The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCorrespondence- Non-AgendaHall, Jennifer From: Irene Myers <irene@kentsnyderlaw.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023 2:13 PM To: Lopez, Jessie; Kent Snyder Cc: Cheryl Newton; Carvalho Sonia (Sonia.Carvalho@bbklaw.com); eComment; Montoya, Jose Subject: RE: Alley in Floral Park between 2383 N. Flower and 2379 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA Emailing: Alley Signed Petitions 2, Alley Signed Petitions 3, Alley Signed Petitions 4, Alley Signed Petitions 5, Alley Signed Petitions 1 Attachments: Alley Signed Petitions 7.pdf Ms. Lopez: Thank you for your service. Attached are additional letters/petitions regarding the above referenced matter. Kent Snyder K pint G. 11:1r(Je it II)1r firs in M) eiirs 11 awow Offices of Illteint G Snydeui. 2301 III1)u11point III'aui.liive, Su Bite d��" 0 111urv!I!ine, CaIII l!I!forin!I!ia 926:1.2 Il:ureine d Illdyeirs Administrator Irene@Kentsnyderlaw.com lol (9,49) 232..,90/2 fax (949) 833 2209 CONFIDENTIAL PvFORAIATION This c-mall transmission contains confidential information which is intended only for the addressee and which may he privileged under applicable law. IDo not read, copy or disseminate it ifyou are not the addressee. Ifyou have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete it. Thank you. From: Irene Myers Sent: Monday, August 14, 2023 3:09 PM To: Lopez, Jessie <JessieLopez@santa-ana.org>; Kent Snyder <kent@kentsnyderlaw.com> Cc: Cheryl Newton <cherylnewton2@cox. net>; Carvalho Carvalho@bbklaw.com) <Sonia.Carvalho@bbklaw.com>; eComment <ecomment@santa-ana.org>; Montoya, Jose <jmontoya@santa-ana.org> Subject: RE: Alley in Floral Park between 2383 N. Flower and 2379 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA Emailing: Alley Signed Petitions 2, Alley Signed Petitions 3, Alley Signed Petitions 4, Alley Signed Petitions 5, Alley Signed Petitions 1 Ms. Lopez: Attached are additional letters protesting the abandonment/vacating of the alley as stated above. Thank you for your help in this matter. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. Kent Snyder K pint G. Sinydeir by fireine M ciirs 11 awow Offices of Illteint G Snydeui. 2301 III1)u11point III'aui.liive, Su Bite d��" 0 111urv!I!ine, CaIII l!I!forin!I!ia 926:1.2 II ureine S Iislyeui s Administrator Irene@Kentsnyderlaw.com lol (9,49) 877..,9078 fax (949) 877 8709 CONFIDENTIAL PvFORAIATION This c-mall transinission contains confidential information which is intended only for the addressee and which may he privileged under applicable law. IDo not read, copy or disseminate it ifyou are not the addressee. Ifyou have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete it. Thank you. From: Lopez, Jessie <J_essielLop zC�2.s nth_- n rg> Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2023 3:59 PM To: Irene Myers <ir nn(2kkntsnyderlaw.com>; Kent Snyder <knnt( knntsn.yd_�r.l_a com> Cc: Cheryl Newton <ch�_rylnewton2@cox.net>; Carvalho Sonia (Son.ia Cary lho(bbkla corn) <Sonia.............................................._.Carvalho(kl:cc�m> ............................. Subject: RE: Alley in Floral Park between 2383 N. Flower and 2379 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA Emailing: Alley Signed Petitions 2, Alley Signed Petitions 3, Alley Signed Petitions 4, Alley Signed Petitions 5, Alley Signed Petitions 1 Irene, I wanted to provide you with an update on the matter at hand. The public hearing scheduled for Tuesday, August 15th has been cancelled. This decision stems from the City's Attorney office's need to conduct a legal review. Although the item will remain on the agenda, it will be clearly labeled as canceled. In accordance with your request, I will send the enclosed documents to the Clerk's office for the purpose of submitting them as public records. Thank you, Jessie Lopez (she/her) Mayor Pro Tem City of Santa Ana 1 20 Civic Center Plaza I Santa Ana, CA 92701 Email: JessieLopez@santa-ana.org Office: (714) 647-6900 Cell: 714 822-0891 Click here to sign up for my Quarterly Newsletter! This email and any files or attachments transmitted with it may contain privileged or otherwise confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this communication in error, please advise the sender via reply email and immediately delete the email you received. -----Original Message ----- From: Irene Myers <ir�_n_n(2kkntsnyderlaw.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2023 2:59 PM To: Lopez, Jessie <J_nssinlLaspz(snt-neaarg>; Kent Snyder <knnt(knntsnydrlwecaarrr> Cc: Cheryl Newton <ch_�_rylnewton2@cox. �rnyers32@gmail.com in Floral Park between 2383 N. Flower and 2379 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA Emailing: Alley Signed Petitions 2, Alley Signed Petitions 3, Alley Signed Petitions 4, Alley Signed Petitions 5, Alley Signed Petitions 1 Mr. Lopez: I understand you will help in getting these signed letter petitions to the appropriate files/people. Thank you so much for your help in this matter. I have attached 5 separate PDFs for your use. There are more to come which I will forward to you accordingly. Thank you so much. Kent G. Snyder Kent G. Snyder by Irene Myers Law Offices of Kent G. Snyder 2301 Dupont Drive, Suite 430 Irvine, California 92612 Irene S. Myers Administrator lrene@Kentsnyderlaw.com tel (949) 833-9078 fax (949) 833-8209 CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION This e-mail transmission contains confidential information which is intended only for the addressee and which may be privileged under applicable law. Do not read, copy or disseminate it if you are not the addressee. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete it. Thank you. Name ira.. Address; SQ)14u, Phone: Email: Date: Augus42,2023 Re: City Council Hearing on August 1S, 2023 Objection to Apploatlon for Abandonment of certain easerrem/rlght of way located at 2363 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA; (Abandonment No. 202301); Applicants Colin Donnelly and Carolina La Dear Mayor and City Council: We are residents at the show: address. We have been residents at said address since CI./ I . We understand that there has been an Application to Abandon the alleyway located between 23n and 2383 North Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA, our neighborhood alleyway. We strongly are opposed to the reverting of said property as stated on Applicant's application for the followingreamns: 1. First, we do not believe there was ever an easement for mid alleyway, It is a dedicated roadway. We strongly believe that alley is a PUBLIC ROADWAY. We strongly object to the fact that the City of Santa is Intending on GIFTING PUBLIC FUNDS to the Applicants. The alleyway belongsto the People. We are of the opinion that gi@Ingof Public funds for free is Illegal. The valve of said "gRr could possibly be worth hundreds of thousands ofdallars taken from our communhy. 2. We believe the glfting ofsaid lard Immasesthe Applicants' property by approximately 1,15D sq. ft of prime property in Santa Ana. 3. We object to The fact that our Community was not informed properly of the Applicants' application to have the property, "reverted" to 2383 North Flower. That property is a PUBLIC ROADWAY —there is nothing to "revert. We, the People, are deservingof proper Notice. 4. We object that the Applicants intend on having a wall built to block the alleyway m no one has access to that public roadway. This is ourcommunhy; the location ofthls property is not for individualuse. We rreveragreed to give the property to anyone. This alleyway will be closed for public use should you approve this Application. S. We also objec"othefact that our neighbors adjacentto said alleyway on Heliotrope will be restricted and inconvenienced by mid down, of this alleyway. They do not have driveways, so they must acceas theugaages via the alleyway. Those nelghborshave legal rights tofull access to this alleyway. It also creates a dangerous driving condition In that People may have to back up onto Heliotrope If a car Is coming down the alley. 6. The residence located at 2379 North Flower will also be greatly impacted if this'reverting" Is approved. This is not an easement, it is a dedicated roadway, nothing to 'covert". The property owner at 2379 also has rights, as do we. 7. Said alleyway has been therefor 100yearsl The Applicants have awned their resideom at 2383 N. Flower for 22 months. We love our neighborhood just as It Is, we do not need to dose alleyways for individuals who have not given thought to ourmmmunity. & Additional verbiage has been added to the legal description of Applicants' application. Applicants are claiming the alleyway belongs to them, and thus, want the alleyway "reverted". This NEW language just appeared out of nowhere. The Cdymust review all ORIGINAL maps and records W disprove this claim. 9. We aim believe that alley way Property was DEDICATED to the City of Santa Ana by prior owners of said land/alleyway in the year 1925, and not as an easement over the Applicants' Property at 2363 N. Flower. 10. We are adamant and herewith request that the City of Santa Ana either take the matter off calendar for further review by the City Attorney and/or any other departments needed to establish said ownership of that property or that the City Council abolish all further discussion on this matter and terminate said Application with n, further discussion. We prefer the latter Thank you In advanceforyourconsidenatlon into this matte, WewishtobecontaReddirettlybythe City with anydecislons made an this Application. Ourcontract information Is noted above. Thank you for your time and your efforts In rejecting this Application. By: n,a. By-. I'peK Name: JA �� Imp4 Vi0.Y Address Phone: Email: Date: August2,2023 Re: Clty Council Hearing on Augunl5,2023 Objection to Application for Abandonment of certain easement/right of way located at 2383 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA; IAbeadonment No. 202"1); Applicants Colin Donnelly and Carolina La Dear Mayor and City Council: We amresidentsat the above address. We have been residents at said address since IT s % . We understand that there has been an Application to Abandon the alleyway located between 2379 and 2383 North Flower Street' Sand Ana, CA, our neighborhood alleyway. We strongly am opposed to the reverting of sold property as stated on Applicant's application for the followingrcasons 1. Host, we do not believe share was ever an easement for old alleyway, It Is a dedicated roadway. We AM091Y believe that alley is a PUBLIC ROADWAY. We strongly object to the fact that the City of5and Is Intending an GIFTING PUBLIC FUNDS to the Applicants. The alleyway belongs to the People. We are of the opinion that gating of public hinds for free Is illegal. The valve of said "gift" could possibly be worth hundreds of mouse cols of dollars taken from our community. 2. We believe the Sitting of said land increases the Applioaotd property by approximately 1,150 sq. ft of prime property in Santa Ana. 3. We object to the had that am community was not informed properly of the Applicants' application W have the property "reverted" to 2383 North Flower. That Propertyls a PUBLIC ROADWAY —there Is nothing to-mwrt". We, the people, are deserving of proper Notice. d. We object that the Applicants intend on having a wall built to block the alleyway so no one has aaoem to that public madway. This Is our community; the luation of this property is not for Individual use. We never agreed to give the property to anyone. This affeywaywlll he closed for public use should you appmve this Application. 5. We also object to the fad that our neighbors adjacent scold alleyway on Hellormae will be restricted and inconvenienced bymid closure of this alleyway. Theydo not have driveways, so they mustaccentheir,wagesvia the alleyway. Those neighbors have legal rights to full access to this alleyway. It also creates a dangerous driving condition in that people may have to back up onto Heliotrope H a car is mining down the alley. 6. The residence located at 2379 North Flower will also be greatly Impacted if this "revemrg" is approved. This is rlotan easement, it Ise dedicated roadway, nothing to "revert". The property ownerat 2379 also has rights, as do we. 7. Said alleyway has been therefor 100 years) The Applicants have owned their residence at 2383 N.Flowerfor22months. Weloveourneighborhoodjustasitiywedonat dtodow alleyways for Individuals who have notgiven thought Wow community. S. Additional verbiage has been added to the legal description of Applicants' application. Applicants are claiming the alleyway belongs to them, and thus, want the alleyway "reverted". This NEW Ianguagejust appeared out of nowhere. The City must review all ORIGINAL maps and records to disprove this claim. 9. We also believe that alley way property was DEDICATED to the City of Sand Are by prior owners of said land/akeyway in the year 1925, and not as an easement over the Applir ms' property at 2383 N. Flower. 1D. We are adamant and herewith request that the City of Sand Ana ehher take the matter oN calendar for further review by the City Attorney and/or any Other departments needed to establish Bald ownership ofthat property or that the City Council abolish all further discussion onthismamerarddrminatemld Application with no further discusson. Wepreferthelsdor. Thank youln adva h urcanslderetion Into this matter. Wewishdbecominteddlrectlybytbe Cary wkh any dells made this Application. Our trontradlnknnationisnotetl above. Thankyou foryour time and you Oros) jetting this Application. BY Date: ApgUA 2, 2023 Re: City Council Hearing on August 15, 2023 Objection to Application for Abandonment of certain easement/right of way located at 2383 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA; (Abandonment No. 2023-01(; Applicants Colin Donnelly and Carolina ca Dear Mayor and City Council: .We �are �`fs(de�nt�s �at the above address. We have been residents at said address since We understand that there has been an Application to Abandon the alleyway located between 2379 and 2383 North Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA, our neighborhood alleyway. We strongly are opposed to the reverting of said property as stated on Applicant's application for the following reasons: 1. First, we do not believe there was ever an easement for said alleyway, It is a dedicated roadway, We strongly believe that alley is a PUBLIC ROADWAY. We strongly object to the fact that the City of Santa Is Intending on GIFTING PUBLIC FUNDS to the Applicants. The alleyway belongs to the People. We are of the opinion that gifting of Public funds for free is illegal. The valve of said "gift" could possibly be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars taken from ourcommunity. 