> Sent: Sunday,August 04, 2019 11:51 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Dear Mayor Peterson and Council Members, I am writing to urge that you OPPOSE Agenda Items and 22. Respectfully submitted, Madeline Pacilio-Brand 21571 Kanakoa Lane Huntington Beach, Ca. 92646 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Date: 3/57// 7 Agenda hem No Switzer, Donna From: Deby Pierce <deby.pierce@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 9:14 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Oppose Agenda Item 2f and 22;. 8-04-2019 Dear Mayor Peterson and Council Members, I am writing to urge that you OPPOSE Agenda Items,,2-1�and 22 and will provide more information below. AGENDA ITEM 21 - Feasibility Study for Community Choice Energy (aka CCA) Hoping that you will due your due diligence and see that this is a horrible idea. Why do we need more government here in Huntington Beach? It seems that this is the least of our worries. Focus on what the public is crying for. Your leadership not more possible spending and loss. I did find this quote and I couldn't have said it better"But perhaps the single most important reason to oppose even the mere idea of a CCA is the fact that NO City Council should given more ability to RAISE OUR UTILITY RATES.....PERIOD! There is absolutely no positive reason to shift the current Southern California Edison responsibility to city staff and City Council unless the end-goal is seeking a new "Slush Fund". May I remind all of you that the recent council majority vote to purchase the Pipeline building, without proper due diligence has landed the city in a lawsuit.....I think it is safe to say that neither City Council nor staff should be afforded additional expansion or responsibility for ANYTHING, let alone something that could permanently jeopardize the citizens of Huntington Beach. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS CONCEPT." AGENDA ITEM 22-Adopt Annual Work Plan for Finance Commission Please be brave and don't succumb to the pressure to destroy the Finance Commission. It is the way the citizens have a little oversight and input over our city. Why is that a bad thing. It is a voluntary position that people are doing to help this city. Everyone wants transparency these days, except the people who are hiding something or doing something wrong.. Please council care about the citizens. Sincerely, Deby Pierce Sent from Mail for Windows 10 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting [date: Agenda Ism No.: a �z 1 Switzer, Donna From: Dombo,Johanna Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 7:43 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL- Subject: FW: Agenda items *H-and #22 AGENDA COMMENT -----Original Message----- From: Pat Pitts<ppitts@socal.rr.com> Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 7:28 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Agenda items-#21 and #22 I am opposed to these two items and would like to know from council members who sponsored them, are these in the best interest of residents of HB? I say no! SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: Agenda Urn No.• i Switzer, Donna From: Linda Polkinghorne <lapolkinghorn@gmail.com> Sent: Monday,August 05, 2019 8:31 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Agenda7and 2jl I find it hard to believe that we even have to speak out against these. Do you guys not see the problem! These are horrible and not at all good for the people of HB. Do the right thing and vote NO SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION MeeBng Date: Y15-1/ Agenda Item No.- Old- ( /47- g.2C0 i Switzer, Donna From: rob.pool.oc@gmail.com Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 11:01 AM To: CITY COUNCIL i Subject: Please OPPOSE Agenda Items and 22 Dear Mayor Peterson and City Council: I am writing today to express my opposition and ask for your"No" vote on two agenda items on Monday's city council meeting: Agenda (tern and Agenda Item 22. Both these items have been discussed before and, I thought, deemed not worthy of future consideration. And yet, here we are again, with agendas and, frankly, personal vendettas being pursued. With respect to Agenda Item 21- Feasibility Study for Community Choice Energy: I attended the meetings held several years ago. And I thought this idea was put to bed and acknowledged that: 1. Although good-intentioned, this idea would not increase the use of green energy, but simply transfer the certificates of purchase from one agency to another. 2. CCA would increase the size and scope of our city government at a time when you should be addressing many, more pressing issues that require resources- both from a financial standpoint as well as an energy perspective. Those more pressing issues, where your energy would be better spent include: infrastructure costs that are unable to keep up with the needs, the failed purchase of a building to be used as a "Navigation" Center, the Ascon toxic waste dump, the mitigation of which is causing many health related issues to your constituents in Southeast Huntington Beach, The tank farm property,where a medium density, mixed use building project next door- and separated simply by a chain link fence to the previously mentioned Ascon toxic waste site is being pushed through our city at the speed of a bullet train. And yet, several of you choose an