Correspondence - #26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LOFTIN I BEDELL P.C. Clerk of City of Santa Ana September 19, 2023 Page 2 of 4 ORDINANCE NO. NS-3027 and PROPOSED AMENDMENTS Councilmember Phan proposed amendment to the 2022 Ordinance to change the council vote required for future amendments to the ordinance from a majority to a super-majority approval in the future, which provision, among others in the proposed amendment, violated the City's Charter and numerous Government Code sections as set forth in the August 29, 2023 correspondence submitted by this Firm and Attorney Terry Dowdall'. Councilmember Phan is a lawyer, purportedly in the public agency team of her law Firm and holds some capacity in the City Attorney's Office of two other Cities. Councilmember Phan wrote the proposed"Amended Ordinance"that she put on the Agenda for hearing on August 29, 2023. The factual basis used to support the Amended Ordinance was generally framed from a political point of view, rather than a factual basis. The next effort to modify the 2022 Ordinance to prohibit further amendment is the proposal before you at this time — the request to prepare a "City Council-Initiated Ballot Measure for Voter Approval Affirming the City of Santa Ana's Rent Stabilization and Just Cause Eviction Ordinance." Councilmember Phan shows her talent again as a political writer disguising the goals of the proposed ballot. Evidence of this talent was previously demonstrated in the Agenda Item 21, City Council Hearing, August 29, 2023. As discussed in the Opposition correspondence to such agenda item, the Agenda Item did not correspond the Agenda Packet for the same matter. There are no factual or legal basis provided or presented as topics or considerations for discussion. The public is thereby prevented from providing knowledgeable support or opposition to the consideration for a ballot measure. The assumption contained herein is that the goal of the Ballot Measure will be the issues set forth in the Agenda Packet for August 29, 2023, Item 21 and unknown considerations and discussions related to a Council initiated ballot measure.2 The consideration of a Ballot Measure should incorporate the purposes, language and legality of the Ballot Measure. Questions to consider: The allocation of City funds is one of the issues to evaluate - What impact will additional expenditure to support the Ballot Measure have on the City Budget? Would the money be better spent assisting the resident renters to pay rent, utility charges and other expenses? The issue raised in 2021 regarding the excess funds from the Federal and State funding to assist with the rental assistance appears to not have been addressed at this time. What was, and is, the plan for the use of the funds? How much money has the City spent to date defending its legally deficient Ordinances? How much money has the City spent to date on contractors and vendors to prepare the 2022 Ordinance to amendment the 2021 Ordinances and similar expenses? Respectfully, the cost to the City, the negative impact on the renters due to changing City Ordinance and Policies, the negative impact on the providers of rental housing and the suppression of new housing could all have been avoided had the City taken the time to consider and pass a legally viable ordinance in 2021, rather than rushing the ordinances forward. 'Incorporated herein are the Opposition letters to this matter submitted by Sue Loftin,Loftin Bedell P.C.and Terry Dowdall,Dowdall Law,and all other opposition to the Phan proposal presented for the City Council Hearing on August 29, 2023,Agenda Item 21. 2 The Opposition to the August 29,2023,Agenda Item 21 is incorporated into this correspondence along with the public record related thereto. KMC7000SA0102023.9.19(v5)Fina1