CITY HALL UPDATE FOR JUNE 2026: GROWING PRESSURE ON 💰 CITY FINANCES 💰 AND FUTURE SERVICE LEVELS; CONCERNS ABOUT GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY AND 🕵🏻‍♂️SURVEILLANCE 🕵🏻‍♂️TECHNOLOGY -PART ONE OF TWO
- Cynthia McDonald
- Jul 21
- 17 min read
City Hall was busy in June due to several long meetings. We have already provided a report on two meetings at the beginning of June:
JUNE 2 CITY COUNCIL MEETING. This the meeting where the City Council adopted Fiscal Year 2026-2027 Proposed Budget. You can find our report here.
JUNE 3 “SHAPING NEIGHBORHOODS” OPEN HOUSE. This concerned the proposed rezoning under Measure K and Measure Y. You can find our report here.
Due to the length of the meetings, this report is divided into two parts. Below is a summary of the remainder of City Hall activity for June 2026. Part Two can be found here.
Council, Commission and Committee Meetings:
City Council: two more meetings held;
Planning Commission: one meeting held;
Pension and Finance Committee: one meeting held (but we did not attend due to a conflict)
Fairview Park Steering Committee:Â held one meeting; and
Active Transportation Committee met once, but we did not attend that meeting because it was held the same night as the “Shaping Neighborhoods” Open House.
JUNE 9 CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION. The June 9 City Council meeting focused on two potential ballot initiatives. The first pertains to business license reform, the second would raise the transient occupancy (hotel) tax. The meeting only lasted about two hours. All Councilmembers were present.
City Manager Cecilia Gallardo-Daly introduced the team who presented the items: Consultants Richard Bernard from FM3 Research and Jeff Stewart from Willdan, Assistant to the City Manager Hadassa Jakher and Assistant City Manager Alma Reyes, Finance Manager Anna Acosta, and Budget and Purchasing Manager Mark Khou.
Anna Acosta began the presentation.
OVERVIEW:
Business License Reform:
Costa Mesa has over 111,000 residents and ~8,000 businesses.
The current business license structure was adopted in 1985Â and has not been updated in decades.
It is based on gross receipts, with a current maximum tax of $200 per business.
Proposed modernization aims to:
Maintain city service levels.
Align rates with nearby cities.
Improve long-term financial sustainability.
Diversify revenue sources beyond sales and property taxes.
Staff reviewed different models used by other cities:
Gross receipts-based (current Costa Mesa approach).
Employee-based (more complex structure).
Finance and Pension Advisory Committee recommendations include:
Updated rate structure with minimum and maximum caps.
Cost-of-living (CPI) adjustments.
Competitiveness with neighboring cities.
Clear definition of gross receipts.
A simpler, easier-to-administer system.
Transit Occupancy Tax (TOT):
Current rate is 8%, unchanged since 2010.
It is lower than most neighboring cities.
The City has consulted with local hotel and motel stakeholders about a potential increase.
Process & Timeline
Discussions began in October 2025.
On December 2, 2025, City Council directed staff to explore both measures.
From January–April, FiPAC continued evaluation.
Recommendations included:
Potential TOT increase and/or a business tax adjustment up to 3 percentage points
Moving forward with a restructured business license model
 Key Rationale
Both measures are intended to strengthen and stabilize general fund revenues.
A more diversified revenue base is critical to maintaining essential city services.
FIPAC Recommendation: In March, FiPAC recommended an increase of TOT for a maximum of three percentage points. It emphasized considering market competitiveness in conjunction with the existing 3% BIA rate.
Proposed Business License Rate Structure
Rate:Â $0.60 per $1,000 in gross receipts.
Minimum fee:Â $25 (for businesses with up to $49,999 in receipts).
Maximum fee:Â $15,000 (for businesses over $25 million in receipts).
Designed to remain lower than neighboring cities’ rates.
Impact on Businesses
Small businesses largely protected:
About 41% of businesses would pay only the $25 minimum.
Many low-revenue businesses would see no change or even pay less.
Lower-revenue tiers:
Some businesses (e.g., $25K–$100K range) would pay the same or less.
Mid-range businesses:
Mixed impact—some small increases, some unchanged.
Higher-revenue businesses would have the largest increases, for example:
$500K–$1M: from ~$200 today → $300–$600.
$1M–$5M: increase up to around $3,000.
$5M–$25M: increase up to $15,000.