item of great significance in which to invest your time, ignoring all the above.You propose to have the city relieve Southern California Edison of their historical duty of billing your constituents for their electricity use. Which brings me to question, WHY?Why is it that several of you deem this as so important? I can think of no other reason than to think that you are looking for additional sources of revenue for our city. And frankly, after the "Navigation" Center fiasco, where none of you listened when Mayor Peterson at the meeting informed you of an alternate solution that would have fulfilled our obligation to Judge Carter without spending OUR$2.7MM, I do not trust your judgement currently with financial matters. I need to see this council begin making better financial decisions before considering a system whereby you will have control over our energy billing. I apologize for being so blunt. But you need to prove yourself more capable than you have. Which segues perfectly into my opposition of the next agenda item-Agenda Item 22-Adopt Annual Work Plan for Finance Commission. At a time when our financial resources are stretched, partially as a result of the poor decision making of this council, the proposal to "gut" the very commission charged with citizen review and oversight of our city's finances is brought forward? Interesting timing. 1 At an Ascon meeting at Edison High School I took the time to speak with a council member that I have grown to greatly respect. I expressed my concern that a city council would take ANY action to limit the voice of citizens in our city government- especially when it relates to financial issues. This council member agreed and supported the idea of increased citizen involvement- not less.The reality is that the citizen members of the Finance Commission act on behalf of everyone in the city-council members and citizens alike-to create a city government that operates in a fiscally responsible manner. They simply look for ways to save money and present those ideas to you seven. They understand they have no policy-making role. I urge you not to limit their role at a time when we need to find ways to streamline our operations and spend our money in responsible ways. Additionally, I am greatly concerned what message this action will send to the citizen participants on every other board and commission. Why would anyone want to be nominated to a board or commission if they knew their actions would be limited and their opinions not considered. No, this is not the message you should be sending- now or ever. Lastly, I am greatly concerned that this issue has become simply a personality issue. As elected members of our city you are leaders. Leaders should rise above pettiness and personality conflicts- not create or inflame them. If you disagree with a member of a commission your job should not be to succumb to that pettiness- but be a leader and rise above it. I encourage all of you to work with the Finance Commission and make the citizen oversight and transparency stronger- not weaker. Respectfully, Rob Pool SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION MeeBng Data: 8/,5I/9 Agenda Item No.;o7­� 2 Switzer, Donna From: Ray Scrafield <octoolguy@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 1:49 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Anti-Agenda items We are sending this letter in the hopes that you folks will take notice of our dislike for these items. We have copied Cari Swan's letter but added our names to it. Thank you for taking the time to think about this. Dear Mayor Peterson and Council Members, I am writing to urge that you OPPOSE Agenda Items 21 and�2d will provide more information below. AGENDA ITEM 21 - Feasibility Study for Community Choice Energy (aka CCA) I had hoped this item would have permanently"died" a couple years ago when, following a Study Session, it was exposed that CCA's are not only a BAD idea for cities, but frankly very dangerous. Since the time of that Study Session, I have been following this topic very closely and can report that there is yet to be even one success among cities who have attempted this massive city-government-expansion. Cities continue to expose and reject this bad idea especially knowing that the only winners in the newest cottage industry of CCA's are the Consultants, Attorneys and, of course, Southern California Edison who conveniently get out of all their bad contracts and transfers the bad-contracts to cities who adopt CCA's. At the end of the day, cities who adopt CCA's are left with: 1. A whole new EXPANDED layer of city government. 2. No additional "green" energy (since CCA's are merely a transfer of paper-certificates from one agency to another). 