2. We believe the gifting of said land Increases the Applicants' property by approximately 1,150 sq. ft of prime property in Santa Ana. 3. We object to the fad that our community was not informed property of the Applicants' application to have the property "reverted" to 2383 North Flower. That property Is a PUBLIC ROADWAY —Mere is nothing to "revert". We, the people, are deserving of proper Notice. 4. We object that the Applicants intend onhaving a wall built to block the alleyway so no one has access to that public roadway. This Is our community; the location of this property is not for individual use. We never agreed to give the property to anyone. This alleyway will be closed for public use should you approve this Application. S. Wea150 object to the fact that our neighbors adjacent to said alleyway on Heliotrope will be restricted and inconvenienced by said closure of this alleyway. They do not have driveways, so they must access their garages via the alleyway. Those neighbors have legal rights to full access to this alleyway. R also creates a dangerous driving condition in that people may have to back up onto Heliotrope If a car is coming down the alley. 6. The residence located at 2379 North Flower will also be greatly Impacted if this "reverting" is approved. This is not an easement, it is a dedicated roadway, nothing to "revert". The property owner at 2379 also has rights, as do we. 7. Said alleyway has been there for 100 years) The Applicants have owned their residence at 2383 N. Flower for 22 months. We love our neighborhood just as it Is, we do not need to close alleyways for individuals who have not given thought to our community. 8. Additional verbiage has been added to the legal description of Applicants' application. Applicants are claiming the alleyway belongs to them, and thus, want the alleyway "reverted'. This NEW language Just appeared out of nowhere. The City must review all ORIGINAL maps and records to disprove this claim. 9. We also believe that alley way property was DEDICATED to the city of Santa Ana by prior owners of said land/alleyway in the year 1925, and not as an easement over the Applicants' property at 2383 N. Flower. 10. We are adamant and herewith request that the City of Santa Ana either take the matter off calendar for further review by the City Attorney and/or any other departments needed to establish said ownership of that property or that the City Council abolish all further discussion on this matter and terminate said Application with no further clutusslon. We prefer the latter. Thank you in advance for your consideration into this matter. We wish to be contacted directly by the City with any decisions made on this Application. Our contract information Is noted above. Thank You for your time and your efforts in rejecting this Application. By: ` I �• Date: August2,2023 Re: City Coundl Hearing on A11914915,2023 Objection W Application for Abandonment cf certain eamment/riBht of way located at 2383 N. Rawer Street, Saab Ana, CA; (Abandonment No. 2023-01(; Applicants Colin Donnelly and Carolina La Dear Mayor and City Council: Q W sld is at the above address We have been residents at said address since ^ . We understand that there has been an Application w Abandon the alleyway 1 Led between 2379 and 2383 North Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA, our neighborhood alleyway. We strongly are opposed W the navemng of said pmpeny as=ad on Applicant's application for the following reaso nc 1. First, we do not believe there was ever an easement for mid alleyway, It Is a dedicated roadway. We strongly believe that alley is a PUBLIC ROADWAY. We strongly object to the fact that the City of Santo Is intending an GIFTING PUBLIC FUNDS to me Applicants. The alleyway belongs to the People. We are of the opinion that giftinoof Public funds for free Is illegal. The valve of said "IlWe could possibly be worth hundreds of thousandsof dollanstaken from our community. 2. We believe the glfting Ofsaid told increasesthe Appliranne grope" approximately 1,150 sq. ft of prime Properly in Santa Ana. 3. We objectto the fact that our community was not Informed properly ofthe Applicanthe apphcatlan to have the property "reverted" to 2383 North Flower. That property Is a PUBLIC ROADWAY —there is nothing to"revert". We, the people, are deserving of proper Notice. 4. We object that the Applicants Intend on having a wall bulk to block the alleyway so no one has access to that public roadway. This is our community; the location of this property is not for individualuse. We never agreed to give the property to anyone. This alleywaywill be closed for public use should you appmve this Application. S. We also oblact W the fact that our neighbors adjacenttosald alleyway on Heliotrope will be restricted and inconvenienced by mid closure of this alleyway. They do not have driveways, so they must access theirgarages via the alleyway. Those neighbors have legal rights to Lull aaess W this alleyway. It also creates a dangerous driving condition In that People may have to back Up onto Heliotrope if a car B coming down the alley. 6. The residence located at 2379 North Flowerwllf also be greatly impacted N this"reverdng" is approved. This is not an easement, it is a dedicated roadway, nothing to "revert". The property owner at 2379 also has rights, as do we. 7. Said alleywayhas been there for 300yearsl The Applicants have owned their residence at 2383 N.Fbwerfor22monms We love our neighborhood just as it is, we do not need lociose alleyways for Individuals who have notgiven thought to our community. 8. Additional verbiage has been added to the legal description ofApplicants' application. Applicants are claiming the alleyway belongs to them, and thus, want the alleyway "reverted". This NEW languagejust appeared out of nowhere. The City must molew all ORIGINAL maps and records to disprove this claim. 9. We also believe that alley way property was OBDICATED to the ❑tyof Sande Ana by prior owners of said land alleyway in the year 1925, and not as an easement over the Applicants' Property at 2383 N. Flower. 1D. We are adamentand herewith request that the City ofSento Me either take the matter off calendar forfurther review by the City Attorneyandjorany other departments needed to establish said ownership ofthat property or that the City Council abolish aA further disonsdon on this matterand terminate Bald Application with no further dBcmoon. Wepreferthelatter. Thank you In advance foryourcansideration into this matter. We with to he contacted directly by the City with any decisions made on this Application. Our COnhact Information Is noted above. Thank you for your time and your efforts in acting this Application. By: _ Name: ntV fit puslCY Address: _ : Email: Date: August2,2O23 Re: City Council Hearing on August 15, 2023 Objection to Application for Abandonment of certain easement/dght of way located at 2383 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA; (Abandonment No. 2023-011; Applicants Colin Donnelly and Carolina La Dear Mayorand City Council: Weareresidentsattheaboveaddress. We have been residentsatsaidaddresssince Jv/S . We understand that there has been an Application to Abandon the alleyway located between 2379 and 2383 North Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA, our neighborhood alleyway. We strongly are opposed to the reverting of said property as stated on Applicanrs app)lcatlun for the following reasons: 1. First, we do not believe there was ever an easement for said alleyway, it Is a dedicated Medway. We strongly believe that alley is a PUBLIC ROADWAY, Westronglyobjecttothefactthatthe City of Santa is intending on GIFTING PUBLIC FUNDS to the Applicants. The alleyway belongs the People. We are of the opinion that gifting of Public funds for free is Illegal. The valve of said "Riff could Possibly be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars taken from our community. 2. We believe the gifting of said land increases We Applicants' property by approximately 1,150 sq. ft of prime property In Santa Ana. 3. We object to the fact that our community was not Informed property of the Applicants' application to have the property "reverted" ro 2383 North Flower. That property Is a PUBLIC ROADWAY —there is nothing to "revert". We, the People, are deserving of proper Notice. 4. We object that the Applicants Intend on having a wall built to block the alleyway so no one has access to that public roadway. This is our communiity; the location ofthls property is not for individual use. We never agreed to give the property to anyone. This alleyway will be closed for public use should you approve this Application. 5. We also object to the fad that our neighbors adjacent to said alleyway an Heliotrope will be restricted and inconvenienced by said closure of this alleyway. They do not have driveways, so they mum access their garages via the alleyway. Those neighbors have legal rights to full access to this alleyway. It also creates a dangerous driving condition in that people may have to back up onto Heliotrope if a Our is coming down the alley. 6. The residence looted at 2379 North Flower will also be greatly Impacted if this "reverting" is approved. This is not an easement, It is a dedicated roadway, nothing to "revert". The property owner at 2379 also has rights, as do we. 7. Said alleyway has been there for 100 yearsi The Applicants have owned their residence at 2383 N. Flower for 22 months. We love our neighborhood just as B is, we do not need to close alleyways for individuals who have not given thought to our community. 8. Additional verbiage has been added to the legal description of Applicants( application. Applicants are claiming the alleyway belongs to them, and thus, want the alleyway "reverted'. This NEW language just appeared out of nowhere. The City must review all ORIGINAL maps and records to disprove this claim. 9. We also believe that alley way property was DEDICATED to the City of Santa Ana by prior owners of said land/alleyway in the year 1925, and not as an easement over the Applicants' property at 2383 N. Flower. 10. We are adamant and herewith request that the City of Santa Ana either take the matter off calendar for further review by the City Attorney and/or arty other departments needed to establish said ownership of that property or that the City Council abolish all further discussion on this matter and terminate said Application with no further discussion. We prefer the latter. Thank you in advance for your consideration Into this matter. We wish to be contacted directly by the City with any decisions made on this Application. Our contract information is noted above. Thank you for your time and your efforts in rejecting this Application. BY: By: Name: Address: . Email: . Date: August 2, 2023 Re: City Council Hearing on August 15, 2023 Objection to Application for Abandonment of certain easement(right of way located at 2383 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA; (Abandonment No. 2023-01); Applicants Colin Donnelly and Carolina to Dear Mayorand City Council: We are residents at the above address. We have been residents at said address since . We understand that there has been an Application to Abandon the alleyway located between 2379 and 2383 North Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA, our neighborhood alleyway. We strongly are opposed to the reverting of said property as stated on Applicant's application for the following reasons: I. First, we do not believe there was war an easement for said alleyway, It is a dedicated roadway. We strongly believe that alley is a PUBLIC ROADWAY. We strongly objedto the fact that the City of Santa Is intending an GIFTING PUBLIC FUNDS to the Applicants. The alleyway belongs to the People. We are of the opinion that gifting of Public funds for free Is illegal. The valve of said "gifr could possibly be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars taken from our community, 2. We believe the gifting of said land increases the Applicants property by approximately1,150 sq. ft of prime property in Santa Ana. 3. We object to the fact that our community was not informed properly of the Applicants' application to have the property "reverted" to 2383 North Flower. That property is a PUBLIC ROADWAY- there is nothing to "revert". We, the people, are deserving of proper Notice. 4. We object that the Applicants intend on having a wall built to block the alleyway so no one has access to that public madway. This is our community; the location of this property is not for individual use. We never agreed to give the property to anyone. This alleyway will be closed for public use should you approve this Application. S. We aim object to the fad that our neighbors adjacent to said alleyway on Heliotrope will be restricted and inconvenienced by said closure ofthis alleyway. They do not have driveways, so they mu t access their garages via the alleyway. Those neighbors have legal rights to full access to this alleyway. It also creates a dangerous driving condition in that people may have W back up onto Heliotrope if a car is coming down the alley. 6. The residence located at 2379 North Flower will also be greatly Impacted If this -ravening" is approved. This is not an easement, It is a dedicated roadway, nothing to "reverr. The property owner at 2379 also has rights, as do we. 7. Said alleyway has been there for 100 years) The Applicants have owned their residence at 2383 N. Flower for 22 months. We love our neighborhood just as R is, we do not need to close alleyways for individuals who have not given thought to our community. S. Additional verbiage has been added to the legal description ofAppllcants application. Applicants are claiming the alleyway belongs to them, and thus, want the alleyway "reverted.. This NEW language just appeared out of nowhere. The City must review all ORIGINAL maps and records to disprove this claim. 