HomeMy WebLinkAboutCorrespondence - #34 Orozco, Norma
From: Matthew Struhar <Matthew.Struhar@doj.ca.gov>
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2023 12:44 PM
To: eComment
Cc: David Pai; Christina Bull Arndt
Subject: July 18, 2023 City Council Meeting - Agenda Item 34 - Public Comment
Attachments: Letter to Santa Ana re Urgency Ordinance.pdf
Hello,
Please see the attached letter,which the Office of the Attorney General submits as a public comment regarding agenda
item 34—the Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment No. 2023-03 to Exempt certain Parcels Identified by the City
from the Requirements of Assembly Bill 2011 and Senate Bill 6 Pursuant to California Government Code Sections
65912.114, 65912.124, and 65852-.24—for the City Council's July 18, 2023 meeting.
Thank you.
0*�'1 ATTbRI,'pk Matthew T. Struhar
41 Deputy Attorney General
ar Land Use and Conservation Section,Public Rights Division
Office of the Attorney General
1300 I Street I P.O. Box 944255 1 Sacramento, CA 95814
o sd' Telephone (916) 210-7246 1 Matthew.Struhar(a�doj.ca.gov
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication with its contents may contain confidential and/or legally
privileged information. It is solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). Unauthorized interception, review,
use or disclosure is prohibited and may violate applicable laws including the Electronic Communications
Privacy Act. If you are not the intended recipient,please contact the sender and destroy all copies of the
communication.
i
is 6s}yF
A
N A
ROB BONTA State of California
Attorney General DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
300 SOUTH SPRING STREET,SUITE 1702
LOS ANGELES,CA 90013-1230
Public: (213)269-6000
Telephone: (213)269-6383
Facsimile: (916)731-2121
E-Mail: Christina.Amdt@doj.ca.gov
July 17, 2023
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza
Santa Ana, CA 92701
Attn: Sonia Carvalho
Re: Urgency Ordinances Adopted on June 20, 2023
Dear Ms. Carvalho:
We have reviewed the urgency ordinance, Ordinance No. NS-3045, that the City Council
passed on June 20, 2023, purporting to exempt certain parcels from AB 2011. We were aware
that the Council had previously been considering a resolution concerning this subject matter but
were surprised to learn it was converted into an urgency ordinance, particularly since the
published June 20 meeting agenda did not identify it as such. State law provides that urgency
ordinances can only be adopted in specific emergency circumstances supported by legislative
findings of an immediate threat to public welfare. Because the urgency ordinance did not make
such findings, the ordinance is void as a matter of law.
As set forth in detail in statewide guidance our office issued today, to be valid,urgency
ordinances amending zoning regulations must be supported by written legislative findings that
"there is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, or welfare, and that the
approval of additional subdivisions,use permits, variances, building permits, or any other
applicable entitlement for use which is required in order to comply with a zoning ordinance
would result in that threat to public health, safety, or welfare." (Gov. Code, § 65858, subd. (c);
216 Sutter Bay Associates v. County ofSutter(1997) 58 Cal.AppAth 86.) Failure to make the
showings required by Section 65858 renders an urgency ordinance invalid as a matter of law.
(California Charter Schools Assn. v. City of Huntington Park(2019) 35 Cal.App.5th 362, 365.)
Ordinance No. NS-3045 states that"there is a current and immediate threat to the public
health, safety, or welfare based on the passage of AB 2011, and an absence of a local ordinance
adopting AB 2011 and the exemption of parcels described therein..., leading to uncertainty of
implementation of the local land use plan in a consistent and equitable manner that may also be
otherwise consistent with the General Plan." This conclusory recital is insufficient to support the
use of an urgency ordinance.
July 17, 2023
Page 2
AB 2011 was enacted on September 28, 2022, and became effective on July 1, 2023. Had
the City sought to implement it through an ordinance, it had nine months to consider and adopt
an implementing ordinance without resorting to an urgency ordinance. The City's own conduct
shows that there is no emergency threat. The ordinance that the City adopted on June 20, 2023
(after public notice stating that the City Council would be considering a resolution)identifies no
threat to public health, safety, or welfare, let alone an immediate threat. The City's conclusory
statement about potential uncertainty in implementation of a nine-month old state law is not a
reasonable, credible, or sound factual finding relevant to the existence of an imminent threat to
public health, safety, or welfare.
Further, an urgency ordinance—like this one—that"has the effect of denying approvals
needed for the development of projects with a significant component of multifamily housing,"
may only be extended beyond the initial 45 days upon written legislative findings, supported by
substantial evidence on the record, of a"specific, adverse impact upon the public health and
safety," which is defined as "a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact based on
objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions" existing at
the time that the urgency ordinance is adopted. (§ 65858, subd. (c)(1)). The findings must further
demonstrate that there is no feasible alternative that would mitigate or avoid the adverse impact
"as well or better, with a less burdensome or restrictive effect," than the urgency ordinance. (§
65858, subd (c)(3).)In addition, a city must"issue a written report describing the measures taken
to alleviate the condition which led to the adoption of the ordinance" at least ten days before its
extension. (§ 65858, subd. (d).)
Finally, as HCD has advised in its letters dated June 19, 2023 and dated July 11, 2023,
both the urgency ordinance adopted June 20 and the proposed regular ordinance scheduled for a
second reading at the July 18 City Council meeting, conflict with AB 2011,particularly as
amended on July 10 by SB 129. AB 2011 allows a local government to exempt parcels only if it
makes specific written findings, including that the exemption would result in no net loss of
residential capacity in the City relative to the total capacity in light of both AB 2011 and local
law. (Gov. Code, § 65912.114, subd. (i)(3).) The City has not made those findings.