3. Potential loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars of start up funding and bad contracts. But perhaps the single most important reason to oppose even the mere idea of a CCA is the fact that NO City Council should given more ability to RAISE OUR UTILITY RATES.....PERIOD! There is absolutely no positive reason to shift the current Southern California Edison responsibility to city staff and City Council unless the end-goal is seeking a new"Slush Fund". May I remind all of you that the recent council majority vote to purchase the Pipeline building, without proper due diligence has landed the city in a lawsuit.....I think it is safe to say that neither City Council nor staff should be afforded additional expan is_0 or responsibility for ANYTHING, let alone something that could permanently jeopardize the citizens of H t ngton Beach. f URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS CONCEPT. AGENDA ITEM 2�opt Annual Work Plan for Finance Commission As I previous wrote to you after the last attempt to destroy the Finance Commission, I find it hard to believe that we have arrived at a point where certain council would be advocating for LESS transparency and LESS oversight. As someone who attends most Finance Commission and many other meetings, it is apparent that there is simply NO WAY to articulate an annual work plan unless the goal is to neuter and silence this commission! If we are truly interested, as a city, in operating efficiently and transparently, all options for oversight must be"on the table" at all times! Whether or not a given council chooses to look at the material coming from Finance Commission is and always has been optional, but to pre- identify, a Work Plan is the complete removal of citizen oversight and participation in the finances of our city which should be the MOST TRANSPARENT aspect of any government entity. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS PRECEDENT. Respectfully, SUPPLEMENTAL Ray and Barbara Scrafield COMMUNICATION Meeting Date Agenda Item No.• i 10 Virus-free. www.avast.com z Switzer, Donna From: Dombo,Johanna Sent: Monday,August 05, 2019 7:43 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW:Agenda Items AGENDA COMMENT -----Original Message----- From: Barbara Shepard <NRDKMOM@AOL.COM> Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 7:39 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Agenda Items Please oppose Agenda ite„� afid,Z3_bbth of which are very detrimental to Huntington Beach. Sent from my iPhone SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Me&"Date: y-/5-/J2 Agenda nen,No.,_,_ Pl- 3-26 Switzer, Donna From: Carl Swan <cswanie@aol.com> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 9:29 AM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: OPPOSE AGENDA ITEMS and 22 Dear Mayor Peterson and Council Members, I am writing to urge that you OPPOSE Agenda Items-21 an�nd will provide more information below. AGENDA ITEM 21 - Feasibility Study for Community Choice Energy (aka CCA) I had hoped this item would have permanently "died"a couple years ago when, following a Study Session, it was exposed that CCA's are not only a BAD idea for cities, but frankly very dangerous. Since the time of that Study Session, I have been following this topic very closely and can report that there is yet to be even one success among cities who have attempted this massive city-government-expansion. Cities continue to expose and reject this bad idea especially knowing that the only winners in the newest cottage industry of CCA's are the Consultants, Attorneys and, of course, Southern California Edison who conveniently get out of all their bad contracts and transfers the bad-contracts to cities who adopt CCA's. At the end of the day, cities who adopt CCA's are left with: 1. A whole new EXPANDED layer of city government. 2. No additional "green" energy (since CCA's are merely a transfer of paper-certificates from one agency to another). 3. Potential loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars of start up funding and bad contracts. But perhaps the single most important reason to oppose even the mere idea of a CCA is the fact that NO City Council should given more ability to RAISE OUR UTILITY RATES.....PERIOD! There is absolutely no positive reason to shift the current Southern California Edison responsibility to city staff and City Council unless the end-goal is seeking a new"Slush Fund". May I remind all of you that the recent council majority vote to purchase the Pipeline building, without proper due diligence has landed the city in a lawsuit.....I think it is safe to say that neither City Council nor staff should be afforded additions tension or responsibility for ANYTHING, let alone something that could permanently jeopardize the citizens of untington Beach. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS CONCEPT. AGENDA ITEM 22 -Adopt Annual Work Plan for Finance Commission As I previous wrote to you after the last attempt to destroy the Finance Commission, I find it hard to believe that we have arrived at a point where certain council would be advocating for LESS transparency and LESS oversight. As someone who attends most Finance Commission and many other meetings, it is apparent that there is simply NO WAY to articulate an annual work plan unless the goal is to neuter and silence this commission! If we are truly interested, as a city, in operating efficiently and transparently, all options for oversight must be "on the table" at all times! Whether or not a given council choses to look at the material coming from Finance Commission is and always has been optional, but to pre- identify a Work Plan is the complete removal of citizen oversight and participation in the finances of our city which should be the MOST TRANSPARENT aspect of any government entity. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS PRECIDENT. Respectfully, Cari Swan SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Mee" Date: �V 5-/�/ Agenda Item No.; ��[ ��' O 2 o) Switzer, Donna From: Cari Swan <cswanie@aol.com> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 9:53 AM To: cswanie@aol.com Cc: CITY COUNCIL Subject: ACTION NEEDED!!! SEND EMAILS TO HB City Council OPPOSE AGENDA ITEMS and 22 Hi Friends, I sent the follow email to city council and need your help to send emails OPPOSING two very dangerous agenda items!! Send emails to: city.council@surfcity-hb.org Feel free to use any of the info from my email, or simply state: "I urge you to oppose Agenda Items � "and 22. oth items will cause irreparable harm to the citizens of Huntington Beach". /Feel free to email or call if you have questions....thank you to all my warrior friends!! Cari Swan Dear Mayor Peterson and Council Members, I am writing to urge that you OPPOSE Agenda Items 21 and 22 and will provide more information below. AGENDA IT MA 'l - Feasibility Study for Community Choice Energy (aka CCA) I had hoped this item would have permanently"died" a couple years ago when, following a Study Session, it was exposed that CCA's are not only a BAD idea for cities, but frankly very dangerous. Since the time of that Study Session, I have been following this topic very closely and can report that there is yet to be even one success among cities who have attempted this massive city-government-expansion. Cities continue to expose and reject this bad idea especially knowing that the only winners in the newest cottage industry of CCA's are the Consultants, Attorneys and, of course, Southern California Edison who conveniently get out of all their bad contracts and transfers the bad-contracts to cities who adopt CCA's. At the end of the day, cities who adopt CCA's are left with: 1. A whole new EXPANDED layer of city government. 2. No additional "green" energy (since CCA's are merely a transfer of paper-certificates from one agency to another). 3. Potential loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars of start up funding and bad contracts. But perhaps the single most important reason to oppose even the mere idea of a CCA is the fact that NO City Council should given more ability to RAISE OUR UTILITY RATES.....PERIOD! There is absolutely no positive reason to shift the current Southern California Edison responsibility to city staff and City Council unless the end-goal is seeking a new"Slush Fund". May I remind all of you that the recent council majority vote to purchase the Pipeline building, without proper due diligence has landed the city in a lawsuit.....I think it is safe to say that neither City Council nor staff should be afforded additional expansion or responsibility for ANYTHING, let alone something that could permanently jeopardize the citizens of Huntington Beach. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS CONCEPT. AGENDA ITEM 22 - opt Annual Work Plan for Finance Commission As I previous wrote to you after the last attempt to destroy the Finance Commission, I find it hard to believe that we have arrived at a point where certain council would be advocating for LESS transparency and LESS oversight. As someone who attends most Finance Commission and many other meetings, it is apparent that there is simply NO WAY to articulate 1 an annual work plan unless the goal is to neuter and silence this commission! If we are truly interested, as a city, in operating efficiently and transparently, all options for oversight must be "on the table" at all times! Whether or not a given council choses to look at the material coming from Finance Commission is and always has been optional, but to pre- identify a Work Plan is the complete removal of citizen oversight and participation in the finances of our city which should be the MOST TRANSPARENT aspect of any government entity. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS PRECIDENT. Respectfully, Can Swan SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meefng bate: Agenda Item No.: 2 Switzer, Donna From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 11:39 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW:I oppose Agenda items-21 and 22 AGENDA COMMENT From: winkie8108@aim.com <winkie8108@aim.com> Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 11:34 AM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: I oppose Agenda items 21 and 22 Dear Mayor Peterson and Council Members, I am writing to urge that you OPPOSE Agenda Items 21 and 22 and will provide more information below. AGENDA ITEM 21 - Feasibility Study for Community Choice Energy (aka CCA) I had hoped this item would have permanently "died" a couple years ago when, following a Study Session, it was exposed that CCA's are not only a BAD idea for cities, but frankly very dangerous. Since the time of that Study Session, I have been following this topic very closely and can report that there is yet to be even one success among cities who have attempted this massive city-government- expansion. Cities continue to expose and reject this bad idea especially knowing that the only winners in the newest cottage industry of CCA's are the Consultants, Attorneys and, of course, Southern California Edison who conveniently get out of all their bad contracts and transfers the bad-contracts to cities who adopt CCA's. At the end of the day, cities who adopt CCA's are left with: 1. A whole new EXPANDED layer of city government. 2. No additional "green" energy (since CCA's are merely a transfer of paper-certificates from one agency to another). 