Commentary: Election requirements cause debt proposals to be larger, not smaller

Once again, without proper fiscal or public review, the Newport Beach City Council is considering a charter amendment to require lease obligation debt, which by legal definition does not involve an increase in taxes, to be submitted to the voters.

No other city in California, to my knowledge, has this requirement. That should tell us something.

This is a bad idea from Councilman Scott Peotter. Currently there is no projected need for lease debt for more than 50 years. Some of the council members who will consider the next debt issue have not yet been born. The city has the highest bond ratings of any city in the nation and our lease debt service is less than the annual budget surplus and affordable.

Election requirements cause debt proposals to be larger, not smaller, as they are increased to involve multiple projects to broaden political support. It prevents the timely award of construction bids because bids will either be padded by 30% or will expire before an election can be held.

Alternatively, it requires going to the voters without a sound basis of a project’s cost. Of course, there is the added cost of an election itself and the sequencing of projects into the season immediately following a biannual election date will cause project costs to rise.

It will prevent future city councils from responding to natural disasters such as an earthquake, fire, tsunami or landslide, where critical infrastructure could be destroyed. Puerto Rico shows us what happens when a jurisdiction does not have immediate capital market access after a disaster. Depending on wording and limits, it could require our next police car replacements to be voted on.

It will pit neighbors against each other, as the council will pay cash for projects favored by a majority, while requiring others to seek voter approval, irrespective of actual financial analysis.

What is truly disappointing is that the real reason for this proposal is to allow council members in the November election to evade the campaign spending limits by using a committee formed to support this measure. Remember the “Team Newport 2016” signs from the last election paid for by Measure MM donors? Don’t you think this council would pay more attention to following our campaign laws?

Don’t be fooled by this cynical effort to create a phony issue by people who have actually accomplished nothing for the good of the community.

KEITH CURRY is a former Newport Beach mayor.