HomeMy WebLinkAbout2 - PUBLIC COMMENT_Zinn
November 9, 2020
Via Electronic Mail Only
City of Santa Ana Planning Commission
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA 92702
c/o Commission Secretary Sarah Bernal
SBernal@santa-ana.org
Re: City of Santa Ana Draft General Plan Update
Dear Chair McLoughlin and Honorable Members of the Commission:
On behalf of Orange County Environmental Justice (“OCEJ”), I write to provide
comments on the City of Santa Ana’s proposed environmental justice policies for its
General Plan Update. As required by Senate Bill 1000 (“SB 1000”), Santa Ana has
integrated a number of environmental justice policies throughout its General Plan
elements. However, OCEJ is concerned that these proposed policies are insufficient and
will not reduce the unique and compounded health risks to environmental justice
communities. OCEJ urges the City to bolster its existing General Plan Update policies
regarding lead contamination and include specific actions and plans to remediate lead
toxicity. The City should also avoid rushing to approve the General Plan Update before
the City can engage with all disadvantaged communities.
I. General Plan Update policies concerning lead contamination are inadequate.
Lead contamination has caused and continues to cause severe harm to Santa Ana’s
low-income communities and communities of color.1 According to a recent study
conducted by the University of California Irvine and OCEJ, City census tracts with a
median household income below $50,000 have over five times higher soil lead
1 “Low-income and predominately Latino neighborhoods in Santa Ana affected by toxic
lead, report says,” L.A. Times (September 10, 2020),
https://www.latimes.com/socal/daily-pilot/entertainment/story/2020-09-10/low-income-
and-predominately-latino-neighborhoods-in-santa-ana-affected-by-toxic-lead-report-says;
City of Santa Ana Planning Commission
November 9, 2020
Page 2
concentrations than higher income census tracts.2 Higher lead concentrations are also
statistically correlated with census tracts in which Latina/o/x/Hispanic residents and
immigrant residents constitute a majority. The study also found that more than half of
residential samples had lead concentrations in excess of the 80 parts per million (“ppm”)
limit recommended by the California Environmental Protection Agency, and 11 census
tracts were characterized as high risk of health impacts to residents due to the level of soil
lead contamination. These statistics are especially troubling given the ongoing COVID-
19 pandemic, which is forcing Santa Ana’s disadvantaged communities to shelter in
places that may have high levels of lead toxicity.
Children are at especially high risk given their higher absorption of lead.
Researchers found that Santa Ana neighborhoods housing more than 28,000 children had
lead concentrations exceeding 80 ppm, and 12,000 of those children were in
neighborhoods with lead concentrations above 400 ppm, the Environmental Protection
Agency’s recommended maximum for play areas.3 To maintain children’s blood lead
levels below the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s (“CDC”) threshold of 50
parts per billion (“ppb”), experts recommend a maximum of 40 ppm of soil lead toxicity.4
However, as the CDC concedes, there is no identified threshold or safe level of lead in
blood.5 Evidence continues to accrue that commonly encountered blood lead
2 S. Masri et al., Social and spatial distribution of soil lead concentrations in the City of
Santa Ana, California: Implications for health inequities, 743 Sci. of the Total Env’t
(2020), available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140764.
3 Id.; Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Registry, Center for Disease Control and
Prevention, “Lead Toxicity: What are U.S. Standards for Lead Levels?” accessed
October, 28, 2020,
https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/csem.asp?csem=34&po=8#:~:text=EPA%20has%20esta
blished%20400%20ppm,areas%20for%20federally%20funded%20projects.
4 National Center for Environmental Health/Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry, Meeting of the Lead Poisoning Prevention Subcommittee of the NCEH/ATSDR
Board of Scientific Counselors, Record of the Proceedings (Sept. 19, 2016), available at
https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/science/lpp/docs/lead_subcommittee_minutes_9_19_2016_50
8.pdf.
5 Id.; American Academy of Pediatrics, Prevention of Childhood Lead Toxicity, 138
Pediatrics (2016), available at https://www.greenandhealthyhomes.org/wp-
content/uploads/AAP-Report.pdf.