3. Potential loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars of start up funding and bad contracts. But perhaps the single most important reason to oppose even the mere idea of a CCA is the fact that NO City Council should given more ability to RAISE OUR UTILITY RATES.....PERIOD! There is absolutely no positive reason to shift the current Southern California Edison responsibility to city staff and City Council unless the end-goal is seeking a new "Slush Fund". May I remind all of you that the recent council majority vote to purchase the Pipeline building, without proper due diligence has landed the city in a Iawsuit.....I think it is safe to say that neither City Council nor staff should be afforded additional expansion or responsibility for ANYTHING, let alone something that could permanently jeopardize the citizens of Huntington Beach. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS CONCEPT. AGEND, _ITEM 22 - Adopt Annual Work Plan for Finance Commission As I previous wrote to you after the last attempt to destroy the Finance Commission, I find it hard to believe that we have arrived at a point where certain council would be advocating for LESS transparency and LESS oversight. As someone who attends most Finance Commission and many other meetings, it is apparent that there is simply NO WAY to articulate an annual work plan unless the goal is to neuter and silence this commission! If we are truly interested, as a city, in operating efficiently and transparently, all options for oversight must be "on the table" at all times! Whether or not a given council choses to look at the material coming from Finance Commission is and always has 1 been optional, but to pre-identify a Work Plan is the complete removal of citizen oversight and participation in the finances of our city which should be the MOST TRANSPARENT aspect of any government entity. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS PRECIDENT. Sincerely, Janice Torres Copied with permission, I couldn't have said it better myself. SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: Agenda Item No., 2 Switzer, Donna From: Linda Wentzel <lindamarieofhb@gmail.com> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 1:55 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Please OPPOSE Agenda Items ')VInd 22 j Dear Mayor Peterson and Council Members, I am writing to urge that you OPPOSE Agenda Items,�l'and 22. Agenda Item 21 - Feasibility Study of Community Choice Energy (aka CCA) I don't believe that we want any City Council that changes every two -four years have the ability to raise our utility rates. I also don't believe that there should be an expansion of government jobs with the current state of pensions. Please OPPOSE this item! Agenda Item 22 - Adopt Annual Work Plan for Finance Commission The commission does research and then provides information for City Council members to consider. The Council does not need to act on recommendations from the commission. Why would the Council want to restrict the commission right from the start? Please OPPOSE this item! Kind Regards, Linda Wentzel lindamarieofhb(&gmail.com (c) 714.951.7463 SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Mee ft Date: 5' /q Agenda roam No.- �a / Switzer, Donna From: Dee Wood <dwood9119@gmai1.com> Sent: Sunday, August 04, 2019 9:41 PM To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Oppose Agenda Items & 22 Dear City Council of Huntington Beach, We are writing to oppose two very dangerous agenda items. We urge you to oppose Agenda Items 21 and 22. In reading and learning about these agenda items they are a bad approach for our City. We do not need more government control - and we don't want our City Council to have the ability to raise our utility rates. We feel that his would jeopardize the citizens of Huntington Beach - just based on too many variables. Re: Agenda Item #22 We do not want less transparency & oversight ... we do not want to neuter the Finance Commission. Why do we need to pre-identify a Work Plan? Please oppose. Thank you for your service. Respectfully yours, Kurt and Dee Wood Huntington Harbour Residents Dee Wood SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meetng Date: Agenda Item No.-.,—A ,2 1 Switzer, Donna From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 1:57 PM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL-- Subject: FW: Agenda items ?Rand 22 i AGENDA COMMENT From: Sherry Daniels<sherryd628@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 1:54 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Agenda items 21 and 22 Dear Mayor Peterson and Council Members, I am writing to you to express my strong opposition to Agenda items1 and 22 for the August 5th city council meeting. Residents have spoken before, opposing these issues and it is clear that not all council members are listening to the residents of Huntington Beach, because here we are again, with these agenda items. We do not need more government, we need less! I oppose Agenda item 21 because certain council members have proven time and time again that they are not working in the best interests of the residents, but rather in their special interest donors' best interests, and I cannot afford to have those council members now in charge of my electric bill, with the ability to raise my bill