9. We also believe that alley way property was DEDICATED to the City of Santa Ana by prior owners of said land/alleyway in the year 1925, and not as an easement war the Applicants' property at 2383 N. Flower. 10. We are adamant and herewith request that the City of Santa Ana either take the matter off calendar for further review by the City Attorney and/or any other departments needed to establish said ownership of that property or that the City Council abolish all further discussion on this matter and terminate said Application with no furtherdiscussion. We prefer the latter. Thank you in advance for your consideration into this matter. We wish to be contacted directly by the City with any decisions made on this Application. Our contract Information is noted above. Thank you for your time and your efforWnrT ec0 his Applicaton. BY: y-` Hall, Jennifer From: Flores, Gaston Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023 5:49 PM To: eComment Subject: FW: Contact the City Council Submission Gaston Flores I Management Analyst City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 120 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701 (714) 647-6945 (office) I (714) 614-3951 (mobile) I gflores@santa-ana.org The m SantaAna_ rr ob.il_e_a_p.p puts the power of the Santa Ana city government in the palm of your hand! The free app lets you quickly and easily report issues to the City, access City services, and find news and events. Download the mySantaAna app: w.ww.:_sa_nta.-ana:aar m ._sq_nt qng.-g.p.p From: notify@proudcity.com <notify@proudcity.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023 4:07 PM To: Flores, Gaston <GFlores@santa-ana.org> Subject: Contact the City Council Submission Name Christine Switzer Email Address Santa Ana, California 92706 United States Map It Phone ( Who is this message for? • Mayor Valerie Amezcua • Mayor Pro Tern Jessie Lopez • Councilmember Thai Viet Phan • Councilmember David Penaloza • Councilmember Phil Bacerra • Councilmember Johnathan Ryan Hernandez • Councilmember Benjamin Vazquez Comments or questions Thank you for considering my request. 1 Upload a file • Ficus-Tree-at-the-Library.docx August 16, 2023 Dear Santa Ana Council Members, We have a situation that needs to be brought to the attention of our City Management and City Council. Santa Ana has an historic tree at the main library that is the largest Ficus Drupace tree in North America. Please look at the enclosed link that verifies and certified this is the largest Ficus Drupace in North America. https://californiabigtrees.calpoly edu/bt-tree-detail/�48 Brian Sternberg, Executive Director of Library Services is rather new to Santa Ana and perhaps is not along -time resident of Santa Ana that has the same passion for our historic trees as we do. Nabil Saba, Executive Director of Public Works, who said Santa Ana Public Works will manage the project and cut down the tree, but they are definitely not the decision makers. The plan is to cut the tree down and replace with five parking spaces. The outside firm that the library has chosen to design the renovations, perhaps looks at this old treejust as that "some old tree". Please do not remove this landmark tree. It is shameful to remove this majestic and stately tree for 5 parking spaces. Live trees in a city provide life in spite of all the concrete around the library and it contributes to the historic value of our community. Respectfully, Christine Switzer 2462 N. Riverside Dr. Santa Ana, CA Hall, Jennifer From: Flores, Gaston Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2023 9:01 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Contact the City Council Submission �mGaston Flores I ManagementAnalyst ' City of Santa Ana I City Manager's Office 120 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana, CA 92701 ' (714) 647-6945 (office) I (714) 614-3951 (mobile) I gflores@santa-ana.org The m SantaAna_._mobil_e:._a_p.pputs the power of the Santa Ana city government in the palm of your hand! The free app lets you quickly and easily report issues to the City, access City services, and find news and events. Download the mySantaAna app: w.ww.:_sa_nta.-ana:aar m ._sq_nt qng.-g.p.p From: notify@proudcity.com <notify@proudcity.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2023 6:38 PM To: Flores, Gaston <GFlores@santa-ana.org> Subject: Contact the City Council Submission Name Christihne Switzer Email Address Santa Ana, California 92706 United States Map It Phone ( Who is this message for? • Mayor Valerie Amezcua • Mayor Pro Tern Jessie Lopez • Councilmember Thai Viet Phan • Councilmember David Penaloza • Councilmember Phil Bacerra • Councilmember Johnathan Ryan Hernandez • Councilmember Benjamin Vazquez Comments or questions Earlier this afternoon I sent out a letter to all of you requesting to save the ficus tree at the library. Brian Sternberg called me immediately and shared with me why the tree needed to be removed. I believe I was misinformed and I understand why this tree 1 needs to be removed. I really appreciate Brian calling me so quickly. Please ignore my first letter. Thank you! Hall, Jennifer From: K Diaz < Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2023 9:34 AM To: eComment Subject: Item 14 To the city council, I support Agenda Item 14 and that I want the enforcement of public intoxication laws to begin IMMEDIATELY. Hall, Jennifer From: YIMBY Action <hello@yimbyaction.org> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2023 10:32 AM To: eCornment Subject: Y1 M BYs say yes to desegregated housing Let's create housing policies that help repair the harm done to communities of �IYIMB'YflnAcflon Housing has historically been and continues to be, exclusionary to Black residents and people of color. Though segregation was outlawed in 1964, redlining, exclusionary zoning, displacement, and other inequitable practices have prevented marginalized communities from closing the housing gap. . ..................................... � I 11111111IRMIRumns Eno rem YIMBYs in places like our Dallas chapter, Dallas Neighbors for Housing, are leading the way in pushing for racial equity! When Interstate 345 was first constructed, the freeway destroyed homes owned and rented by people of color living in Dallas. The campaign, LgjEtg�q345, aims to ensure that 1-345 and its surrounding corridor are reimagined into a community -led, green, economically equitable affordable housing boulevard. Their coalition is also advocating for 1 111 OR PER J I • SHATATMOWNWAS I F*=A '- I a 1, 0 9 START WAS Your donation funds the core teaim and tools that it takes to build a irnoveirnent to fight for abundant, affordable housing across the United States. Any donation aimount is welcome! IDonations of at least $50/imonth enters you in our Infill Circle, our club for top supporters! Fourplex Midrise Affordable Home Triplex (Infill Circle Club) (Infill Circle Club) YOUR YIMBY ACTION MEMBERSHIP MEMBERSHIP STATUS Im DONOR LEVEL Unknown, Unknown Unknown Add/update location MOBILE ALERTS None N VOLUNTEER LEVEL MW Add/update mobile Keeping this information up to cute pourers our activism! Need help with your membership? Email hello@yirnbyaction.org. C (�IrlVst i'ii lh li n YIMBY Action lip irnlrcu��irl4� u��i' I�ir...11�u��u�nliirn foir irtt°noirc liinculivc I ou sn li n ICCpdllk,, es and a i'u to ire of abuindaint Sent via ActionNetwork.org. To update your email address, change your name or address, or to stop receiving emails from YIMBY Action, please click here. Hall, Jennifer From: Irene Myers <irene@kentsnyderlaw.com> Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2023 12:47 PM To: Lopez, Jessie; Kent Snyder; sonia.carvalho@bbklaw.com Cc: Montoya, Jose; irenemyers32@gmail. eComment; cherylnewton2@cox. Subject: RE: Alley in Floral Park between 2383 N. Flower and 2379 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA Attachments: Alley Signed Petitions 7.pdf, Neighborhood Objection Chart.pdf Ms. Lopez: Attached are a few more petitions/letters opposing the vacating of the alleyway as referenced above (sent yesterday but I do not believe they were received). We are of the opinion that the 74 signatures/43 lots, sends the message how the neighborhood feels about the request to vacate. Do you feel this is sufficient evidence for the City Council that the neighborhood does not want this? If so, we will stop collecting signatures, unless, of course, you advise otherwise. Thank you very, very much for all your help in this matter. Kent Snyder 11 aw Offices of Illteint G Snydeui. 2301 III1)u11point III'aui.liive, Su Bite d:" 0 111urv!I!ine, CaIII liitouirin!I!ia 926:1.2 Il:ureine d Illdyeirs Administrator Irene@Kentsnyderlaw.com lol (9,49) 232..,90/2 fax (949) 222 2209 CONFIDENTIAL PvFORAIATION This c-mall transinission contains confidential information which is intended only for the addressee and which may he privileged under applicable law. IDo not read, copy or disseminate it ifyou are not the addressee. Ifyou have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete it. Thank you. Name ira.. Address; SQ)14u, Phone: Email: Date: Augus42,2023 Re: City Council Hearing on August 1S, 2023 Objection to Apploatlon for Abandonment of certain easerrem/rlght of way located at 2363 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA; (Abandonment No. 202301); Applicants Colin Donnelly and Carolina La Dear Mayor and City Council: We are residents at the show: address. We have been residents at said address since CI./ I . We understand that there has been an Application to Abandon the alleyway located between 23n and 2383 North Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA, our neighborhood alleyway. We strongly are opposed to the reverting of said property as stated on Applicant's application for the followingreamns: 1. First, we do not believe there was ever an easement for mid alleyway, It is a dedicated roadway. We strongly believe that alley is a PUBLIC ROADWAY. We strongly object to the fact that the City of Santa is Intending on GIFTING PUBLIC FUNDS to the Applicants. The alleyway belongsto the People. We are of the opinion that gi@Ingof Public funds for free is Illegal. The valve of said "gRr could possibly be worth hundreds of thousands ofdallars taken from our communhy. 2. We believe the glfting ofsaid lard Immasesthe Applicants' property by approximately 1,15D sq. ft of prime property in Santa Ana. 3. We object to The fact that our Community was not informed properly of the Applicants' application to have the property, "reverted" to 2383 North Flower. That property is a PUBLIC ROADWAY —there is nothing to "revert. We, the People, are deservingof proper Notice. 4. We object that the Applicants intend on having a wall built to block the alleyway m no one has access to that public roadway. This is ourcommunhy; the location ofthls property is not for individualuse. We rreveragreed to give the property to anyone. This alleyway will be closed for public use should you approve this Application. S. We also objec"othefact that our neighbors adjacentto said alleyway on Heliotrope will be restricted and inconvenienced by mid down, of this alleyway. They do not have driveways, so they must acceas theugaages via the alleyway. Those nelghborshave legal rights tofull access to this alleyway. It also creates a dangerous driving condition In that People may have to back up onto Heliotrope If a car Is coming down the alley. 6. The residence located at 2379 North Flower will also be greatly impacted if this'reverting" Is approved. This is not an easement, it is a dedicated roadway, nothing to 'covert". The property owner at 2379 also has rights, as do we. 7. Said alleyway has been therefor 100yearsl The Applicants have awned their resideom at 2383 N. Flower for 22 months. We love our neighborhood just as It Is, we do not need to dose alleyways for individuals who have not given thought to ourmmmunity. & Additional verbiage has been added to the legal description of Applicants' application. Applicants are claiming the alleyway belongs to them, and thus, want the alleyway "reverted". This NEW language just appeared out of nowhere. The Cdymust review all ORIGINAL maps and records W disprove this claim. 9. We aim believe that alley way Property was DEDICATED to the City of Santa Ana by prior owners of said land/alleyway in the year 1925, and not as an easement over the Applicants' Property at 2363 N. Flower. 10. We are adamant and herewith request that the City of Santa Ana either take the matter off calendar for further review by the City Attorney and/or any other departments needed to establish said ownership of that property or that the City Council abolish all further discussion on this matter and terminate said Application with n, further discussion. We prefer the latter Thank you In advanceforyourconsidenatlon into this matte, WewishtobecontaReddirettlybythe City with anydecislons made an this Application. Ourcontract information Is noted above. Thank you for your time and your efforts In rejecting this Application. By: n,a. By-. I'peK Name: JA �� Imp4 Vi0.Y Address Phone: Email: Re: Clty Council Hearing on Augunl5,2023 Objection to Application for Abandonment of certain easement/right of way located at 2383 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA; IAbeadonment No. 202"1); Applicants Colin Donnelly and Carolina La Dear Mayor and City Council: We amresidentsat the above address. We have been residents at said address since IT s % . We understand that there has been an Application to Abandon the alleyway located between 2379 and 2383 North Flower Street' Sand Ana, CA, our neighborhood alleyway. We strongly am opposed to the reverting of sold property as stated on Applicant's application for the followingrcasons 1. Host, we do not believe share was ever an easement for old alleyway, It Is a dedicated roadway. We AM091Y believe that alley is a PUBLIC ROADWAY. We strongly object to the fact that the City of5and Is Intending an GIFTING PUBLIC FUNDS to the Applicants. The alleyway belongs to the People. We are of the opinion that gating of public hinds for free Is illegal. The valve of said "gift" could possibly be worth hundreds of mouse cols of dollars taken from our community. 