O.C. Registrar rejects scheduling 3 Newport Beach ballot measures in November

Three Newport Beach charter amendments sought by residents but not fully embraced by the City Council cannot be added to the Nov. 3 election because the city advised the Orange County Registrar of Voters of them past deadline, an attorney for the County of Orange notified attorneys for both sides Friday afternoon.

It’s the latest wrinkle in prolonged effort by ballot proponents to have the trio of measures on term limits, district elections and transparency policies go before Newport Beach voters this November.

On Tuesday, the Newport Beach City Council voted 5-2 to schedule the three citizen-led ballot measures for Nov. 7, 2028 general election instead of this November. Orange County Superior Court Judge Julianne Bancroft reversed that decision two days later.

Ahead of a Thursday afternoon hearing that Bancroft canceled, she ruled that the City Council “abused its discretion” and ordered councilmembers to take immediate steps to schedule the measure for the Nov. 3, 2026 general election.

Former Mayor Marshall “Duffy” Duffield and the Newport Beach Stewardship Assn. hailed Bancroft’s decision as a victory.

“I believe the judge has sent a strong message to the city that she doesn’t appreciate their delay tactics,” said Charles Klobe, president of Still Protecting Our Newport. “They had no good reason for delay. I think the judge trusts that Newport Beach voters can figure these initiatives out in the time available to them, and I agree that they can.”

Whether or not the initiatives can still get to the November ballot outside of a consolidated election remains unclear.

The county attorney’s letter on behalf of Registrar of Voters Bob Page, noted that if Newport Beach sought to request election services under code, the city’s hastily-produced packet received Thursday did not specify the types of services requested, an ask that would be subject to approval by the Orange County Board of Supervisors.

If approved by the supervisors, the city would have to provide a county elections official with a list of precincts no later than 61 days before an election — or before Sept. 3, in Newport Beach’s case.

Klobe and NBSA’s attorneys believe that Newport Beach can abide by the court order by independently conducting a general municipal election to coincide with the general election, a compliance the city would have to pay for.

Newport Beach had challenged the three initiatives, plus a housing measure that will appear on this November’s ballot, in court and alleged that proponents did not publish legal notices in the Daily Pilot as the city’s newspaper of record.

But on Aug. 19, Bancroft struck down the city’s challenge and ruled that proponents substantially complied with election code in publishing the notices in the Orange County Reporter — which, like The Pilot, is an adjudicated newspaper— and gathering enough valid signatures from registered voters to qualify.

She also gave city officials discretion on when to put the measures on the ballot, but required an explanation in court if officials chose the Nov. 7, 2028 general election for any or all of them.

When the City Council voted Tuesday to schedule the three initiatives to be considered by voters in the November 2028 election, a staff report recommended the date “given the significant and volume of the proposed changes to the city charter.”

City officials contended that delaying the vote two years allows enough time to prepare ballot questions, impartial analysis and arguments for and against each initiative.

It was a recommendation that some residents and councilmembers did not believe held weight.

Councilmember Robyn Grant favored scheduling the ballot measure this November.

“I am especially sensitive to staff time and the need to properly implement these responsibilities that we have under the election code, but I think that these considerations have to be viewed in the larger context of what prolonging this matter means to our community, and maintaining the confidence that the public has in this city council,” she said during the meeting. “Our role tonight is to provide certainty and allow the process to come to a conclusion.”

Grant’s comments on the issue stood alone.

Councilmember Noah Blom moved to put the three initiatives on the November 2028 ballot in accordance with city staff’s recommendation without deliberation.

A council majority agreed with him, with only Councilmember Michelle Barto joining Grant in voting against it on the seven-member board.

But Bancroft did not find the reasons for scheduling the ballot measures two years from now to be compelling enough to stand.

It marked the second court defeat for Newport Beach this week alone. The city filed an appeal of Bancroft’s Aug. 19 ruling and sought emergency relief, but an appellate court denied it before Tuesday’s council meeting.

An attorney for the Newport Beach Stewardship Assn. argued “the city has been engaged in scorched-earth litigation for months to delay and block a local vote” in a letter to the California Court of Appeal.

Bancroft’s order seeks to have Newport Beach residents decide the three charter amendments in two months, not two years.

The term limits initiative seeks to impose a lifetime cap on councilmembers tenures to two four-year terms.

Proponents are also asking voters to reform the city’s hybrid district elections system, which currently requires candidates to live in the district they seek to represent but subjects them to a citywide vote. If passed by voters, only residents within a district will have the right to vote for their own representative.

Another initiative seeks to broaden public access to city board and commission meetings through publishing agendas as well as video and audio recordings of proceedings.

“Who is paying for the election is unclear to me,” Klobe said, “But we expect the three initiatives to be on the ballot on Nov. 3 as the court has ordered.”

A city spokesperson, Georgia Rios, stated in an email Friday afternoon that Newport Beach is “currently analyzing the steps necessary to comply with the judge’s order and will likely seek further direction from the court next week, as coordination with the County is critical to conducting a successful election.”