when they want to. This would add a whole new layer of bureaucracy to our city government, and we barely afford what we already have. This would create pensions, benefits, etc, for which we are already greatly in debt with our current unfunded liabilities. I am in even stronger opposition to Agenda item 22 because our city needs resident oversight and MORE transparency will 0 1 amend this Agenda item makes the Finance Committee the Council's puppet, removing transparency and oversight. Why wouldn't we want the Finance Committee to always be on the lookout for ways to save our city money? Saving money is a good thing! The Finance Committee needs to be able to work independently and NOT just when the council wants to submit a Work Plan. I am GRAVELY concerned that Mr. Posey continues to attempt to pull the wool over the residents' eyes by trying to dismantle the Finance Commission with the support of Ms. Carr. The residents of HB are watching all of you!!! REJECT Agenda items 21 and 22 by voting NO! SUPPLEMENTAL Thank you, COMMUNICATION Sherry Daniels Mee#ng Date: i Agenda item No.: ,L.? L `7— L2�a] Switzer, Donna From: Dombo,Johanna Sent: Monday,August 05, 2019 2:00 PM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW:Agenda Items fZ&22 AGENDA COMMENT From: Michael Hoskinson<mikehosk@me.com> Sent: Monday,August 05, 2019 1:03 PM To:CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Cc: Fikes, Cathy<CFikes@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: RE:Agenda Items#21 &22 Huntington Beach City Council Monday, August 5, 2019 RE: Agenda Items & 22 Honorable Mayor Peterson and Council Members, In regards to Ite7�2 Community Choice Energy Feasibility Study. In 2017 the HBCC had an extensive study session regarding a potential CCA and wisely chose to not move forward. In the intervening 2 years many things have changed for CCAs, all of them bad. 1. Renewable energy subsidization. CCAs rely solely on subsidized renewable energy to compete with fossil fuel power. The Trump administration is moving quickly to end many subsidies; should he win in 2020 it's likely that subsidization may end. In this case CCAs will not be able to buy competitive power and ratepayers bills will skyrocket. CCAs can not compete on a level playing ground with coal, natural gas or other fossil fuels. 2. CCAs claim to "deliver green energy. The physical reality of the grid precludes delivery of one type of energy over another. The grid is essentially a "pool" of energy that customers tap into, there is no physical way to direct "green" energy to the end user. 3. Choice. CCA customers are told they have a "choice" in the levels of green energy they can purchase, this is simply a lie. As mentioned previously CCAs 1 cannot direct different volumes of green energy to the end user. This is fraudulent. 4. Startup costs and Bureaucracy. Before one dollar of customer money is taken in starting a CCA will require tens of millions in seed money and the creation of a costly bureaucracy to manage it. As HB has significant long-term debt from payroll and pensions adding to that burden would unwise in the extreme. 5. CCA failure. Many cities and municipalities are reversing or voting down CCAs, including 5 cities in the Ventura CCA, Redondo Beach and SLO County. Please vote no on Item #21 In regards to Item #22-Adgpt ng an Annual Work Plan for the Finance Commission 1) It is imperative that the Finance Committee be able to choose their work without council direction-as-the entire_ reason for the FC is oversight. Please vote no on Item #22. Yours truly, Michael Hoskinson SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meefing Date• Agenda hem No: as-CIS- gz"'o)' 2 Switzer, Donna From: Dombo,Johanna Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 4:39 PM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL - Subject: FW:I strongly Oppose Agenda Items nd 22 / AGENDA COMMENT From: Frank Jacinto<fmjacinto@msn.com> Sent: Monday,August 05, 2019 4:37 PM To:CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: I strongly Oppose Agenda Items 21 and 22 Dear Mayor Peterson and Council Members, I am writing to urge that you OPPOSE Agenda Items and 22 AGENDA ITEM 21 - Feasibility Study for Community Choice Energy (aka CCA) I had hoped this item would have permanently "died" following a Study Session, it was exposed that CCA's are not only a BAD idea for cities, but frankly very dangerous. There is yet to be even one success among cities who have attempted this massive city-government- expansion. Cities continue to expose and reject this bad idea knowing that the only winners of CCA's are the Consultants, Attorneys and, of course, Southern California Edison who conveniently get out of all their bad contracts and transfers the bad-contracts to cities who adopt CCA's. At the end of the day, cities who adopt CCA's are left with: 1. A whole new EXPANDED layer of city government. 2. No additional "green" energy (since CCA's are merely a transfer of paper-certificates from one agency to another). 