2. We believe the Sitting of said land increases the Applioaotd property by approximately 1,150 sq. ft of prime property in Santa Ana. 3. We object to the had that am community was not informed properly of the Applicants' application W have the property "reverted" to 2383 North Flower. That Propertyls a PUBLIC ROADWAY —there Is nothing to-mwrt". We, the people, are deserving of proper Notice. d. We object that the Applicants intend on having a wall built to block the alleyway so no one has aaoem to that public madway. This Is our community; the luation of this property is not for Individual use. We never agreed to give the property to anyone. This affeywaywlll he closed for public use should you appmve this Application. 5. We also object to the fad that our neighbors adjacent scold alleyway on Hellormae will be restricted and inconvenienced bymid closure of this alleyway. Theydo not have driveways, so they mustaccentheir,wagesvia the alleyway. Those neighbors have legal rights to full access to this alleyway. It also creates a dangerous driving condition in that people may have to back up onto Heliotrope H a car is mining down the alley. 6. The residence located at 2379 North Flower will also be greatly Impacted if this "revemrg" is approved. This is rlotan easement, it Ise dedicated roadway, nothing to "revert". The property ownerat 2379 also has rights, as do we. 7. Said alleyway has been therefor 100 years) The Applicants have owned their residence at 2383 N.Flowerfor22months. Weloveourneighborhoodjustasitiywedonat dtodow alleyways for Individuals who have notgiven thought Wow community. S. Additional verbiage has been added to the legal description of Applicants' application. Applicants are claiming the alleyway belongs to them, and thus, want the alleyway "reverted". This NEW Ianguagejust appeared out of nowhere. The City must review all ORIGINAL maps and records to disprove this claim. 9. We also believe that alley way property was DEDICATED to the City of Sand Are by prior owners of said land/akeyway in the year 1925, and not as an easement over the Applir ms' property at 2383 N. Flower. 1D. We are adamant and herewith request that the City of Sand Ana ehher take the matter oN calendar for further review by the City Attorney and/or any Other departments needed to establish Bald ownership ofthat property or that the City Council abolish all further discussion onthismamerarddrminatemld Application with no further discusson. Wepreferthelsdor. Thank youln adva h urcanslderetion Into this matter. Wewishdbecominteddlrectlybytbe Cary wkh any dells made this Application. Our trontradlnknnationisnotetl above. Thankyou foryour time and you Oros) jetting this Application. BY Date: ApgUA 2, 2023 Re: City Council Hearing on August 15, 2023 Objection to Application for Abandonment of certain easement/right of way located at 2383 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA; (Abandonment No. 2023-01(; Applicants Colin Donnelly and Carolina ca Dear Mayor and City Council: .We �are �`fs(de�nt�s �at the above address. We have been residents at said address since We understand that there has been an Application to Abandon the alleyway located between 2379 and 2383 North Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA, our neighborhood alleyway. We strongly are opposed to the reverting of said property as stated on Applicant's application for the following reasons: 1. First, we do not believe there was ever an easement for said alleyway, It is a dedicated roadway, We strongly believe that alley is a PUBLIC ROADWAY. We strongly object to the fact that the City of Santa Is Intending on GIFTING PUBLIC FUNDS to the Applicants. The alleyway belongs to the People. We are of the opinion that gifting of Public funds for free is illegal. The valve of said "gift" could possibly be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars taken from ourcommunity. 2. We believe the gifting of said land Increases the Applicants' property by approximately 1,150 sq. ft of prime property in Santa Ana. 3. We object to the fad that our community was not informed property of the Applicants' application to have the property "reverted" to 2383 North Flower. That property Is a PUBLIC ROADWAY —Mere is nothing to "revert". We, the people, are deserving of proper Notice. 4. We object that the Applicants intend onhaving a wall built to block the alleyway so no one has access to that public roadway. This Is our community; the location of this property is not for individual use. We never agreed to give the property to anyone. This alleyway will be closed for public use should you approve this Application. S. Wea150 object to the fact that our neighbors adjacent to said alleyway on Heliotrope will be restricted and inconvenienced by said closure of this alleyway. They do not have driveways, so they must access their garages via the alleyway. Those neighbors have legal rights to full access to this alleyway. R also creates a dangerous driving condition in that people may have to back up onto Heliotrope If a car is coming down the alley. 6. The residence located at 2379 North Flower will also be greatly Impacted if this "reverting" is approved. This is not an easement, it is a dedicated roadway, nothing to "revert". The property owner at 2379 also has rights, as do we. 7. Said alleyway has been there for 100 years) The Applicants have owned their residence at 2383 N. Flower for 22 months. We love our neighborhood just as it Is, we do not need to close alleyways for individuals who have not given thought to our community. 8. Additional verbiage has been added to the legal description of Applicants' application. Applicants are claiming the alleyway belongs to them, and thus, want the alleyway "reverted'. This NEW language Just appeared out of nowhere. The City must review all ORIGINAL maps and records to disprove this claim. 9. We also believe that alley way property was DEDICATED to the city of Santa Ana by prior owners of said land/alleyway in the year 1925, and not as an easement over the Applicants' property at 2383 N. Flower. 10. We are adamant and herewith request that the City of Santa Ana either take the matter off calendar for further review by the City Attorney and/or any other departments needed to establish said ownership of that property or that the City Council abolish all further discussion on this matter and terminate said Application with no further clutusslon. We prefer the latter. Thank you in advance for your consideration into this matter. We wish to be contacted directly by the City with any decisions made on this Application. Our contract information Is noted above. Thank You for your time and your efforts in rejecting this Application. By: ` I �• Date: August2,2023 Re: City Coundl Hearing on A11914915,2023 Objection W Application for Abandonment cf certain eamment/riBht of way located at 2383 N. Rawer Street, Saab Ana, CA; (Abandonment No. 2023-01(; Applicants Colin Donnelly and Carolina La Dear Mayor and City Council: Q W sld is at the above address We have been residents at said address since ^ . We understand that there has been an Application w Abandon the alleyway 1 Led between 2379 and 2383 North Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA, our neighborhood alleyway. We strongly are opposed W the navemng of said pmpeny as=ad on Applicant's application for the following reaso nc 1. First, we do not believe there was ever an easement for mid alleyway, It Is a dedicated roadway. We strongly believe that alley is a PUBLIC ROADWAY. We strongly object to the fact that the City of Santo Is intending an GIFTING PUBLIC FUNDS to me Applicants. The alleyway belongs to the People. We are of the opinion that giftinoof Public funds for free Is illegal. The valve of said "IlWe could possibly be worth hundreds of thousandsof dollanstaken from our community. 2. We believe the glfting Ofsaid told increasesthe Appliranne grope" approximately 1,150 sq. ft of prime Properly in Santa Ana. 3. We objectto the fact that our community was not Informed properly ofthe Applicanthe apphcatlan to have the property "reverted" to 2383 North Flower. That property Is a PUBLIC ROADWAY —there is nothing to"revert". We, the people, are deserving of proper Notice. 4. We object that the Applicants Intend on having a wall bulk to block the alleyway so no one has access to that public roadway. This is our community; the location of this property is not for individualuse. We never agreed to give the property to anyone. This alleywaywill be closed for public use should you appmve this Application. S. We also oblact W the fact that our neighbors adjacenttosald alleyway on Heliotrope will be restricted and inconvenienced by mid closure of this alleyway. They do not have driveways, so they must access theirgarages via the alleyway. Those neighbors have legal rights to Lull aaess W this alleyway. It also creates a dangerous driving condition In that People may have to back Up onto Heliotrope if a car B coming down the alley. 6. The residence located at 2379 North Flowerwllf also be greatly impacted N this"reverdng" is approved. This is not an easement, it is a dedicated roadway, nothing to "revert". The property owner at 2379 also has rights, as do we. 7. Said alleywayhas been there for 300yearsl The Applicants have owned their residence at 2383 N.Fbwerfor22monms We love our neighborhood just as it is, we do not need lociose alleyways for Individuals who have notgiven thought to our community. 8. Additional verbiage has been added to the legal description ofApplicants' application. Applicants are claiming the alleyway belongs to them, and thus, want the alleyway "reverted". This NEW languagejust appeared out of nowhere. The City must molew all ORIGINAL maps and records to disprove this claim. 9. We also believe that alley way property was OBDICATED to the ❑tyof Sande Ana by prior owners of said land alleyway in the year 1925, and not as an easement over the Applicants' Property at 2383 N. Flower. 1D. We are adamentand herewith request that the City ofSento Me either take the matter off calendar forfurther review by the City Attorneyandjorany other departments needed to establish said ownership ofthat property or that the City Council abolish aA further disonsdon on this matterand terminate Bald Application with no further dBcmoon. Wepreferthelatter. Thank you In advance foryourcansideration into this matter. We with to he contacted directly by the City with any decisions made on this Application. Our COnhact Information Is noted above. Thank you for your time and your efforts in acting this Application. By: _ Name: ntV fit puslCY Address: _ : Email: Date: August2,2O23 Re: City Council Hearing on August 15, 2023 Objection to Application for Abandonment of certain easement/dght of way located at 2383 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA; (Abandonment No. 2023-011; Applicants Colin Donnelly and Carolina La Dear Mayorand City Council: Weareresidentsattheaboveaddress. We have been residentsatsaidaddresssince Jv/S . We understand that there has been an Application to Abandon the alleyway located between 2379 and 2383 North Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA, our neighborhood alleyway. We strongly are opposed to the reverting of said property as stated on Applicanrs app)lcatlun for the following reasons: 1. First, we do not believe there was ever an easement for said alleyway, it Is a dedicated Medway. We strongly believe that alley is a PUBLIC ROADWAY, Westronglyobjecttothefactthatthe City of Santa is intending on GIFTING PUBLIC FUNDS to the Applicants. The alleyway belongs the People. We are of the opinion that gifting of Public funds for free is Illegal. The valve of said "Riff could Possibly be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars taken from our community. 2. We believe the gifting of said land increases We Applicants' property by approximately 1,150 sq. ft of prime property In Santa Ana. 3. We object to the fact that our community was not Informed property of the Applicants' application to have the property "reverted" ro 2383 North Flower. That property Is a PUBLIC ROADWAY —there is nothing to "revert". We, the People, are deserving of proper Notice. 4. We object that the Applicants Intend on having a wall built to block the alleyway so no one has access to that public roadway. This is our communiity; the location ofthls property is not for individual use. We never agreed to give the property to anyone. This alleyway will be closed for public use should you approve this Application. 5. We also object to the fad that our neighbors adjacent to said alleyway an Heliotrope will be restricted and inconvenienced by said closure of this alleyway. They do not have driveways, so they mum access their garages via the alleyway. Those neighbors have legal rights to full access to this alleyway. It also creates a dangerous driving condition in that people may have to back up onto Heliotrope if a Our is coming down the alley. 6. The residence looted at 2379 North Flower will also be greatly Impacted if this "reverting" is approved. This is not an easement, It is a dedicated roadway, nothing to "revert". The property owner at 2379 also has rights, as do we. 7. Said alleyway has been there for 100 yearsi The Applicants have owned their residence at 2383 N. Flower for 22 months. We love our neighborhood just as B is, we do not need to close alleyways for individuals who have not given thought to our community. 8. Additional verbiage has been added to the legal description of Applicants( application. Applicants are claiming the alleyway belongs to them, and thus, want the alleyway "reverted'. This NEW language just appeared out of nowhere. The City must review all ORIGINAL maps and records to disprove this claim. 9. We also believe that alley way property was DEDICATED to the City of Santa Ana by prior owners of said land/alleyway in the year 1925, and not as an easement over the Applicants' property at 2383 N. Flower. 