Very large businesses (> $25M):
Capped at $15,000.
Fewer than 2% of businesses would pay the maximum.
Other Key Points
Some businesses currently paying $0 would begin paying a $25 minimum.
The proposal shifts more of the cost burden toward higher-revenue businesses.
Final comparison shows the new structure remains competitive regionally.
Bottom line: The proposal modernizes the business license tax by keeping it simple, protecting small businesses, and significantly increasing contributions from higher-revenue businesses while staying below regional benchmarks.
Council Questions and Discussion: Business License Tax Reform
Councilmembers asked a series of questions about the proposed business license tax structure, focusing on the choice of tax model, fairness, enforcement, competitiveness, and potential economic impacts.
Gross Receipts vs. Employee-Based Tax Models: A significant portion of the discussion centered on whether Costa Mesa should continue using a gross receipts-based tax or consider an employee-based model.
Staff explained that gross receipts taxes are the most common approach among California cities and are generally easier to administer and verify because they rely on documented revenue rather than employee counts. Staff also noted that many cities have moved away from employee-based models in recent years.
According to Staff, a gross receipts model:
Better reflects overall business activity and economic output.
Adjusts naturally with economic conditions, as tax obligations decline when revenues fall.
More accurately captures high-revenue businesses that may have relatively few employees.
Is easier to audit because reported revenue can be compared against tax records.
By contrast, Staff noted that employee-based systems:
May not accurately reflect a company's size or profitability.
Can be more difficult to verify and enforce.
May understate tax obligations for businesses that generate substantial revenue with a smaller workforce.
Business Preferences and Administrative Considerations: Councilmembers also asked whether businesses generally prefer one model over the other.
Staff said they had not conducted a formal analysis of business preferences and emphasized that the recommendation was driven primarily by administrative simplicity, consistency, and ease of enforcement rather than stakeholder preference.
Reporting, Audits, and Enforcement: Questions were raised about whether business revenues are self-reported and how the City verifies compliance.
Staff explained that the City's existing ordinance already includes audit authority and that no changes to enforcement provisions are proposed. Audits have been conducted in the past and can be supported by outside firms such as HDL when necessary.
Fairness and Alternative Approaches: Councilmembers questioned whether a profit-based tax might be fairer than a gross receipts tax, particularly for businesses operating with narrow profit margins.
Staff responded that a profit-based structure was not evaluated because the goal was to remain consistent with Costa Mesa's existing ordinance and aligned with the practices of neighboring jurisdictions, most of which also use gross receipts as the basis for their business license tax.
Regional Comparisons and Economic Competitiveness: Councilmembers noted that Costa Mesa's business license tax has not been meaningfully updated since 1985 and asked how long the city has trailed neighboring communities such as Santa Ana, Anaheim, and Orange.
While Staff did not have a complete historical comparison available, a consultant indicated that the disparity with Santa Ana has existed since at least 2004.
Councilmembers also asked whether the City's relatively low business license fees have helped attract or retain businesses over the years.
Staff confirmed that no formal economic development study has been conducted to determine whether Costa Mesa's lower rates have provided a measurable competitive advantage.
Key Takeaways: The discussion highlighted broad support for a gross receipts-based structure due to its simplicity, enforceability, and consistency with regional practices. At the same time, Councilmembers raised questions about fairness, competitiveness, and the potential economic effects of higher business license fees. Staff acknowledged that historical comparisons and economic development impacts have not been formally studied and may warrant additional analysis as the measure moves forward.
Council Questions and Discussion: Proposed Hotel Tax (TOT) Increase
Councilmembers focused their questions on three primary areas: potential new revenue sources, the economic effects of increasing hotel taxes, and maintaining Costa Mesa's competitiveness with neighboring cities.
Short-Term Rentals (AirBnB and Home-Sharing): Several councilmembers asked whether cities that permit short-term rentals collect transient occupancy taxes (TOT) from those properties and how much revenue those rentals generate compared with traditional hotels. Questions were also raised about whether Costa Mesa could estimate potential revenue from home-sharing and whether the City currently collects TOT on those rentals.
Staff explained that neighboring cities such as Newport Beach, Anaheim, and Huntington Beach collect TOT from short-term rentals. Costa Mesa currently allows home-sharing but does not collect TOT because it lacks a registration and tracking system. Staff noted that it does not currently have reliable data on the potential revenue that could be generated from home-sharing activity.