The City must implement AB 2011 according to its terms. We welcome the City's
reconciliation of its municipal ordinances with state law and we would be happy to meet to
discuss this matter.
Sincerely,
/s/Christina Bull Arndt
CHRISTINA BULL ARNDT
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
For ROB BONTA
Attorney General
July 17, 2023
Page 3
cc: Mayor Valerie Amezcua
Mayor Pro Tem Jessie Lopez
Councilmember Thai Viet Phan
Councilmember Benjamin Vazquez
Councilmember Phil Bacerra
Councilmember Johnathan Ryan Hernandez
Councilmember David Penaloza
Orozco, Norma
From: Dale Helvig <
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2023 9:33 PM
To: eComment; Hall, Jennifer; Amezcua, Valerie; Phan, Thai; Vazquez, Benjamin; Lopez,
Jessie; Bacerra, Phil; Hernandez, Johnathan; Penaloza, David
Cc: Ridge, Kristine; Carvalho, Sonia R.; Mendoza, Steven; Thai, Minh
Subject: 2023-07-18 Letter to City Council-Item 34 AB2011 and S136 Ordinance
Attachments: 2023-07-18 Letter to City Council-Item 34.pdf
Please ensure that only the attachment is posted so that emails are left off.
Dale Helvig
Resident, Santa Ana
1
Dale Helvig
Resident, Santa Ana CA 92706
July 18, 2023
Mayor Amezcua and Santa Ana City Councilmembers
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza, 81' Floor
Santa Ana CA 92702
Subject: ITEM 34—Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment No. 2023-03 to Exempt Certain
Parcels Identified by the City from the Requirements of AB 2011 and SB 6
1 would like to start off by thanking you, and the City staff, for the effort and strong support you all
have provided to ensure the first reading of this proposed ordinance was successful. This ordinance
shows the City cares and what to follow the approved General Plan which includes the State of
California approved Housing Element. The City should not give up its right to determine what is best
for its residents, especially considering this city is leading the way in housing development for all
income levels. This is why I fully support the City of Santa Ana in adopting this ordinance.
The General Plan took many years of hard work by the City, its residents, and its businesses to
develop and pass. Do not let others dishonor that effort by making this into a NIMBY issue for the
sake of optics and politics when clearly it is not. No one is saying "Do not build at all"... merely build
according to the General Plan and State approved Housing Element.
Santa Ana has been a leader in addressing new housing and should have the opportunity to be a
leader again by identifying where and what it needs to build to meet or exceed state requirements.
Santa Ana should be held up as a model for both the state and other cities to follow.
Please retain local control and support this ordinance. Approve the second reading!
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration. Stay safe, stay healthy.
Respectfully,
Dale A Helvig
Resident, Santa Ana
cc: Kristine Ridge, Steven Mendoza,
City Manager, Santa Ana Assist. City Manager, Santa Ana
Sonia Carvalho, Minh Thai,
City Attorney, Santa Ana Executive Director, Planning & Building
Page 1 of 1
2023-07-18 Letter to City Council-Item 34
Orozco, Norma
From: Tom Lutz <
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2023 10:16 AM
To: eComment
Subject: Approval of Item #34
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
I encourage the support in passing item#34 to help protect development within the city and preserve the General Plan.
Tom & Nancy Lutz
Ward 5
1
Orozco, Norma
From: Irma Jauregui <
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2023 11:38 AM
To: eComment; Amezcua, Valerie; Bacerra, Phil; Penaloza, David; Hernandez, Johnathan;
Vazquez, Benjamin; Lopez, Jessie; Phan, Thai
Cc: Ridge, Kristine; Thai, Minh
Subject: Item 34 support
Attachments: 2023-07-18 Letter to City Council-Item 34.pdf
Dear Mayor,council members,city manager and executive director,
I am also in support of item 34 and included the letter that our neighbor Dale Helvig has sent to you for which I am heartily in
agreement.
Thank you all for your work caring for our city and residents,
Wannest regards,
Inna P Jauregui
Wilshire Square resident
Sent from my iPad
1
Dale Helvig
Resident, Santa Ana CA 92706
July 18, 2023
Mayor Amezcua and Santa Ana City Councilmembers
City of Santa Ana
20 Civic Center Plaza, 81' Floor
Santa Ana CA 92702
Subject: ITEM 34—Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment No. 2023-03 to Exempt Certain
Parcels Identified by the City from the Requirements of AB 2011 and SB 6
1 would like to start off by thanking you, and the City staff, for the effort and strong support you all
have provided to ensure the first reading of this proposed ordinance was successful. This ordinance
shows the City cares and what to follow the approved General Plan which includes the State of
California approved Housing Element. The City should not give up its right to determine what is best
for its residents, especially considering this city is leading the way in housing development for all
income levels. This is why I fully support the City of Santa Ana in adopting this ordinance.
The General Plan took many years of hard work by the City, its residents, and its businesses to
develop and pass. Do not let others dishonor that effort by making this into a NIMBY issue for the
sake of optics and politics when clearly it is not. No one is saying "Do not build at all"... merely build
according to the General Plan and State approved Housing Element.
Santa Ana has been a leader in addressing new housing and should have the opportunity to be a
leader again by identifying where and what it needs to build to meet or exceed state requirements.
Santa Ana should be held up as a model for both the state and other cities to follow.
Please retain local control and support this ordinance. Approve the second reading!
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration. Stay safe, stay healthy.
Respectfully,
Dale A Helvig
Resident, Santa Ana
cc: Kristine Ridge, Steven Mendoza,
City Manager, Santa Ana Assist. City Manager, Santa Ana
Sonia Carvalho, Minh Thai,
City Attorney, Santa Ana Executive Director, Planning & Building
Page 1 of 1
2023-07-18 Letter to City Council-Item 34