3. Potential loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars of start up funding and bad contracts. The most important reason to oppose the idea of a CCA is the fact that NO City Council should given more ability to RAISE OUR UTILITY RATES! There is no positive reason to shift the current Southern California Edison responsibility to city staff and City Council unless the end-goal is seeking a new "Slush Fund". The recent council majority vote to purchase the Pipeline building, without proper due diligence has landed the city in a lawsuit, City Council nor staff should be given additional responsibility for ANYTHING, let alone something that could permanently jeopardize the citizens of Huntington Beach. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS CONCEPT i AGENDA ITEM 2 --Adopt Annual Work Plan for Finance Commission At a time when our financial resources are stretched, partially as a result of the poor decision making of this council, the proposal to "gut"the very commission charged with citizen review and oversight of our city's finances is brought forward? Interesting timing. If we are truly interested, as a city, in operating efficiently and transparently, all options for oversight must be "on the table" at all times! Whether or not a given council choses to look at the material coming from Finance Commission is and always has been optional, but to pre- identify a Work Plan is the complete removal of citizen oversight and participation in the finances of our city which should be the MOST TRANSPARENT aspect of any government entity. I URGE ALL OF YOUR TO OPPOSE THIS DANGEROUS PRECIDENT. Respectfully, Frank Jacinto SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Medng Date: Agenda ttem W.• z Switzer, Donna From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 2:25 PM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW:Agenda item d22 August 5th, 2019 City Council Agenda AGENDA COMMENT From: EVENT EXPOS<eventexpos@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 2:10 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Agenda item 21-22 August 5th, 2019 City Council Agenda Mayor Peterson and Council... I, along with many other residents have already made our position clear in regard to Item 22..-I'm not going through it again ..Please vote NO.. _- - Do not make yet another major financial blunder ....... ite vote NO. Sincerely Yvonne Mauro SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: F/5-// / -U (/9- Agenda Item No.. �2C0� Switzer, Donna From: Dombo,Johanna Sent: Monday,August 05, 2019 5:20 PM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW:I am writing this as opposition to City Council Agenda Items lease vote NO on both agenda items. AGENDA COMMENT From: larry mcneely<Imwater@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday,August 05, 2019 5:16 PM To:CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: I am writing this as opposition to City Council Agenda Items 21(��lease vote NO on both agenda items. 1 Switzer, Donna From: Dombo, Johanna Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 4:39 PM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: NO ON AGENDA ITEM 21 AND ITEM 22 PLEASE AGENDA COMMENT From: Rob Ott<motoott@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 05, 2019 4:30 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: Fwd: NOON AGENDA ITEM"AND ITEM 22 PLEASE Dear Mayor Peterson and City Council: I am writing today to express my lVosition and ask for your"No"vote on two agenda items on Monday's city council meeting: Agenda Item 21 and Agenda Item 2 Both these items have been discussed before and,I thought,deemed not worthy of future consideration.And yet,here we are again, with agendas and,frankly,personal vendettas being pursued. With respect to Agenda Item -Feasibility Study for Community Choice Energy: I attended the meetings held several years ago.And I thought this idea was put to bed and acknowledged that: 1.Although good-intentioned,this idea would not increase the use of green energy,but simply transfer the certificates of purchase from one agency to another. 2.CCA would increase the size and scope of our city government at a time when you should be addressing many,more pressing issues that require resources-both from a financial standpoint as well as an energy perspective.Those more pressing issues,where your energy would be better spent include: infrastructure costs that are unable to keep up with the needs,the failed purchase of a building to be used as a"Navigation"Center,the Ascon toxic waste dump,the mitigation of which is causing many health related issues to your constituents in Southeast Huntington Beach,The tank farm property,where a medium density,mixed use building project next door-and separated simply by a chain link fence to the previously mentioned Ascon toxic waste site is being pushed through our city at the speed of a bullet train. And yet,several of you choose an item of great significance in which to invest your time,ignoring all the above.You propose to have the city relieve Southern California Edison of their historical duty of billing your constituents for their electricity use. Which brings me to question,WHY?Why is it that several of you deem this as so important?I can think of no other reason than to think that you are looking for additional sources of revenue for our city.And frankly,after the"Navigation"Center fiasco,where none of you listened when Mayor Peterson at the meeting informed you of an alternate solution that would have fulfilled our obligation to Judge Carter without spending OUR$2.7MM,I do not trust your judgement currently with financial matters.I need to see this council begin making better financial decisions