City of Santa Ana Planning Commission
November 9, 2020
Page 3
concentrations, even those below 50 ppb, impair cognition and cardiovascular function.6
Because of higher average lead concentrations in low-income census tracts and census
tracts with large populations of Latina/o/x/Hispanic residents, children of color in the
City’s low-income households are most at risk for lead toxicity.7
This significant and disproportionate burden on Santa Ana’s disadvantaged
communities underscores the importance of including comprehensive General Plan
policies and initiatives to remediate soil lead contamination and protect public health. In a
July 2020 letter to City officials, OCEJ sought to provide community-based
recommendations to ameliorate soil lead toxicity for the City’s disadvantaged
communities. OCEJ’s policy recommendations included, among other things, blood
testing for communities exposed to soil lead levels greater than 80 ppm, free on-going
health care access for communities poisoned by lead, comprehensive lead testing of
residential soils, and remediation of homes with soil lead levels above 80 ppm. OCEJ has
also consistently emphasized the need for community collaboration and input.
Unfortunately, the City has not integrated these suggestions into any of its proposed
environmental justice policies.
Although the City has included a few implementation actions aimed at addressing
lead contamination in its most recent draft General Plan Update, those vague actions lack
the necessary specificity to ensure results. For example, Action 2.4 in the Safety Element
states that the City will “[w]ork with local and regional partners . . . to understand the
prevalence, sources, and implications of lead contamination of soil across Santa Ana,”
and “[c]ollaborate with environmental justice stakeholders in proposing solutions to
remove hazardous lead soils in the city. . . with benchmarks to measure and track
effectiveness.” Similarly, Action 3.26 in the Land Use Element states that the City will
“identify baseline conditions for lead contamination in Santa Ana, monitor indicators of
lead contamination, and measure positive outcomes.”
These measures fail to provide specific direction about how community
organizations and stakeholders will be identified, the timeline for implementation of these
programs, and commitment to specific benchmarks to ensure implementation.
Additionally, and most importantly, the proposed policies do not mention community
leadership or ownership. As the California Department of Justice (“DOJ”) noted in its
own comment letter earlier this month, the City’s policies do not match the severity of the
lead contamination burdens and unique needs of the disadvantaged communities in its
6 Id.
7 S. Masri et al. at 2.
City of Santa Ana Planning Commission
November 9, 2020
Page 4
jurisdiction as SB 1000 requires. Gov. Code § 65302(h)(1)(c). DOJ also agrees that the
City must do more to incorporate community input. The City’s newly proposed policies
and implementation actions do not solve the deficiencies DOJ identified.
The City should amend its current General Plan Update policies to incorporate
additional measures focused on addressing lead contamination specifically. OCEJ
recommends the following:
A. Identify collaborators.
First, the City should strengthen existing policies by not just explicitly identifying
collaborators such as, OCEJ, Orange County Health Care Agency (“OCHCA”),
University of California Irvine Public Health (“UCI Public Health”), but also establishing
a method to identify other regional organizations and community stakeholders. Lead
poisoning arises from several sources: historic use of leaded gasoline, lead-based paint,
pesticides, and disruption of leaded soil during construction.8 Accordingly, General Plan
policies should emphasize that remediation will require collaborative efforts from
agencies, community groups, and community members.
Sample Policies and Actions:
• Work with OCEJ, OCHCA, UCI Public Health, and other community
organizations to understand the prevalence, sources, and implications of lead
contamination across Santa Ana’s soil. At the first cohort meeting with the listed
organizations, engage in consultation to identify additional agencies, groups, or
community members that can provide different community perspectives.
B. Establish a Public Health Action Plan.
To allow the City to better understand the prevalence, sources, and implications of
lead contamination throughout the City, the General Plan Update should call for the
development of a Public Health Action Plan by December 31, 2022. The Public Health
Action Plan must be rooted in equity and community knowledge. It must be developed in
a process characterized by community ownership rather than mere community
engagement. In developing the Public Health Action Plan, the City should provide
stipends, translation/interpretation services, childcare for community leaders to engage
residents, and other funded accessibility measures to ensure the opportunity for
democratic participation by residents in developing the Plan. If the City issues any
8 See S. Masri et al. at 2.
City of Santa Ana Planning Commission
November 9, 2020
Page 5
request for proposals related to the development of the Plan, the City should prioritize
consideration of Santa Ana community-based and grassroots-affiliated consultants and/or
consultants with demonstrated experience in facilitating community ownership of public-
participatory processes. It is essential that the affected community is directly involved in
decisions about the Plan’s policies and implementation strategies.
Although the content of the Plan must be dictated by community stakeholders,
OCEJ believes that, at a minimum, it should include specific policies, as well as specific
implementation actions that cover all of the following:
(1) Education and outreach – raising knowledge about lead toxicity, health
effects, and effective strategies;
(2) Support and coordination – describing current and potential partnerships to
implement the strategy;
(3) Incentives and funding – listing funding and incentive opportunities for the
strategy; and
(4) Planning and regulations – policy actions and regulatory changes that could
be put in place to support the recommendation.