10. We are adamant and herewith request that the City of Santa Ana either take the matter off calendar for further review by the City Attorney and/or arty other departments needed to establish said ownership of that property or that the City Council abolish all further discussion on this matter and terminate said Application with no further discussion. We prefer the latter. Thank you in advance for your consideration Into this matter. We wish to be contacted directly by the City with any decisions made on this Application. Our contract information is noted above. Thank you for your time and your efforts in rejecting this Application. BY: By: Name: Address: . Email: . Date: August 2, 2023 Re: City Council Hearing on August 15, 2023 Objection to Application for Abandonment of certain easement(right of way located at 2383 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA; (Abandonment No. 2023-01); Applicants Colin Donnelly and Carolina to Dear Mayorand City Council: We are residents at the above address. We have been residents at said address since . We understand that there has been an Application to Abandon the alleyway located between 2379 and 2383 North Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA, our neighborhood alleyway. We strongly are opposed to the reverting of said property as stated on Applicant's application for the following reasons: I. First, we do not believe there was war an easement for said alleyway, It is a dedicated roadway. We strongly believe that alley is a PUBLIC ROADWAY. We strongly objedto the fact that the City of Santa Is intending an GIFTING PUBLIC FUNDS to the Applicants. The alleyway belongs to the People. We are of the opinion that gifting of Public funds for free Is illegal. The valve of said "gifr could possibly be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars taken from our community, 2. We believe the gifting of said land increases the Applicants property by approximately1,150 sq. ft of prime property in Santa Ana. 3. We object to the fact that our community was not informed properly of the Applicants' application to have the property "reverted" to 2383 North Flower. That property is a PUBLIC ROADWAY- there is nothing to "revert". We, the people, are deserving of proper Notice. 4. We object that the Applicants intend on having a wall built to block the alleyway so no one has access to that public madway. This is our community; the location of this property is not for individual use. We never agreed to give the property to anyone. This alleyway will be closed for public use should you approve this Application. S. We aim object to the fad that our neighbors adjacent to said alleyway on Heliotrope will be restricted and inconvenienced by said closure ofthis alleyway. They do not have driveways, so they mu t access their garages via the alleyway. Those neighbors have legal rights to full access to this alleyway. It also creates a dangerous driving condition in that people may have W back up onto Heliotrope if a car is coming down the alley. 6. The residence located at 2379 North Flower will also be greatly Impacted If this -ravening" is approved. This is not an easement, It is a dedicated roadway, nothing to "reverr. The property owner at 2379 also has rights, as do we. 7. Said alleyway has been there for 100 years) The Applicants have owned their residence at 2383 N. Flower for 22 months. We love our neighborhood just as R is, we do not need to close alleyways for individuals who have not given thought to our community. S. Additional verbiage has been added to the legal description ofAppllcants application. Applicants are claiming the alleyway belongs to them, and thus, want the alleyway "reverted.. This NEW language just appeared out of nowhere. The City must review all ORIGINAL maps and records to disprove this claim. 9. We also believe that alley way property was DEDICATED to the City of Santa Ana by prior owners of said land/alleyway in the year 1925, and not as an easement war the Applicants' property at 2383 N. Flower. 10. We are adamant and herewith request that the City of Santa Ana either take the matter off calendar for further review by the City Attorney and/or any other departments needed to establish said ownership of that property or that the City Council abolish all further discussion on this matter and terminate said Application with no furtherdiscussion. We prefer the latter. Thank you in advance for your consideration into this matter. We wish to be contacted directly by the City with any decisions made on this Application. Our contract Information is noted above. Thank you for your time and your efforWnrT ec0 his Applicaton. BY: y-` NEIGHBORS/RESIDENTS OPPOSING VACATING OF ALLEYWAY BETWEEN 2379 AND 2383 NORTH FLOWER 17-Aug-23 RESIDENT/YEAR NAMES ADDRESS LOT SIGN # N. FLOWER Page 1 2013 Dan Lipton NEIGHBORS/RESIDENTS OPPOSING VACATING OF ALLEYWAY BETWEEN 2379 AND 2383 NORTH FLOWER 17-Aug-23 RESIDENT EAR NAMES ADDRESS LOT SIGN # N. HELIOTROPE Page 2 2015 Jeff Wertheimer 1 NEIGHBORS/RESIDENTS OPPOSING VACATING OF ALLEYWAY BETWEEN 2379 AND 2383 NORTH FLOWER 17-Aug-23 RESIDENT/YEAR NAMES ADDRESS LOT J SIGN # N. HELIOTROPE CONTINUED Page 3 2020 Peter and Evan Jackson 2 2023 Heidi Markowitz 17-Aug-23 RESIDENT/YEAR NAMES ADDRESS LOT SIGN # NORTH PARK 2016 Dr. Frank Patti 1 TOTAL I 143/LOTS 74 SIGN Hall, Jennifer From: Irene Myers <irene@kentsnyderlaw.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2023 2:21 PM To: Carvalho, Sonia R. Cc: Penaloza, David; Hernandez, Johnathan; Bacerra, Phil; Phan, Thai; Vazquez, Benjamin; Amezcua, Valerie; Lopez, Jessie; Cheryl Newton; irenemyers32@gmail. eComment Subject: Vacation of Alley in Floral Park between 2383 N. Flower and 2379 N. Flower, Santa Ana, CA Attachments: KGS Itr to Carvalho 8 22 23.pdf Ms. Scarvalho: Please see attached letter from attorney Kent Snyder regarding the above -entitled matter. Thank you. K pint G. u:)r(l it II)1r ]lain M)eiirs 11 aw Offices of Illteint G Snydeui. 2301 III1)u11point III'aui.liive, Su Bite d��" 0 111urv!I!ine, CaIII l!I!forin!I!ia 926:1.2 Il:ureine d Illdyeirs Administrator Irene@Kentsnyderlaw.com lol (9,49) 232..,90/2 fax (949) 222 2209 CONFIDENTIAL PvFORAIATION This c-mall transmission contains confidential information which is intended only for the addressee and which may he privileged under applicable law. IDo not read, copy or disseminate it ifyou are not the addressee. Ifyou have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete it. Thank you. Law Offices of KENT G. SNYDER KENT G. SNYDER KATHLEEN A.KELLY kent@kentsnyderlaw.com Ms. Sonia R. Carvalho City Attorney, City of Santa Ana 22 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, California 92701 ATTORNEYAT LAW 2301 DUPONT DRIVE, SUITE 430 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92612 August 22, 2023 (949)833-9078 Fax: (949) 833-8209 kathleen@kentsnyderlaw.com Re: Vacation of Allev in Floral Park between 2383 N. Flower and 2379 N. Flower Street, Santa Ana, CA Dear Ms. Carvalho: As you know, I represent some of the property Owners on North Flower Street concerning a proposed vacation of a city -owned alley, which runs between Flower Street and Heliotrope Drive, in Ward 3 of the City of Santa Ana. I have now read the entire City file on this matter. I would like to make the following comments and statements and ask that you review this letter at the appropriate time with your client: The Applicants caused the Title Report that the Applicants submitted to the City along with their Application, to contain a false statement that the alley is an Easement. The alley is not an Easement and never was an Easement. The alley was offered to the City for Dedication for Public Use on the Tract Map which the City accepted, and hence, the City owns the alley in fee simple absolute. California law recognizes the Doctrine of Merger. If the Owner of the fee also owns an Easement, the Easement is automatically extinguished by merger. Accordingly, there is not now and never was an Easement in connection with this alley. Throughout the City documents I have found repeated suggestions that this is an Easement, it is not an Easement, it is a fee owned by the City dedicated for public use. 2. I would like you and your client to consider the fact that if this Application is approved, it will create a dangerous traffic condition. This Application will not make the area safer; it will make the area more prone to traffic collisions. The Donnellys will have to back out of their driveway onto Flower Street. At the present time, the Donnellys drive out of the alley going forward and exit on Heliotrope Drive. A much safer driving maneuver than backing out onto heavily trafficked Flower Street. Likewise, the people who are using the alley whose homes front on Heliotrope Drive August 22, 2023 Page 2 will have to back out from the alley onto Heliotrope with the same dangerous traffic effect. 3. There are five homes that abut the alley, four of them are owned in fee by the Owners, and one Owner uses the alley via an easement over one of the fee Owner's lot. Four of those Owners have signed a Petition asking the City Council to vote NO on this Application. The only one in favor of the Application is the Applicants themselves. 4. The residents of Floral Park have strongly voiced their disapproval of this Application by signing a Petition circulated by my clients opposing the vacation of the alley or any portion thereof. THEY HAVE RECEIVED AND DELIVERED TO THE CITY 74 SIGNATURES, REPRESENTING THE OWNERS AND/OR TENANTS OF 43 LOTS. I declare under penalty of perjury and as a member of the State Bar of California that the foregoing is true and correct. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Very truly yours, ientG. Snyder cc: The Mayor Thai Viet Phan Benjamin Vazquez Jessie Lopez Phil Bacerra Johnathan Ryan Hernandez David Penaloza Cheryl Newton Irene Myers Hall, Jennifer From: Tom Lutz < Sent: Friday, August 25, 2023 10:52 AM To: Amezcua, Valerie; phil@philbacerra.com Cc: eComment Subject: Proclamation Attachments: Eunice B-day Invitation.pdf Good morning Valerie and Phil, I would like to see if either of you would be so kind to do a city proclamation for my friend's mother who will be tuning 100 on Sept. 9th. Her name is Eunice Dexter and she is the daughter of Clarence Amling who, with his brother, started the Amling Roses Greenhouses in the late 40's which were located on the SEC of Fairview Ave. and 5th St. where Eunice's husband, Jack, later ran the business. These greenhouses went all the way from Fairview Ave. to the old PE rail tracks until they closed somewhere in the late 60's or early 70's supplying fresh roses all over So. California. She was also the longest and oldest serving volunteer at the Western Med Hospital on Tustin Ave. stepping down after she was in her 90's. Her son Mike and I went all thru school together and I'm asking him to supply us more information on his mom for the proclamation. Her birthday celebration will be on Sept. 9th at the Turnip Rose on Flower St. in Orange. See attached invitation. When you see her picture in the invitation you'll probably be like most people and say "No way is she 100!" Eunice lives alone at Lake Park on Fairhaven Ave, still drives, and is sharp as a tack. With Eunice's longevity here in Santa Ana, her contribution to Western Med, as well as her family's history with the Ambling Roses, I feel it appropriate the city recognize her on her 100th Birthday. Thank you, Tom Lutz 5"&e Z)ezrh ,SeA&M&n 9, 1923 100 years of nurturing and caring represent a small portion of what Eunice Dexter has given to her community, church, family and friends. Her children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren have all been beneficiaries of her loving generosity and selfless acts of kindness. The oldest of three sisters, she has devoted her life doing for others. Ten years ago she was recognized as the longest serving Western Medical Center volunteer (including staff members) Please come and celebrate Eunice Dexter's 100th Birthday with us Saturday, September 9, 2023 for Lunch from 12:00 - 3:00 Velvet Rose 300 South Flower St. Orange, Ca 92868 Please RSVP by August 12, 2023 Chris or crleblancl@gmail. "We request no gifts, please." Hall, Jennifer From: Lopez, Jessie Sent: Monday, August 28, 2023 9:20 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: The truth is right there -----Original Message ----- From: Manny < Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2023 5:09 PM To: Lopez, Jessie <JessieLopez@santa-ana.org> Subject: The truth is right there Chief David Valentin was appointed Chief of Santa Ana Police in 2017, Then Just 2 years in as Chief, January 2019, Chief Valentin submitted a request to the Santa Ana City Council to give him (SAPD) permission to destroy eight boxes of police records. These records fall directly under what SIB 1421 disclosed to the public.The records include use of force, in -custody injuries, in -custody deaths, officer involved shootings and alleged employee misconduct. The public has a right to know how police departments handle incidents with officer shootings, beatings, sexual assault and other forms of misconduct and violence by police officers. SAPID, one of the deadliest police departments in the county, has an excessive amount of controversial cases that need answers. SAPID has the highest number of fatal shootings in Orange County, with twenty-seven shootings per 324,568 residents.It is time the public knows how the SAPID holds itself accountable behind closed doors. In the last election year, Chispa highlighted the Santa Ana Police Officers Associations (POA) campaign fund through an independent expenditure. The POA spent at least $450,000 in the 2018 midterm election, resulting in a pro -police union City Council. When our council voted to delete these records, reveals to the people who the council is truly accountable to. Chief Paul Walters had to wait until Chief Carlos Rojas was gone because Walters knew Chief Rojas would not go along with him, as you know Rojas was pushed out because he was cracking down on officers misbehavior and disciplining police officers who violated the law while at work, and he reported a number of alleged illegal activity by Mayor Miguel Pulido, which the city nor Orange County Distric Attorney