before considering a system whereby you will have control over our energy billing.I apologize for being so blunt.But you need to prove yourself more cap=1tem ve. Which segues perfectly into my opposition of the next agenda item-AAdo Annual Work Plan for Finance Commission. At a time when our financial resources are stretched,partially as a result of the poor decision making of this council,the proposal to "gut"the very commission charged with citizen review and oversight of our city's finances is brought forward?Interesting timing. At an Ascon meeting at Edison High School I took the time to speak with a council member that I have grown to greatly respect. I expressed my concern that a city council would take ANY action to limit the voice of citizens in our city government-especially when it relates to financial issues.This council member agreed and supported the idea of increased citizen involvement-not less. The reality 1 is that the citizen members of the Finance Commission act on behalf of everyone in the city-council members and citizens alike-to create a city government that operates in a fiscally responsible manner.They simply look for ways to save money and present those ideas to you seven.They understand they have no policy-making role. I urge you not to limit their role at a time when we need to find ways to streamline our operations and spend our money in responsible ways. Additionally,I am greatly concerned what message this action will send to the citizen participants on every other board and commission. Why would anyone want to be nominated to a board or commission if they knew their actions would be limited and their opinions not considered.No,this is not the message you should be sending-now or ever. Lastly,I am greatly concerned that this issue has become simply a personality issue.As elected members of our city you are leaders. Leaders should rise above pettiness and personality conflicts-not create or inflame them. If you disagree with a member of a commission your job should not be to succumb to that pettiness-but be a leader and rise above it. I encourage all of you to work with the Finance Commission and make the citizen oversight and transparency stronger-not weaker. Regards, Rob Ott SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION k4eetng Cats. 8/SSZ/ 2 Agenda Item No.• ,;'vP - Y2b) 2 Switzer, Donna From: Dombo,Johanna Sent: Monday,August 05, 2019 2:36 PM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy; CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: oppose item 21 and AGENDA COMMENT From: ROSE, BLAKE <broee@cfiemail.com> Sent: Monday,August 05, 2019 2:31 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject:oppose items nd 22 1 am a HB citizen and II oppose agenda items,1211 an 22. Sincerely, Blake Rose, CFP° Pinnacle Strategies Insurance and Financial Services Registered Representative Centaurus Financial, Inc. 3211 West Warner Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92704 Phone: 714-263-0301 Ex- 119 Fax: 714-263-0392 CA Insurance License # OD06078 www.rolloveryourira.corn Securities offered through Centaurus Financial,Inc.a registered broker/dealer and registered investment advisor,a member FINRA and SIPC. This is not an offer to sell securities,which maybe done only after proper delivery of a prospectus and client suitability is reviewed and determined.Information relating to securities is intended for use by individuals residing in CA and KY. This e-mail and attachments)may contain information that is privileged,confidential,and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law.If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any dissemination,distribution,or copy of this message is strictly prohibited.If received in error, please notes the sender immediately and delete/destroy the message and any copies thereof. This e-mail was sent in accordance with US Code 47.5.11,section 227. We respect your privacy and pledge not to abuse this privilege. To stop future mailings,please respond by typing"remove"in your reply. CFP®and CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNERTM are certification marks owned by the Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards,Inc. These marks are awarded to individuals who successfully complete the CFP Board's initial and ongoing certification requirements. SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Date: 9/5-//1 Agenda hen,No.• Switzer, Donna From: Dombo,Johanna Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2019 7:43 AM To: Agenda Comment Cc: Fikes, Cathy;CITY COUNCIL Subject: FW: AGENDA COMMENT From: Ken Johnson<maintken@aol.com> Sent: Monday,August 05, 2019 10:40 PM To: CITY COUNCIL<city.council@surfcity-hb.org> Subject: To Whom It May COncern, I oppose agenda Itemanere is ample evidence and data reflecting poorly to date on all government run energy programs and only adds layers of additioonal government and unnessary unchecked tax burdens for tax payers. Lack of oversite is also not in the citizens best interest when it comes to financial planning and Im deeply troubled by both these items being brought forward in some cases repeadedly in an obvious effort to force or circumvent poorly drafted plans. I implore you all to vote both items down AGAIN and for good. Respectfully, Kenneth W.Johnson SUPPLEMENTAL COMMUNICATION Meeting Date: Vy//G] Agenda mein No.:_ /°I