The goal of the Public Health Action Plan should be to lay out a long-term vision
for community health and health equity. For this reason, the City must prioritize
development of the Plan over any other lead remediation initiative. The Plan must be
designed to guarantee community input is integral to the process of identifying solutions
to Santa Ana’s lead toxicity crisis. Merely engaging community members is insufficient;
the City must ensure that community members are leading and equally participating in
crafting solutions and identifying viable implementation strategies.
Sample Public Health Action Plan Policies:
• Develop performance standards and cultural competency guidelines for public
health agencies and partners to use when treating patients with lead toxicity.
Cultural competency guidelines will allow providers and organizations to
effectively deliver health care services that meet the social, cultural, and linguistic
needs of patients most affected by lead toxicity.
City of Santa Ana Planning Commission
November 9, 2020
Page 6
• Expand and standardize population-wide data sources. Alongside experts and
community stakeholders, assess the adequacy of current systems on the basis of
these characteristics and the need for dynamic, interactive data access and use.
• Use data to plan health programs and to communicate consistent messages about
the urgency of preventing lead toxicity.
• Develop and support detailed research agendas that specifically address
community health and health equity, including prevention of lead toxicity in
children.
C. Mandate blood lead tests.
OCEJ maintains that the General Plan Update should commit the City to work
with OCEJ, UCI Public Health, OCHCA, and other community stakeholders to provide
free blood lead testing for all Santa Ana residents. Through this General Plan policy, the
City should provide funded comprehensive support services for residents affected by lead
exposures to help with care, with these supports delivered by trusted community
institutions. Support services include, but are not limited to: trusted community members
communicating and following up on blood lead test results, blood testing as a
preventative measure, and early childhood lead toxicity intervention.
Sample Policies and Actions:
• Work with OCEJ, UCI Public Health, OCHCA, and other community stakeholders
to provide free blood lead testing for all Santa Ana residents.
• Provide direct blood test outreach to residents in homes with soil lead levels 80
ppm or higher.
• Launch advertisement campaigns promoting testing for residents in communities
with low blood testing rates. Advertisement campaigns will include educational
material discussing the importance of testing and lead toxicity remediation.
Resources and testing advertisements will be printed in all languages spoken by
3% or more of Santa Ana residents.
• Follow-up with all residents that test for any amount of lead toxicity. Provide free
health services for lead-related health problems.
City of Santa Ana Planning Commission
November 9, 2020
Page 7
• Provide a dedicated nurse to any child with a blood lead level above 50 ppb to
coordinate care.
D. Conduct comprehensive soil testing.
Similarly, the General Plan Update should establish a comprehensive scheme for
soil testing on lands designated for residential or recreational use. With the assistance of
the appropriate agencies and community stakeholders, Santa Ana should prepare or
support the preparation of soil lead contamination studies and establish a testing schedule
for all city-owned parks.
The City of Arvin adopted several policies to address water contamination in their
Conservation and Open Space Element that could serve as a model for Santa Ana.9
Arvin’s Policy CO-4.1 requires the City to monitor water quality regularly in all wells in
the Arvin Community Services District, and under Action 5.2, the City must prepare or
support the preparation of water quality and water management studies to ensure the
continued provision of good quality water to residents.
Sample Policies and Actions:
• Work with OCEJ, UCI Public Health, OCHCA, California Department of Toxic
Substance Control, City Parks, Recreation and Community Services Agency, and
other community stakeholders to monitor soil quality for lead contamination
regularly. Prepare or support the preparation of soil quality and lead toxicity
studies to ensure soil is safe in all residential and recreational areas.
• Test all municipal parks for soil lead contamination by December 31, 2022, as part
of the comprehensive study. Re-test every two years.
• Provide free soil lead testing to all Santa Ana residents and conduct targeted
outreach for soil testing to any residence in a census tract in which at least one
other residence has soil lead contamination exceeding 80 ppm.
9 City of Arvin General Plan Update, adopted by Arvin City Council on August 21, 2012,
http://www.arvin.org/wp-
content/uploads/2015/08/ADOPTED_ARVIN_GP_UPDATE_Aug-21-121.pdf.
City of Santa Ana Planning Commission
November 9, 2020
Page 8
• Publish all soil lead tests performed in the jurisdiction in a publicly available
database. Circulate reports to health care providers and require health care
providers to follow-up with residents for blood testing.