officals did anything about his complaints, Rojas claims Serrano met with city council members and candidates before the November 2016 election and offered them political support in exchange for signing an agreement that they would terminate the city then -city manager David Cavazos and Rojas.Rojas resigned in April 2017, What a shame that the city of Santa Ana let Chief Rojas go, Now Chief David Valentin seems to be doing his friend, Ex -Chief Paul Walters diry work, Why else would he be asking the City Council permission to destroy eight boxes of police records of alleged illegal activities by Mayor Miguel Pulido, which the city nor Orange County District Attorney officials did anything about his complaints, Rojas claims Serrano met with city council members and candidates before the November 2016 election and offered them political support in exchange for signing an agreement that they would terminate then -city manager David Cavazos and Rojas. Rojas resigned in April 2017 What a shame that the city of Santa Ana let Chief Rojas go, Now Chief David Valentin seems to be doing his friend, Ex -Chief Paul Walters diry work, Why else would he be asking the City Council permission to destroy eight boxes of police records of alleged employee misconduct. Hall, Jennifer From: Lopez, Jessie Sent: Monday, August 28, 2023 9:21 AM To: eComment Subject: FW: Yale Navigation Center Report From: Brian Alexis Mendoza < Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2023 4:41 PM To: Vazquez, Benjamin <bvazquez@santa-ana.org>; Penaloza, David <DPenaloza@santa-ana.org>; Hernandez, Johnathan <JRyanHernandez@santa-ana.org>; Lopez, Jessie <JessieLopez@santa-ana.org>; Bacerra, Phil <pbacerra@santa-ana.org>; Amezcua, Valerie <VAmezcua@santa-ana.org>; Phan, Thai <TPhan@santa-ana.org> Cc: Eggers, Terri <TEggers@santa-ana.org>; gracew@mercyhouse.net Subject: Yale Navigation Center Report Hi Council Members - My name is Brian Alexis Mendoza. I am a 25 year old latino social worker and journalist living off the streets of Santa Ana, Orange County, CA. I have worked in psych wards and homeless service nonprofits in the area. As of 8/27/2023 I am currently homeless and staying at Yale Navigation Center. I have experienced harassment and discrimination from both residents and staff. I have reported and faced retaliation. I have called the Santa Ana Police Department who then turn the issue around in me and try to point fingers at me. The shelter staff made up an "incident" about me and told me I wasn't allowed to come back in until the next day. I told them I had to go to work and that they are unjustly keeping my belongings. They would not explain what the "incident" was. As far as I know they made this up as I did not speak to any staff or residents on the day they claimed there was an "incident". The SAPD Officer Choi (Badge # 3631) told me it was a "civil" matter and told me to sue and hire a lawyer. Officer Choi proceeded to speak to the shelter security/staff. Officer Choi asked them "Was there an incident involving Brian today?" The shelter staff falsely claimed "Yes." Officer Choi then said "Alright have a good day. You can leave." I attempted to speak with the shelter staff to find out what the "incident" was. They emotionally yelled at me saying "Don't talk to me." And the Officer told me to leave. I am not sure what's going on here but it seems that the shelter is making false claims. Every time I come into the shelter they ask me to step out of my car and search my trunk. This is not the same for every resident. I have only seen them search my trunk. They have also called me "miss" and "main". For the record, I am male and go by the pronouns he/him. They are sadistic and easily irritable. I have worked with Mercy House (another shelter in ORANGE COUNTY) as a case manager and this is no way a shelter is run or how residents are treated. They have been sued in the past for harassment and discrimination reason as well. I have had issues with residents regarding harassment and racial tensions which they are ignoring. 1 Again, they are having me miss work and keeping my belongings at this time. I know California has anti -harassment and discrimination laws. They (Shelter and staff) are definitely breaking them. https://fullertonobserver.com/2021/01/08/aclu-sues-orange-county-homeless-shelters-for-harassment- violations-of-rights/ These shelters have been sued in the past before by the ACLU of Southern California so I am far from the only individual who has experienced these sort of issues with them. If ANYTHING, they need anger management. If any of you know how to civilly sue someone or a shelter or organization please let me know ! Sincerely , - Brian Alexis Mendoza Social Worker Journalist @ Santa Ana Voices Hall, Jennifer From: Sheri Snyder < Sent: Monday, August 28, 2023 9:21 AM To: eComment Subject: Republic - No trash pick-up since Friday, August 18th To the Members of the City Council: For the past year, our community (Windwood Forest Condominiums) has endured repeated missed pick-ups from Republic Trash Services, the worst being when Republic first took over from Waste Management in July 2022, but ongoing since. It's been more than a year and they still don't have "their act together." Over the past year, Republic has been deceptive telling our Property Management that they have been on -site, when they have not. They have required that reports for failed pick-ups be reported by our Property Management by 5:OOpm on the day of the missed pick-up. Why is it that Republic doesn't know where their own trucks are and if pick-ups are occurring, especially for a large community such as ours (144 units). In this day of GPS tracking, this should not difficult. Republic continues to make excuses (labor shortages, broken down equipment). Now our community is experiencing yet another round of missed pick-ups. Republic has not been on-sitei i , August t, though they erroneously ifon- site. We NEVER had these kinds of problems in the many years our community was serviced by Waste Management. Republic over -promised and has since under -performed, while charging more for their services than WM. I implore the City Council to provide resolution to this matter as quickly as possible. As of this morning (Monday, August 28th), our community bins are overflowing! Thank you, Sheryl Snyder Santa Ana, CA Windwood Forest Condominiums Hall, Jennifer From: Michael Canning <mike.canning@seabreezemgmt.com> Sent: Monday, August 28, 2023 9:46 AM To: eComment Subject: Windwood Forest: No trash service last week Hello, esteemed members of the City Council: I manage Windwood Forest in Ward 1. We had no trash service last week and now the bins are overflowing and creating a public health hazard. I am concerned about the health, safety and welfare of your constituents. Republic promised all week to send a truck but they ghosted us. Can you please utilize your good offices to force the vendor to do their job? Various residents have asked me to call an investigative news team so they can roll cameras on the overflowing bins, but I wanted to reach out to you first. Also, we would like a discount on our bill for lack of service, it is only fair. Thanks, Mike Canning SEABREEZE 0 a lke C a in in lii in g (999) 900 8859 Cuurnrnu.unkl y II`9 nageir (800) 902 791. S(�,rilhir � 4ern a1 awn 26840 AEI so Mee () Il: irkw y, Si.e 100 I AEI so Cup Vuu, CA 92696 1 Hall, Jennifer From: Evelyn Gray < Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2023 1:17 PM To: Sternberg, Brian; Ridge, Kristine; eComment Cc: tours@esotouric.com Subject: Santa Ana -- save the Parrot Tree Dear Santa Ana Government People, The planet is boiling and the only thing that can save it are trees so what the flock would motivate you to cut an old, established one down? am requesting the City of r' r Ana r • all r g` make all possible effortsto preserve the Parrot Tree, incorporate it into the Library's renovation plans, and protect and provide proper care• # the renovation. Evelyn Gray Lake Balboa, 1 Hall, Jennifer From: Nate Callens < > Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2023 1:23 PM To: Sternberg, Brian; Ridge, Kristine; eComment; tours@esotouric.com Subject: Please DO NOT CHOP DOWN the Parrot Tree!! It's rare, beautiful, and home to many parrots. That is all. Don't chop it down https:Hesotouric. substack. comp/parrot-tree?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email Thanks! Nate Callens Graphic Designer I Marketer I Podcaster 701.238.95281 Fargo, ND I View My Resume bassdesignfkgo.com ( Linkedln I On The Rocks Podcast Hall, Jennifer From: Paul Hill < Thursday, August 31, 2023 4:32 PM To: Sternberg, Brian Cc: Ridge, Kristine; eComment; Kim Cooper Subject: The Parrot tree at the Main Library Please don't destroy the Parrot tree at the library. I'm sure there are ways to save it ... if you ask the right people. And the right people are out there. Thank you for your consideration, Paul Hill Hall, Jennifer From: Victoria Brandon < Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2023 5:44 PM To: Sternberg, Brian Cc: Ridge, Kristine; eComment; tours@esoteric.com Subject: The Parrot Tree Dear Mr. Sternberg: I ask that you allow the Parrot Tree to be saved and protected at the Santa Ana Library. This tree has stood there for a very long time, and has great meaning to all of us who have spent time beneath its branches. I would like to say that you can be an example to others who find themselves in similar situations; by respecting this magnificent tree, you will teach others by your example that such things have meaning and are valued in our society. If your concern is merely one of logistics in the changes that are being made to the building, work around it to ensure its safety. It will add a great dimension to the work that you are doing, and will integrate Santa Ana history into the present. I am certain there are birds and other wildlife who depend on the tree for their sustenance, and I know that you would consider being a steward of such an effort to support environmental issues. Trees are our allies in climate change, offsetting carbon and generating oxygen. Thank you for your consideration, I have faith that you will do the right thing. Sincerely, Victoria Brandon Hall, Jennifer From: Joan Renner < Sent: Friday, September 1, 2023 11:38 AM To: Ridge, Kristine; eComment Cc: Sternberg, Brian Subject: Please save the Parrot Tree I am writing in support of keeping the "Parrot Tree" intact. I grew up in Orange County, and have used the library many times over the years. I will be 75 this month. echo the opinion of Donald R. Hodel, Emeritus Environmental Horticulture Advisor, University of California Cooperative EXtension.He said, "The tree's significant location adjacent to the main center of learning and enlightenment in Santa Ana, make its destruction all the more harmful and unnecessary. It could easily and less expensively be incorporated into the City's plans for the library renovation. Removing the concrete surrounding the tree and replacing it with one of a multitude of modern, technologically advanced, permeable surfaces along with the amphitheater type seating would create an instant, outdoor, cool, green, leafy, and unique educational and event meeting venue. To destroy it is illogical and contrary to the best interests of the citizens of Santa Ana and society as a whole." Please reconsider this disastrous plan. Thank you. Joan Renner 1 Hall, Jennifer From: YIMBY Action <hello@yimbyaction.org> Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2023 10:02 AM To: eComment Subject: Unlock your impact in the pro -housing movement So, you want to welcome more neighbors into your community and ensure everyone has access to a safe, affordable home, but you're not sure where to start? We got you covered! The Unlocking Your Impact Series is a 3-part series where you'll get the tools you need to better understand the housing shortage and the YIMBY movement, what it looks like to become an advocate in your community, and how to tell your housing story in a way that will inspire your local community to build more homes. This series is easy and accessible so you can get the support you need to take meaningful action on housing in your community. That's why the Unlocking Your Impact Series has been designed to allow you to attend as many events as you'd like to in any order. You can attend all three events consecutively, or participate on a basis that's more flexible. This series will equip you with knowledge and skills so we can build a future where everyone has access to affordable, equitable, and sustainable housing. 1 Our first session, How to be a Pro Housing.Advocate, will is off on September 20, YOUR YIMBY ACTION MEMBERSHIP MEMBERSHIP STATUS LOCATION None DONOR LEVEL None Unknown, Unknown Unknown Add/update location MOBILE ALERTS VOLUNTEER LEVEL Add/update mobile Keeping this hl?