Hotel Industry Input and Travel Costa Mesa Analysis: Councilmembers expressed interest in understanding how a hotel tax increase might affect participation in the City's tourism programs and whether hotels might seek additional marketing support if costs increase.
Staff reported that Travel Costa Mesa has not yet taken a formal position. The organization is conducting an independent economic impact study and plans to present its findings before making recommendations regarding a potential TOT increase.
Economic Effects of a Tax Increase: Councilmembers asked whether the independent study would examine how higher hotel taxes could affect traveler behavior, hotel occupancy rates, and overall demand for Costa Mesa hotels.
Staff confirmed that the commissioned analysis will evaluate the potential impact of tax increases on hotel demand, occupancy, and competitiveness.
Flexibility in Setting Tax Rates: Questions were raised about whether the City could pursue a range-based tax structure—for example, authorizing a rate between 9% and 11%—that would allow future adjustments without returning to the voters.
The City Attorney confirmed that a range-based structure is legally permissible and that the Council could lower the rate within the approved range. However, if the rate were later reduced, any future increase back to a higher level would require voter approval.
Comparing Revenue Across Cities: Councilmembers emphasized that comparing tax rates alone does not provide a complete picture and requested information about actual TOT revenues generated in neighboring cities.
Staff noted that hotel tax revenues depend on several factors, including:
Number of hotel rooms
Average room rates
Occupancy levels
While revenue data from neighboring cities had been provided, Staff said additional analysis would be needed to determine which factors contribute most to revenue differences.
Differences in How Cities Calculate TOT: Questions were also raised about whether hotel tax revenues are directly comparable across cities.
Staff explained that some jurisdictions, such as Anaheim, calculate TOT differently by taxing the higher market value of a hotel room even when guests receive discounted rates. As a result, TOT comparisons between cities are not always an apples-to-apples comparison.
Key Takeaways: Councilmembers generally focused on:
Potential untapped revenue from short-term rentals.
The risk that higher hotel taxes could reduce demand or make Costa Mesa less competitive.
Whether the City should build flexibility into any future hotel tax increase.
Staff emphasized:
Significant data gaps remain, particularly regarding short-term rental revenue.
An independent hotel industry study is underway and expected to provide additional information.
Multiple tax structures are legally feasible, but the economic impacts require further analysis before policy decisions are made.
FM3 Research Survey Presentation: Polling consultant Richard Bernard of FM3 Research presented the results of a voter survey conducted May 4–11 among 426 likely Costa Mesa voters regarding two potential ballot measures: business license tax reform and a hotel tax (TOT) increase.
Key Survey Findings:
Perceived Need for Additional Revenue: Voters showed moderate awareness of the City's financial needs:
52% believe there is at least some need for additional funding.
Only 17% perceive a "great need."
The consultant noted that residents generally view Costa Mesa as a well-run city, which can make it harder to convince voters that additional revenue is necessary.
Business License Tax Measure: Initial voter support for a business license tax measure was:
53% support
33% oppose
14% undecided
After voters received additional information about the proposal and its purpose, support increased to approximately 71%, suggesting that voter education could play a significant role in the measure's success.
Hotel Tax (TOT) Measure: Initial support for a TOT increase was:
51% support
37% oppose
12% undecided
The consultant described the TOT measure as potentially viable but less certain than the business license measure because the polling included only limited questioning on the topic. Additional research would be needed to better evaluate voter support.
Funding Priorities: When asked how additional revenue should be used, voters ranked the following as top priorities:
1.    Public safety
2.    Homelessness response
3.    Street and road maintenance
4.    Parks maintenance
5.    Keeping public spaces clean
6.    Supporting and attracting businesses
Consultant's Conclusions: The presentation emphasized several themes:
Voter support increases when residents understand the City's financial needs and how the revenue would be used.
Communicating need is particularly challenging in cities that are already perceived as financially responsible and well-managed.
The business license tax proposal currently appears stronger politically than the hotel tax proposal.
Both measures would require substantial public education and outreach if placed on the ballot.
Council Questions and Discussion:
Use of Revenue: General vs. Special Tax: Councilmembers asked whether revenue could be dedicated to specific purposes such as public safety, parks, or infrastructure.
Staff explained that:
A general tax can be used for any municipal purpose and requires only a simple majority vote.
A special tax dedicates funds to specific uses and requires approval by two-thirds of voters.
