Laserfiche WebLink
September 8, 2009 <br />Honorable Judge Kim Dunning <br />Presiding Judge of Superior Court <br />700 Civic Center Drive West <br />Santa Ana, CA 92701 <br />Honorable Judge Dunning: <br />The City of Santa Ana, which serves over 355,000 people, appreciates the opportunity to respond <br />to your letter of June 15, 2009 on the issue of "Paper Water -Does Orange County Have a <br />Reliable Future?" <br />The City is pleased to offer the following responses to the 2008-2009 Orange County Grand Jury <br />findings and recommendations: <br />• F-1: There is inadequate coordination between local land-use planning agencies <br />and local water supply agencies, resulting in a process that fails to fully engage <br />issues. <br />Disagree. <br />The City of Santa Ana provides for a high level of coordination between its land-use <br />planning function and its water supply agency through an internal development <br />review process. Because the City of Santa Ana provides its own water utility, the <br />employees representing the Water Division of the Public Works Department play an <br />integral part in the City's Development Review Committee. The Water Division <br />reviews and provides input on every development project proposed in the City of <br />Santa Ana. <br />(a). Water agencies have tended to avoid interfering with or participating in <br />growth-management decisions. <br />Disagree. <br />The City of Santa Ana's General Plan, which provides a policy framework for <br />growth-management in Santa Ana, provides the baseline data on which the City's <br />Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) relies for its projections of existing <br />supply and future demand. The two planning documents are inextricably linked <br />and provide crucial data that is used in the analysis of development projects. <br />Through the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review process <br />project impacts related to public utilities, such as water provision, are analyzed, <br />any impacts are identified and mandatory mitigation measures are implemented. <br />These implementation measures can be quite costly which some might interpret as <br />"interfering" with a project, though the City would characterize it as simply <br />protecting the public interest. In addition, the City requires that developments <br />EXHIBIT 1 <br />19E-3 <br />