/brmation up to date powers our aclivislv! Need help with your lvelvbership? E'lvail hello(li)lyinihyaclion. orS,),. N YIMBY Action k as netwodc, op`jwo Ga.oaa;rung aacOvist,s fugfiOng Fol- rn(we undue ve fiou;aung paofi6es and as fa m-e ol'aabundaa t Ga.oumuatp,. Sent via ActionNetwork.org. To update your email address, change your name or address, or to stop receiving emails from YIMBY Action, please click here. Hall, Jennifer From: Bulmaro Vicente < boomer@chispaoc.org > Sent: Thursday, September 7, 2023 11:28 AM To: eComment Subject: Urgent Action Needed: Release RFP and Convene Commission Attachments: Chispa - Urgent Request for RFP Release and Police Oversight Commission Convening.pdf Good morning, I am submitting this letter on behalf of Chispa to express our deep frustration and growing concern regarding the significant delays in establishing the much -needed City's Police Oversight Commission. We urge the City to release the Request for Proposal for the Independent Director of the Commission, and to convene the Commission for their first meeting. In Solidarity, Boomer Policy and Political Director I Chispa e: boo ert,a�chispao c: 1505 E 17th Street Suite 117 Santa Ana, CA 92705 don CEW ckispa September 7, 2023 Mayor Amezcua and City Councilmembers 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Dear Mayor Amezcua and City Councilmembers, We are writing to express our deep frustration and growing concern regarding the significant delays in establishing the much -needed City's Police Oversight Commission (Commission). We urge the City to release the Request for Proposal (RFP) for the Independent Director (Director) of the Commission, and to convene the Commission for their first meeting. The City must fulfill its obligation in effectively implementing this essential oversight body. The Council made a vital commitment to improve the transparency and accountability of the City's Police Department (Department) by creating this historic Commission. This marked a commendable step towards addressing the longstanding community demand for police oversight in the wake of ongoing incidents of police violence. Earlier this year, Staff introduced an implementation timeline with the goal of fully staffing and setting meetings for the Commission by July. This deadline has passed; the RFP for the Director has yet even to be released. This delay, coupled with the fact that the Commission has not convened for its first meeting, despite having quorum, is eroding the community's confidence in the City's commitment to implement police oversight and ensure accountability. This year the City's Department continues to make headlines over instances of misconduct, including a delayed investigation of a Child Sexual Assault by an Off -Duty Officer', and the satirical and insensitive "be on the lookout" (BOLO) bulletin' circulated by the police, which made reference to the 2021 killing of Brandon Lopez, the cousin of City Councilmember Jonathan Hernandez. The BOLO has been the subject of an internal affairs investigation for over a year and a half, yet no one has been held accountable. The Department's ongoing, appalling ' Ben Camacho, Santa Ana Police Department Delays Investigation of a Child Sexual Assault by an Off -Duty Officer for More Than Half a Year, Commander Alleges, Knock LA (Jun. 21, 2023),https: //knock -la. com/santa-ana-police-department-delays-investigation-of-a-child-sexual-assault-by-an-off-dut y-officer-for-more-than-half-a-year/ 2 Ben Camacho, Fake BOLO at SAPD Reveals Culture of Harassment, Knock LA (Apr. 4, 2023), https:Hknock-la.com/fake-bolo-at-sapd-reveals-culture-of-harassment/ patterns of misconduct damage the City's reputation and integrity, and erode public trust. And yet, the Commission responsible for addressing these incidents and making recommendations to the Council has yet to materialize. Given these concerns, we urge the City to promptly release the RFP for the Director. Furthermore, the City must engage the community in the process of selecting the new Director, as directed by Council earlier this year. The Council should call a public special meeting during which they can conduct interviews with the top 3 candidates for the Director role, and provide an opportunity for community members to offer public comments and questions. Lastly, we demand that the Commission convene for its first meeting immediately, before the Director's hiring, to initiate discussions on crucial matters, such as the recent incidents of misconduct within the Department. Our community cannot wait any longer. The City must uphold its commitments to the community and fulfill its promise to establish a robust and effective Commission. Sincerely, Bulmaro Vicente Policy and Political Director CC: vamezcuan.santa-ana.or PB acerra&Santa-ana. org TPhannsanta-ana. org DPenaloza(&,,santa-ana. org JessieLopezn.santa-ana. org J4anHemandez c&santa-ana.org bvazquez(L Santa-ana. org Hall, Jennifer From: Carol < Sent: Saturday, September 9, 2023 8:05 AM To: Sternberg, Brian Cc: Ridge, Kristine; eComment Subject: Parrot Tree Dear All, After reading the article about the possible future demise of the Parrot Tree, I wanted to provide other options. Instead of cutting down a designated large tree that is home to many birds, why not incorporate it into future plans? If there is a parking lot planned then pave around it. If there is a patio planned then use the tree for free shade. No awnings or expensive patio covers will be needed for that area. The paved patio could circle around the tree. All one needs to do is go visit Santa Ana zoo and see how they have used large trees in both their parking lots and in paved areas of the zoo. Sincerely, Carol Johnson Santa Ana Resident Hall, Jennifer From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Dec 11, 2021 Dear Mayor, City Council and Staff, Sandra Pocha Pena < Monday, September 11, 2023 3:22 PM eComment !City Clerk; Gomez, Daisy; Thai, Minh; mmccann@santa-ana.org; Sarmiento, Vicente; Mendoza, Nelida; Lopez, Jessie; Hernandez, Johnathan; Ginelle Gmail Hardy; Ridge, Kristine Public Comment: General Plan - So Main Historical Survey I am writing to urge you to wait until we can complete a Historical Survey on South Main before adopting the new General Plan. Without a Historical Survey, we can't identify the antique structures which give South Main Street much of its charm. Way back this past Spring, in April or May, staff from Planning contacted myself and fellow neighborhood leader Ginelle Hardey to ask that we stop plans on conducting a community -led historical survey because the City was going to contract a consultant to research all the buildings on the South Main Corridor. We have the largest concentration of Streamline Modern, Googie, Craftsman and other regional forms of architecture in the whole county right on South Main Street dating back to it's time as a part of historic Route 101, a sister highway to Route 66. At the November 4 Historical Resources Commission meeting, Ginelle and I asked the status of this Historical Survey and staff could not provide an answer. If no Consultant has been contracted or if the Survey can not be completed, I ask that the City partner with existing South Main Neighborhood Alliance, a coalition of South Main residents, neighborhood leaders and businesses to complete this important endeavor. Approving a General Plan that does not protect our important historical structures will ensure their destruction as development rushes forward on this important corridor. As a guide to the kind of partnership that would be ideal, I ask you to review the City of San Antonio's proposed Historic Buena Vista District which includes a video presentation and multi-lingual flyer campaign for local residents: hit s: www.sananion!o. ov historic scouisa II i!sior!cD!sir!cis BuenaV!sta Looking forward to working together to preserve our historic heritage! Sincerely, --- Sandra Pena Sarmiento Pacific Park / Eastside Neighborhood Leader cc Ginelle Hardey, Henninger Park Neighborhood Leader Irma Jauregui, South Main Neighborhood Alliance Sandra Pena Sarmiento "Frontier Arts & Hybrid Culture" www.pocharte.com Hall, Jennifer From: Irma Jauregui < Sent: Monday, September 11, 2023 4:16 PM To: Sandra Pocha Pena Cc: eComment; !City Clerk; Gomez, Daisy; Thai, Minh; mmccann@santa-ana.org; Sarmiento, Vicente; Mendoza, Nelida; Lopez, Jessie; Hernandez, Johnathan; Ginelle Gmail Hardy; Ridge, Kristine Subject: Re: Public Comment: General Plan - So Main Historical Survey Dear MAyor, Council members, City manager and City leadership I too concur with Sandra and Ginelle to wait, do studies/surveys and protect our historic South Main corridor so we not lose our unique character that makes us so special and that the owners, businesses and residents of the South Main corridor work together with the city for the benefit of all. Most respectfully, Irma P Jauregui SAHNA Alliance Wilshire Square resident Sent from my iPad On Sep 11, 2023, at 3:22 PM, Sandra Pocha Pena < wrote: Dec 11, 2021 Dear Mayor, City Council and Staff, I am writing to urge you to wait until we can complete a Historical Survey on South Main before adopting the new General Plan. Without a Historical Survey, we can't identify the antique structures which give South Main Street much of its charm. Way back this past Spring, in April or May, staff from Planning contacted myself and fellow neighborhood leader Ginelle Hardey to ask that we stop plans on conducting a community -led historical survey because the City was going to contract a consultant to research all the buildings on the South Main Corridor. We have the largest concentration of Streamline Modern, Googie, Craftsman and other regional forms of architecture in the whole county right on South Main Street dating back to it's time as a part of historic Route 101, a sister highway to Route 66. At the November 4 Historical Resources Commission meeting, Ginelle and I asked the status of this Historical Survey and staff could not provide an answer. If no Consultant has been contracted or if the Survey can not be completed, I ask that the City partner with existing South Main Neighborhood Alliance, a coalition of South Main residents, neighborhood leaders and businesses to complete this important endeavor. Approving a General Plan that does not protect our important historical structures will ensure their destruction as development rushes forward on this important corridor. As a guide to the kind of partnership that would be ideal, I ask you to review the City of San Antonio's proposed Historic Buena Vista District which includes a video presentation and multi-lingual flyer campaign for local residents: hit s: www.sananion!o. ov historic scouisa II i!sior!cD!sir!cis BuenaV!sta Looking forward to working together to preserve our historic heritage! Sincerely, --- Sandra Pena Sarmiento Pacific Park / Eastside Neighborhood Leader cc Ginelle Hardey, Henninger Park Neighborhood Leader Irma Jauregui, South Main Neighborhood Alliance Sandra Pena Sarmiento "Frontier Arts & Hybrid Culture" www.pocharte.com Orozco, Norma From: gomi bin < Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2023 8:56 PM To: Sternberg, Brian; Ridge, Kristine; eComment Cc: tours@esotouric.com Subject: NURTURE & TAKE CARE OF SANTA ANA'S PARROT TREE Dear Brian Sternberg, Santa Ana Exec Director of Library Services, Kristine Ridge, Santa Ana City Manager, Santa Ana City Council I got word that the city is intending to cut down the tree at the Santa Ana Main Library. This tree is called the "Parrot Tree". I STRONGLY OPPOSE this action. This is an incredible tree and is named the 'State and National Champion Big Tree Brown Woolly Fig. The benefits of our having this tree is great. It benefits our environment - providing oxygen, combats our increasing temperatures, provides beauty and greenery to our city landscape of concrete & glass buildings. Having greenery and nature is relaxing and soothes our daily stresses . Our Parrot Tree is a BIG & WONDROUS treasure engulfing Mother Nature's beneficial attributes. I was once told Santa Ana is the "Tree City". As the "Tree City", it MUST support, preserve and promote this designation by caring for its iconic trees NOT cut them down. I am proud to have Santa Ana be a Tree City. Nature beautifies the physical environment we live in and gives our human heart & soul peace and good energy within ourselves and for others. SAVE THE PARROT TREE, Janice KEVIN L, ANDERSON Santa Ana CA 92704 ( 5 September 2023 F'1HTQ IRiM f- 1`'f CLE .1- '' City of Santa Ana Officials See attached mailing list Re: Gridlock on Jaguar Way Dear City of Santa Ana Officials: The `Artisan' neighborhood consists of 42 homes on Picasso and Rembrandt, the sole vehicular and pedestrian access to which is at and through the traffic intersection of Artisan Way and Jaguar Way. During `drop off,' `pick up' and `special event' periods at Sergerstrom High, access to and from our neighborhood becomes extremely congested because vehicles completely block the intersection where our entrance road intersects Jaguar Way. I am respectfully submitting the attached Petition for action to improve access to Artisan. The Petition has been signed by 60 residents of the neighborhood and others. You can view the online version here: htti)s://cbng.it/XDWhvxio2zX Please let me know how to proceed to obtain the actions desired. 1.v ANDERSON Valerie Amezcua, Mayor 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Jessie Lopez, Mayor Pro Tem 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Thai Viet Phan, Council Member 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Benjamin Vazquez, Council Member 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Phil Bacerra, Council Member 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Johnathan Ryan Hernandez, Council Member 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 David Penaloza, Council Member 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Jennifer L, Hall, City Clerk 20 Civic Center Plaza, M-30 Santa Ana, CA 92701 Kristine Ridge, City Manager 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Commander Marty, Traffic Division, SAPD 60 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Department of Public Works, Streets 20 Civic Center Plaza Ross Annex, M-20 Santa Ana, CA 92702 PETITION TO CITY OF SANTA ANA Whereas, the `Artisan' neighborhood consists of 42 homes on Picasso and Rembrandt, the sole vehicular and pedestrian access to which is at and through the traffic intersection of Artisan Way and Jaguar Way in Santa Ana; and, Whereas, during normal `drop off,' `pick up' and `special event' hours at Sergerstrom High School, traffic on Jaguar Way often completely blocks the traffic intersection at Artisan Way, preventing residents living on Picasso and Rembrandt, vendors and delivery vehicles from entering or exiting for periods of time exceeding 30 minutes; and, Whereas, California Vehicle Code section 22526(a) (the Anti -Gridlock Act) provides: "Notwithstanding any official traffic control signal indication to proceed, a driver of a vehicle shall not enter an intersection or marked crosswalk unless there is sufficient space on the other side of the intersection or marked crosswalk to accommodate the vehicle driven without obstructing the through passage of vehicles from either side;" and, Whereas, Santa Ana Code of Ordinances section 36-41(9) provides: "No person shall drive a vehicle into an intersection or a marked crosswalk unless there is sufficient space on the other side of the intersection or crosswalk to accommodate the