While ballot language cannot earmark general tax revenues, the City can communicate intended priorities through resolutions, ballot arguments, and public education efforts.
Survey Methodology: Councilmembers asked how the survey was conducted and whether voters were informed about factors such as the City's business license tax remaining unchanged for more than 40 years.
The consultant explained that:
Responses were collected through a combination of phone, text, email, and online outreach.
Early questions intentionally avoided providing additional background information in order to measure voters' initial perceptions without influencing their answers.
Ballot Language and Messaging: Councilmembers asked whether future ballot language could highlight facts such as the percentage of small businesses that would be unaffected by a business license tax increase.
Staff and the consultant responded that:
The Council has flexibility to revise ballot language before adoption.
Ballot summaries are limited to 75 words and must include legally required information.
More detailed information can be shared through voter education materials, ordinance language, ballot arguments, and impartial analyses.
The consultant advised keeping messaging simple and focused on fairness, noting that too many statistics can confuse voters.
Protecting Small Businesses: Councilmembers discussed whether the measure could be structured to primarily affect larger businesses while minimizing impacts on small businesses.
Staff indicated that this is possible but would require careful design of the rate structure and exemptions.
Key Takeaways: The presentation suggested that a business license tax measure currently has stronger voter support than a hotel tax increase, particularly when voters understand why additional revenue is needed. Support for both measures appears closely tied to public safety, infrastructure, parks, and other quality-of-life services. Councilmembers also learned that they retain substantial flexibility in shaping both the tax structure and the messaging used to explain the proposals to voters.
Public Comment. Three speakers addressed the item.
Ralph Taboada (FiPAC member, speaking as a resident) clarified that FiPAC's recommendation was not necessarily a full 3% increase in the hotel tax (TOT). Rather, FiPAC discussed up to a 3-percentage-point increase through some combination of the TOT and Business Improvement Area (BIA) assessment. He also noted that FiPAC supported a gross receipts-based business license tax but did not recommend Staff's proposed rate. Personally, he supported a lower business license rate of $0.50 per $1,000 in gross receipts, a $10,000 cap rather than $15,000, and a maximum 2% increase in the hotel tax. He argued that a smaller increase would help Costa Mesa remain competitive with nearby cities, particularly Irvine.
Paulette Lombardi-Fries, President of Travel Costa Mesa, urged caution regarding any hotel tax increase. She said Travel Costa Mesa is commissioning an independent economic analysis and emphasized that visitors consider the total cost of lodging—including room rates, hotel taxes, BIA assessments, and other fees—when choosing destinations. She warned that higher taxes could make Costa Mesa less competitive, particularly for conferences, tournaments, group bookings, and budget-conscious travelers.
Steve Yannarell, Chair of Travel Costa Mesa and General Manager of the Westin South Coast Plaza, echoed those concerns. He emphasized that Costa Mesa's hotels compete directly with Irvine and other nearby cities, not national destinations. Even modest tax increases could influence where groups, conferences, and business travelers choose to stay. He cautioned that lower hotel occupancy could reduce spending at restaurants, retail stores, and other local businesses. Yannarell encouraged the Council to consider the long-term economic effects of a tax increase and noted that local hotels are already investing in renovations and improvements that could increase visitation and tax revenue through growth rather than higher tax rates.
Key Themes
General support for moderate, rather than large, tax increases.
Strong concern about maintaining competitiveness with Irvine and other nearby cities.
Calls for additional economic analysis before making decisions on the hotel tax.
Concern that higher hotel taxes could ultimately reduce tourism, visitor spending, and related tax revenues if travelers choose alternative destinations.
Summary of City Council Discussion and Direction to Staff:
The council discussion focused on whether to place measures on the ballot to increase the business license tax and/or the transient occupancy tax (TOT or hotel tax), and how to balance revenue needs with economic competitiveness.
1. Desire for More Business and Hotel Industry Input
One City Councilmember expressed concern that the City had heard primarily from larger businesses and hotel operators and wanted additional feedback from a broader range of businesses before moving forward. He suggested gathering polling, survey data, or direct business input to better understand how proposed tax increases might affect local businesses and what level of increase they could support.
He noted that because the business license tax has not been substantially updated in more than 40 years, many businesses may feel caught off guard by the proposal.
2. Discussion of a Sunset Clause
A Councilmember asked whether any tax increase could automatically expire after a set period, such as two years, allowing the city to evaluate whether the increase had negative economic effects.