E. Remediate contaminated sites prior to issuing development permits.
Finally, the City should prohibit the issuance of permits for new construction until
a proposed development site is tested for soil lead toxicity and any identified
contamination is remediated. One of the City’s recently proposed implementation actions,
Action 3.23 in the Land Use Element, merely requires developers to identify potential
contamination. Action 3.23 does not require soil testing nor does it provide a plan for
ensuring remediation.
The City of Richmond adopted a series stronger policies in their Community
Health and Wellness Element that the City should follow instead. Richmond’s Policy
HW-9 requires the City to ensure that contaminated sites are adequately remediated
before allowing new development and to implement a response plan to address existing
contaminated sites in the City.10 This policy also requires the City to develop guidelines
for convening an oversight committee with community representation to advise and
oversee toxic site cleanup and remediation. Further, Action HW9.K requires the City to
adopt standards for the safe management of hazardous substances, including standards
that require soil testing at development sites where contamination is suspected.
Sample Policies and Actions:
• Implement standards for the safe management of hazardous substances in close
coordination with the City Planning Department, California Department of Toxic
Substance Control, and other appropriate agencies. The standards should require
soil testing at development sites where contamination is suspected based on
specified criteria. Use of the latest technologies available should be considered
when conducting remediation to expedite the process and do the least harm to the
environment and human health.
10 City of Richmond, General Plan, Health and Wellness Element, adopted by Richmond
City Council on April 25, 2012,
http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/8579/Health-and-Wellness-
Element?bidId=#:~:text=Purpose%20of%20the%20Element,well%2Dbeing%20of%20Ri
chmond%20residents.
City of Santa Ana Planning Commission
November 9, 2020
Page 9
• Require property owners to test proposed development sites for soil lead toxicity
and comply with state and federal requirements for site remediation as a condition
for approving redevelopment on contaminated sites. Seek state and federal funds
to implement the necessary level of clean-up.
* * *
OCEJ urges Santa Ana to follow SB 1000’s mandate to “prioritize improvements
and programs that address the needs of disadvantaged communities” by creating General
Plan policies and actions that will lead to remediation of lead pollution and amelioration
of its serious health consequences. Gov. Code § 65302(h)(1)(b)-(c). Santa Ana’s
proposed policy goals and actions do not go far enough to meet the burden of lead
toxicity that the City’s disadvantaged communities are forced to endure.
II. Santa Ana’s expedited General Plan Update timeline is concerning.
Santa Ana released a Draft Environmental Impact Report and draft General Plan
Update in August 2020. Subsequently, the City released a second draft of the General
Plan Update on September 28, 2020. City staff anticipates the hearing process for the
General Plan and the Final Environmental Impact Report to begin in early November
2020, with adoption set to occur only weeks later. This estimated timeline is unrealistic.
Community engagement is the backbone of SB 1000, and an accelerated timeline cannot
fully allow for the meaningful community engagement with environmental justice
communities that the law requires. See Gov. Code § 65302(h)(1)(b).
Moreover, the speed with which the City is attempting to respond to General Plan
Update comments raises concerns about the thoroughness and adequacy of the review
process. An agency’s review and response to public comments is a time-consuming
endeavor, and rushing the process runs the risk of failing to incorporate valid community
input. OCEJ urges the City not to push forward with a General Plan Update before the
City can meaningfully engage with its disadvantaged communities and adequately
respond to community comments.
III. Conclusion
Santa Ana’s proposed environmental justice policies do not sufficiently identify,
address, and remedy existing lead contamination affecting low-income communities of
color in Santa Ana. The City should amend its draft General Plan Update to include the
policies discussed above to ensure that the City implements a successful plan to
ameliorate lead toxicity.
City of Santa Ana Planning Commission
November 9, 2020
Page 10
Very truly yours,
SHUTE, MIHALY & WEINBERGER LLP
Matthew D. Zinn
Katrina A. Tomas
cc: Verny Carvajal, Principal Planner
Enrique Valencia, OCEJ
Rica Garcia, California Department of Justice
Shahir Masri, UCI Public Health
Michael Logue, UCI Public Health
Jun Wu, UCI Public Health
Alana LeBrón, Department of Chicano/Latino Studies, University of California
Irvine
Abigail Reyes, Community Resilience, University of California Irvine
Lisa Rudloff, Santa Ana Parks, Recreation and Community Services
1303484.7
as