vehicle he is operating without obstructing the passage of other vehicles or pedestrians in such intersection or crosswalk, notwithstanding any official traffic -control device or signal indication to proceed;" and, Whereas, courtesy, expediency and commerce will be enhanced if the City of Santa Ana enforces the Anti -Gridlock Act and its own Ordinance at the traffic intersection of Jaguar Way and Artisan Way; Now, therefore, the residents of Artisan living on Picasso and Rembrandt petition the City of Santa Ana to enact an ordinance or pass a resolution as part of the City's Traffic Management Plan: 1. Designating the traffic intersection at Jaguar Way and Artisan Way as an `Anti -Gridlock' area; 2. Providing for the posting of signs on Jaguar Way advising operators of motor vehicles of the same; 3. Installing and maintaining pavement markings on Jaguar Way at the intersection with Artisan Way reading `KEEP CLEAR' and/or `DO NOT BLOCK; and, 4. Enforce California's Anti -Gridlock law and the City's Ordinance on Jaguar Way at Artisan Way. Dated: ?0_ v 5 20 Z3 _S f, -) M. j oo ( �n Re densi t Name Resident Address Resident Signature St!'V SuLkr C n V"" Ct: N W (7N v c.4 n tip�.tt^e�5v, cn Al; 0 F ro co �' I I STATE Or( All PORMIA AUTHENTICATEDI ELECTRONIC LEGAL MTERIAL State of California VEHICLE CODE Section 22526 22526_(a). Notwitbstanding any official traffic control signal indication to proceed, a driver of a vehicle shall not enter an intersection or marked crosswalk unless there is sufficient space on the other side of the intersection or marked crosswalk to accommodate the vehicle driven without obstructing the through passage of vehicles from either side. (b) A driver of a vehicle which is making a turn at an intersection who is facing a steady circular yellow or yellow arrow signal shall not enter the intersection or marked crosswalk unless there is sufficient space on the other side of the intersection or marked crosswalk to accommodate the vehicle driven without obstructing the through passage of vehicles from either side. (c) A driver of a vehicle shall not enter a railroad or rail transit crossing, notwithstanding any official traffic control device or signal indication to proceed, unless there is sufficient undercarriage clearance to cross the intersection without obstructing the through passage of a railway vehicle, including, but not limited to, a train, trolley, or city transit vehicle. (d) A driver of a vehicle shall not enter a railroad or rail transit crossing, notwithstanding any official traffic control device or signal indication to proceed, unless there is sufficient space on the other side of the railroad or rail transit crossing to accommodate the vehicle driven and any railway vehicle, including, but not limited to, a train, trolley, or city transit vehicle. (e) A local authority may post appropriate signs at the entrance to intersections indicating the prohibition in subdivisions (a), (b), and (c). (f) A violation of this section is not a violation of a law relating to the safe operation of vehicles and is the following: (1) A stopping violation when a notice to appear has been issued by a peace officer described in Section 830.1, 830.2, or 830.33 of the Penal Code. (2) A parking violation when a notice of parking violation is issued by a person, other than a peace officer described in paragraph (1), who is authorized to enforce parking statutes and regulations. (g) This section shall be known and maybe cited as the Anti -Gridlock Act of 1987. (Amended by Stats. 2010, Ch. 216, Sec. 11. (AB 2144) Effective January 1, 2011.) cdcpA�dft°ardment while necessarily in use on construction or repair work on or in the public right-of-way. The foregoing exemption shall not, however, protect the driver of any such vehicle from the consequences of his wilful disregard of safety of others. (Code 1952, § 3226; Ord. No. NS-560, § 1, 1-15-62) Sec. 3 -41 Miscellaneous driving movements and acts prohibited. No person shall• (1) Drive between the vehicles comprising a funeral procession while it is in motion and when such vehicles are identified as part of such procession by the display upon the outside of each vehicle of a pennant or other identifying insignia or by such other method as may be determined and designated by the chief of police. This provision shall not apply at intersections where traffic is controlled by traffic -control signals or police officers. (2) While riding any bicycle, motorcycle, coaster, skateboard, motorized skateboard, roller skates, or any toy vehicle, attach the same or himself to any moving vehicle upon any roadway, and no person driving any vehicle shall permit the same to be done. (3) Drive any motor vehicle within or over any sidewalk area or any parkway except at a driveway. (4) Drive over or across any new pavement or freshly painted marking, when any street barrier, sign or marking is in place, warning persons not to drive over or across the same, or when a sign is in place stating that the street, or any portion thereof, is closed. (5) Drive or operate a vehicle contrary to the directions or provisions of any barrier or sign erected pursuant to the provisions of any ordinance of the city, or by any public utilities, or by any department of the city, or by any other person pursuant to law or contract with the city, and no unauthorized person shall move or after the position of any such barrier or sign. (6) Drive a vehicle onto or from any freeway except at such entrances and exits as are established by public authority. (7) Park any vehicle within three hundred (300) feet of any fire apparatus which is stopped in answer to a fire alarm. (8) Ride a bicycle or skateboard upon a sidewalk within a business district, as that term is defined in California Vehicle Code, Section 235. Whenever any person is riding a bicycle or skateboard upon a sidewalk other than in a business district, or in any other public place, such person shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian. (9) CONvyCJT'CMedntmer Intersection or a marked crosswalk unless there is sufficient space on the other side of the intersection or crosswalk to accommodate the vehicle he Is operating without obstructing the passage of other vehicles or pedestrians in such intersection or crosswalk, notwithstanding any official traffic -control device or signal indication to proceed. (10) Drive any motor vehicle upon or over a median. (11) Ride a bicycle, skateboard, motorized scooter, roller skates, or any other device or conveyance with a riding surface of any design which is designed to be or can be propelled by human power within the civic center. Any person convicted of violating this subsection shall be punished by a fine which shall not exceed twenty-five dollars ($25.00) and for any subsequent convictions within one year shall be punished with a fine which does not exceed seventy-five dollars ($75.00). (Code 1952, § 3240; Ord. No. NS-560, § 1, 1.15-62; Ord. No. N5-1451, § 3,10-16-78; Ord, No. 2394, § 4, 8- 16-99; Ord. No. NS-2424, § 2, 5-1-00; Ord. No. NS-2634, § 2, 7-7-03) Sec. 36-42. - Driving around railway barriers. No person shall drive any vehicle around, or under, any crossing gate or barrier at a railroad grade crossing while such a gate or barrier is closed or is being opened or closed. (Code 1952, § 3290; Ord. No. NS-560, § 1, 1-15-62) Sec. 36-43. - Amplification devices. No driver of a vehicle shall operate or permit operation of any radio system, loudspeaker, or other noise device Intended to make sound audible outside the vehicle when the vehicle is being operated upon any street and the purpose of such sound is to advertise for commercial purposes. (Ord. No. NS-1710, § 1, 1-3-84) Sec. 36-44, - Buses may stop in front of driveway. A bus engaged as a common carrier may stop to load or unload passengers in front of a driveway. At no time shall the bus so stop for a period longer than is necessary to load or unload passengers. (Code 1952, § 3241; Ord. No. NS-560, § 1, 1-15-62) Sec. 36-45. - Obstructions to vision —Prohibited at corners. On property on any corner formed by intersecting streets, it shall be unlawful to install, set out, maintain or allow the installation, setting out or maintenance of any sign, fence, hedge, shrubbery, natural growth or other obstruction to the eye, higher than two and one-half (2Y2) feet above the top of the sidewalk, or, where no sidewalks exist, higher than three (3) feet above the level of the center of the Orozco, Norma From: turquoiseisle < Sent: Monday, September 18, 2023 5:12 PM To: eComment Subject: Irvine police gives Racist commenter Top Fan badge on Facebook Sent with Proton Mail secure email. ------- Forwarded Message ------- From: turquoiseisle < Date: On Monday, September 18th, 2023 at 4:09 AM Subject: Hi, Mayor Valerie and Santa Ana City Council Irvine Police gave Top Fan status to a public commenter who called Colombia a Thirdworld Shithole Country i Irvine Police Department 'yesterday, a person driving home from South Co, Plea with some new purchases noticed they wei being followed home by another car. They called we found the car following them and supped it. After an investigation, officers believed the two rr following the reporting person were part of an organized crime group, Two Colombian National : were arrested and booked on conspiracy charges. a request for bail enhancements. Be aware of your surroundings when leaving a ba shopping center with expensive items. watch for people following you and report suspicious beha, the police. Song: The Crystal Method "'Don't Stop" #irvine #irvinepolice #police #irvinepd #cityofirvi #orangecounty #arrest ##lawenforcement #irvinel iffl.MI", An 2 630 > LiIdL iiIL- VVdZD it iiL lit-AL « hit- diiu KLPL fallowing my movements and was l ookir everything on the lowest shelf trying to Ic up my skirt. I got so freaked out that abandoned my cart in the store and weni my car For a minute I actually convinced myself I was being paranoid, but left anyways. I was at the red... See more d Like Reply Why no mugshots d Like r . be careful tomorrow' d Like Reply off Top fan Punks d Like Reply 3 https://fb.watch/m kdi7UIPr/?mibextid=Nif5oz https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02DynStp5eMKvgx6kcskZP3aE44 YAXAjTiAWWF73VxvWdRG1 FEvCR4Q5oj6CchE65AI&id=100064740364357&mibe xtid=Nif5oz Sent with Proton Mail secure email. 4 Orozco, Norma From: Lisa Lisa < Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2023 2:38 PM To: eComment Subject: Racist Law Enforcement in Irvine Attachments: Screens hot_20230910_210042_Face boo kjpg; Screenshot_20230918_180900 _Facebookjpg; Screens hot_20230918_180818_Face boo kjpg Hi, I was made aware of this racism against Colombians where Irvine police assigned a Facebook "Top Fan badge" to someone who called Colombia a 3rd world sh#thole! I live here and apologize for the IPD's racism. When looking at their page it does appear they feature a disproportionate amount of Latinas and Latinos in addition to Black people and there's a special emphasis on people from Santa Ana for some reason on the IPDy Facebook page. Thank you for allowing me to share this and have a great evening. Lisa. https:Hfb.watch/m kdi7UIPr/?mibextid=Nif5oz https:Hm.facebook.com/story.php?story fbid=pfbid02DynStp5eMKvgx6kcskZP3aE44YAXAOTiAWWF 73VxvWdRG1 FEvCR4Q5oi6CchE65Al&id=100064740364357&mibextid=NifSoz 1 6:0809 $ 0lk� a0 ., 76%■ Q Search ••• Posts About Videos Photos More ® Irvine Police Department Sep 6 • 0 Yesterday, a person driving home from South Coast Plaza with some new purchases noticed they were being followed home by another car. They called us, we found the car following them and stopped it. After an investigation, officers believed the two men following the reporting person were part of an organized crime group. Two Colombian Nationals were arrested and booked on conspiracy charges with a request for bail enhancements. Be aware of your surroundings when leaving a bank or shopping center with expensive items. Watch for people following you and report suspicious behavior to the police. Song: The Crystal Method "Don't Stop" #irvine #irvinepolice #police #irvinepd #cityofirvine #orangecounty #arrest #lawenforcement #irvinepdpio �► III ': 630 UICIL IIC VVdJ 11Y11L IICAI LU 11IC d1IU rt:-PI following my movements and was looking at everything on the lowest shelf trying to look up my skirt. I got so freaked out that abandoned my cart in the store and went to my car. For a minute I actually convinced myself I was being paranoid, but left anyways. I was at the red... See more ?r1 I ikr, Reply Why no mugshots? i Like Reply be careful tomorrow! 3d Like Reply ® Top fan Punks Reply . � Biden's guests? ,Id Like Reply 18 no,they are definitely trum... View 12 more replies... Enjoy prison. It'll be a step from your third world sh!thole 4d Like Reply Write a comment... 6:080Of0V a0 76% '1 Stop Social Media Stalkers is with Office of � = Tammy Kim, Vice Mayor and 2 others. Sep 9 0 We are pumped and ready to #ExposeTheTruth about Irvine Police Department. To quote #IrvinePDPIO "They must not follow our social media page..... because if they did they would know nothing gets past us" Well, guess what #WeDontMissaTrick either We are watching the #IPDFacebook page 24/7 waiting for#IrvinePolice to do even more stupid ass shit Here they claim to be #AntiRacist but give a #TopFan badge to someone who called #Colombia a #ShitholeCountry " #StayRacist City of Irvine ! Santa Ana Police Department LAPD Headquarters this is NOT even why #IrvinePD is under active investigation by Attorney General Rob Bonta ... but it only helps our claims ! #Self Destructive, much !? #Onlyinlrvine is this #CognitiveDissonance real... W ie You and 2 others 1 comment Share 'J Top fan Enjoy prison. It'll be a step from your third world sh!thole 2d Like Reply 1 #YouMightBeARacist if you give a #TopFan badge to people who call other nations #ShitholeCountries 111 0 < �a `yf` F #_ _ :erg, � � �t �¢'" f � � f'� - " �� _ "1.4 ti' ' - �_ .-� �.� _ .�.- ry y .r£* s _„. s k `_ 3 =-sat -��.v: �� = _. __ w 4 i 2 A �f i { < w 1 s., r LI h.. r ' _ _ J nF � V 3 Z'� %mac � q�pi• _ i h. TrL.w �r �F £�git�➢i t r. 4, i aL- � Siaq q. tj��v, yy'ti E" C TM � a WA Nt A r $y ' T y 5 ars ^t z�� \ \�� \ ��\ of