Staff responded that:
A sunset provision is legally possible and would need to be included in the ballot measure.
Staff generally does not recommend sunsets because:
They complicate long-term budgeting.
Cities often return to voters to renew expiring taxes.
Major revenue sources are difficult to replace once incorporated into city operations.
Staff noted that for TOT specifically, if negative impacts emerged, the City Council could voluntarily reduce the tax rate in the future without needing a sunset provision.
For the business license tax, staff cautioned that because it would become an important revenue source, allowing it to expire could significantly impact reserves and financial stability.
Some councilmembers discussed alternatives such as requiring periodic reviews of the tax rather than automatic expiration.
3. Broad Support for Updating the Business License Tax
Several councilmembers expressed strong support for modernizing the business license tax, emphasizing that:
The structure has not been significantly updated in decades.
Inflation and city costs have increased substantially.
Many large businesses currently pay relatively small license fees given their size and revenue.
The city faces ongoing obligations related to public safety, infrastructure, facilities, and parks.
A common theme was that maintaining city services requires identifying new revenue sources rather than relying exclusively on budget cuts.
One councilmember argued that failing to update the tax could eventually force reductions in road maintenance, parks, public safety staffing, or other services.
Another noted that Staff recently cut millions from departmental budgets while maintaining services and argued that future councils will face even more difficult budget decisions if new revenues are not considered.
4. Protecting Small Businesses
There was significant interest among multiple councilmembers in shielding smaller businesses from increases.
Ideas discussed included:
Exempting businesses below a certain annual gross receipts threshold, such as $1 million.
Ensuring local small businesses, coffee shops, and startups are not burdened by the increase.
Creating a more progressive structure where larger companies contribute more.
Councilmembers discussed a possible framework of:
A rate of $0.50 per $1,000 in gross receipts (rather than Staff's $0.60 proposal).
A cap of approximately $10,000–$12,500 instead of a higher cap.
Excluding businesses below $1 million in gross receipts.
Staff was asked to model these scenarios and estimate revenue impacts.
5. Stronger Reservations About Raising the Hotel Tax (TOT)
While many Councilmembers appeared comfortable pursuing a business license tax measure, there was notably more caution regarding a hotel tax increase.
The concerns mirrored those raised by hotel representatives during public comment:
Competition with Irvine
Multiple Councilmembers acknowledged learning that:
Irvine is Costa Mesa's primary hotel competitor.
Several major Costa Mesa hotels directly compete with Irvine hotels for business travelers and group bookings.
Even small differences in overall lodging costs may influence where conferences, tournaments, and visitors stay.
Need for More Analysis
Councilmembers repeatedly stated they wanted:
The independent study being commissioned by Travel Costa Mesa.
Better analysis of how travelers make lodging decisions.
Information comparing total costs, not just tax rates.
One Councilmember expressed interest in understanding whether higher Costa Mesa hotel taxes would still leave total lodging costs competitive if hotel room rates in Irvine remain higher.
Preference for Smaller Increases
Several Councilmembers indicated that if a TOT increase moves forward, they would prefer:
A maximum increase of 2 percentage points rather than 3.
Maintaining competitiveness with Irvine.
Avoiding large changes that could unintentionally reduce hotel demand.
6. Interest in Regulating and Taxing Short-Term Rentals (AirBnBs)
A substantial portion of the discussion focused on short-term rentals.
Councilmembers noted that:
AirBnBs operating in the city may not currently be subject to the same registration and enforcement mechanisms as hotels.
Other jurisdictions successfully require:
Registration
Licensing
Inspections
Collection of TOT through platforms such as AirBnB
Councilmembers argued that:
The City should ensure existing lodging businesses are being regulated consistently.
Collecting taxes already due from short-term rentals could generate meaningful revenue.
This may be a more attractive option than increasing hotel taxes.
The City Attorney confirmed that short-term rentals are already subject to TOT requirements, but the City currently lacks a registration system that would allow Staff to identify and collect taxes from operators.
7. Linking Revenue Needs to Community Investments
Several councilmembers requested additional financial analysis before deciding on specific tax rates. They asked Staff to provide information on:
Long-term operating cost increases.
Infrastructure and facility maintenance needs.
Public safety facility improvements.
Parks improvements and deferred maintenance.
The City Manager stated that annual operating costs increase approximately $6–7 million per year due to contractual obligations and labor agreements alone.
