HomeMy WebLinkAboutCORRESPONDENCEJanuary B, 2015 7015 3AN 12 P�) 3^ 5 9
Dear Santa Ana City Co Unci Imembers,
Every two years, your election platforms have promised to m�sffiijiiAs to operate in
Santa Ana. And yet election cycles come and go and nothing ever cyanges to make it easier for
businesses to operate here in Santa Ana. Agenda items 13A and 13C of the December 161h City Council
Meeting are symbolic of why nothing ever changes. The vote on those two agenda items glaringly
demonstrates that the Council is more interested in playing political games than in improving the
business climate in Santa Ana.
I've watched the Planning Commission for many years and we all know that most of the appointees have
been political allies of the appointing Councilmember. Sadly, most Planning Commissioners have had few,
if any, qualifications to make good Commissioners. Even sadder still, Santa Ana has many residents who
would make excellent Planning Commissioners, but would never want to be associated with any of you or
the Commission as it exists.
Ask anyone who has tried to open a business in Santa Ana. It is a frustratingly long, outdated and
obscenely expensive process. Some of this is due to outdated codes that never seem to get updated,
some of it is due to unforeseen building conditions, some of it is due to missteps of City Staff or the
business owner himself. But most of the frustration is due to politics. Santa Ana has stated many times
that we want to encourage new business, yet the Planning Commission thinks nothing of delaying
approvals for months on end as if these small businesses have the deep pockets of a store chain. Take
Little Sparrow for instance. The flaming hoops this business owner was forced to jump through over and
over again was shameful. Commissioners with no business experience who judge whether a business
owner "has what it takes", are self-aggrandizing fools. And those Commissioners who find a way to turn
everything into a racial issue, are crossing the line of decency.
When Commissioner Mill was reinstated on the Planning Commission several years ago, it was with the
strict requirement that he discontinue his blogging on the Orange Juice / New Santa Ana blog site. Yet we
all know that he never stopped blogging. Just because he doesn't sign his posts and continues to feed the
"Editor" with information, doesn't mean he isn't blogging. Of course Mr. Mill has a First Amendment right
to speak his mind, but the kind of bullshit that goes on at "New Santa Ana", isn't something a
Commissioner should be associated with. Especially when immediately after Planning Commission
meetings, the "Editor" (who doesn't attend the meetings) will report the same biased information that
Mr. Mill has just delivered in the meeting. Just as it wouldn't be appropriate for a Councilmember to be
writing for "New Santa Ana", it isn't appropriate for any appointed Commissioners to be doing it either.
Yet, it has been an unwritten rule (or perhaps it is actually written in our Charter) that City
Councilmembers will always approve each other's choices for Commissioners unless there is something
really egregious about the appointee. So it would be assumed that Councilmember Tmajero would be the
one to remove or retain Mr. Mill as his Commissioner. And likewise it would be Councilmember
Benavides who would be the one to remove or retain Mr. Bacerra as his Commissioner.
As I understand, Commissioner Bacerra's actions were deemed egregious because he questioned the
usefulness and the transparency of a new Ex Parte communication disclosure form that some unknown
entity within the Planning Department decided the Commissioners should begin completing. Yet
according to Mr. Bacerra, he did complete all the forms once the by-laws for the Planning Commission
were amended to include the new form (even though he continues to disagree with the usefulness of the
form). So in a Planning approval cycle that is bogged down with delays, redundancy, outdated codes,
bureaucracy and aggrandizing Commissioners, apparently it is egregious for one of the Commissioners to
question the need for adding another layer of redundancy. Was Mr. Bacerra's "egregious" behavior
based solely on his questioning and initial refusal to complete this form? Or if there's more to the story,
let's hear it from somebody other than NewSantaAna (which reported and embellished it extensively —
hmmm, wonder where the "Editor" got his information?). Which brings up another question. Who
decided this new Ex Parte communication disclosure form is so important (apparently worthy of
excommunication if ignored), and if it is so important, why aren't the members of the City Council
required to complete this form too?
Meanwhile it was revealed during item 13C of the City Council Meeting that Commissioner Mill was
apparently using his City position for personal gain. Hmmmmm, I hadn't heard about this. I wonder why
this wasn't extensively reported and "embellished" by the "Editor" of NewSantaAna? But according to
Mr. Mill's supporters on the Council, his transgression didn't warrant the egregious classification because
as soon as he was informed that he couldn't use the City Logo for personal gain, he stopped using it.
Really? Do you really expect us to believe Mr. Mill wasn't aware that his actions were unethical? And do
you really expect us to believe that Mr. Mill isn't continuing to use his Commission position for personal
gain. It couldn't be any clearer but you the Councilmembers don't see it because you are blinded by
infighting and politics: A Commissioner who questions why we would want to create redundancy without
transparency, should be commended. A Commissioner who is using his position for personal gain, should
be removed. The majority of you got it wrong on both items at City Council and in those votes you show
no respect for the residents and the business community of Santa Ana.
Is it any wonder we never make any progress in making Santa Ana more business friendly and is it any
wonder we will again hear the same unfulfilled campaign promises during the next election cycle?
Sincerreellyy,,y, `l C��
'D .
Dave Hoen
30 year resident of Santa Ana
Distribution:
Mayor Miguel Pulido
Mayor Pro-Tem Vince Sarmlento
Councilmember Michele Martinez
Councilmember Sal Tinajero
Councilmember David Benavides
Councilmember Roman Reyna
Councilmember Angelica Amezcua
City Manager David Cavazos
City Attorney Sonia Carvalho
Clerk of the Council Maria Huizar