Laserfiche WebLink
not only disruptive; it raises serious due process concerns for property owners who have relied in <br /> good faith on existing zoning regulations. <br /> Finally, I must note how disjointed the process has become. The Council's lack of quorum at the <br /> last scheduled hearing delayed this vote, adding more uncertainty to an already confusing <br /> situation. Responsible property owners like myself deserve clear, predictable rules and an open <br /> and transparent process. <br /> I respectfully request that the Council reject the ordinance as currently drafted. At a minimum, <br /> the City should incorporate an exemption or clear path to relief for longstanding, low-impact <br /> industrial properties with no history of violations and allow low-impact M2 businesses to <br /> continue operating. There is no justification for treating clean, compliant operations the same as <br /> bad actors, and no legal basis for moving forward with this ordinance without proper CEQA <br /> analysis and meaningful procedural safeguards. <br /> Put simply, the entire ordinance is unnecessary; the City already has ample tools through its code <br /> enforcement authority to address problem operators without resorting to a blanket ban that <br /> penalizes longstanding, compliant businesses—businesses that have consistently contributed to <br /> Santa Ana's employment base,tax revenues, and industrial economy for decades. <br /> Thank you for the opportunity to submit this letter. <br /> Sincerely, <br /> Michael A. Freedman <br /> 1008 & 1012 N. Fuller Street <br /> Santa Ana, CA <br /> -2- <br />