Councilmembers suggested that future ballot discussions should clearly explain why additional revenue is being considered, including needs identified through facility and parks condition assessments.
Overall Direction of the Discussion:Â The general consensus appeared to be:
Business License Tax
Broad support for placing a business license tax measure on the ballot.
Strong interest in protecting small businesses.
Preference for a progressive structure based on gross receipts.
Continued refinement needed regarding rates, caps, and exemptions.
Hotel Tax (TOT)
Considerably more caution.
Desire for additional economic analysis before making a decision.
Concerns about losing competitiveness to Irvine.
More support for a modest increase (if any) rather than a large increase.
Additional Revenue Options
Significant interest in regulating and collecting taxes from short-term rentals (AirBnBs).
Interest in tying any new revenue to maintaining city services, public safety facilities, parks, and infrastructure.
Overall, the discussion showed growing council support for a business license tax update, while the proposed hotel tax increase remained much more uncertain pending additional economic data.
JUNE 10 FAIRVIEW PARK STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING. All Committee members were present, except Daniel Baume and Jose Toscano.
Also in attendance were Kelly Dalton, Fairview Park Administrator, Brian Gruener, Parks and Community Services Director, and Seung Yang, City Engineer. Orange County Model Engineers Liaison Hank Castignetti and Jason Komala, Parks and Community Services Commission Liaison, were present.
Council Liaison Arlis Reynolds was absent.
PUBLIC COMMENT. Betsy Densmore spoke about the Biological Technical Memorandum CEQA Analysis, HSS Flying Field Relocation Project prepared by Hamilton Biological for the City. She commented that the diagram of proposed east side flying field in that Technical Memorandum looks  larger than the one on the west side. Kim Hendricks remarked that the current fly field is not in the location the City designated and that the flyers continue to degrade the park. I (Cynthia McDonald) also spoke about the Technical Memorandum  and the new location, in my opinion, is a liability to the City. I also noted that the contract with HSS requires that it move its equipment, and that is not the City’s responsibility. I also commented that relocating the fly field doesn’t absolve the City of responsibility, as any accidents on Placentia as a result of errant planes will be partially the fault of the City because of its poor choice of location. Â
APPROVAL OF MINUTES. A motion to approve the minutes from the April 29 meeting was made by Jay Humphrey and seconded by Terri Fuqua. The motion passed on a 5–0 vote, with two members absent.
NEW BUSINESS: There were two items discussed: a memorial bench donation request and a discussion about a donation and sponsorship program. The Committee was only allowed to give feedback on the item, but could not vote on it as the Parks and Community Services Commission has that right. There was discussion about the donation and sponsorship program. The subject of donating trees came up, but that was quickly tamped down because it was decided long ago by the Committee that the tree leaves hindered the preservation and restoration of the vernal pools. Â
There was discussion about creating a nonprofit for donations, but it was pointed out that the Costa Mesa Community Foundation is already the vehicle for donations and that it has an “adopt a park” program.
OLD BUSINESS: This item had been continued from a prior meeting, so it really was New Business, but who is counting? Kelly Dalton briefly spoke, and then passed on the mike to Paul Wagner of Coastal Corridor Alliance (CCA), who spoke about the plan to provide a year-long program to train volunteer docents or wardens for the park.
This comes as a result of the need for more enforcement in Fairview Park, but the City has, so far, refused to provide a full-time park warden. In fact, during the budget process, the Police Department cut one of the park warden positions from its staff.
The program will be modeled on the Bolsa Chica and will launch this month. CCA acquired a grant from the Trust for Public Land for the program, so this is free to the City. If It will take one year to develop the program, but next year 20 volunteers will be trained as docents/wardens so they can engage and educate the public on the wonders of Fairview Park. CCA is looking for volunteers from Coastline Colleges, the Shalimar neighborhood, and the Costa Mesa Senior Center. This program received support by multiple members of the Steering Committee.
If you are interested in helping or participating, you can get more information from Paul@CoastalCorridor.org .
ADMINISTRATOR’S UPDATE: Dalton provided an update on the Fairview Park Master Plan. The public comment period for the draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration has passed, and now the document will be revised based on the comments that were received. The final version is anticipated to be presented to the City Council around September.
The Mesa Restoration Project is continuing, and although it may appear that nothing is happening, it is because this is the season where invasive weeds are being killed.
Â
Comments