Correspondence - Item 18 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

From: ED GUTIERREZ < Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2026 6:53 AM To: Arias, Fernanda <farias@santa-ana.org> Cc: Mills, Susan <smills@santa-ana.org>; Janet Brown <Janet.Brown2@mail.house.gov> Subject: Re: Appeal Application No. 2025-2-APC Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. Supplemental Clarification Regarding Tentative Hearing Date, Notice Timing, and Postmark To the Planning Department, Assigned Case Planner, and the City of Santa Ana, This supplemental correspondence is submitted in advance of the February 3, 2026 City Council hearing to clarify the timing, nature, and adequacy of notice provided for the appeal hearing, and to ensure that these procedural facts are accurately reflected in the administrative record. In correspondence dated December 8, 2025, the assigned City Planner advised that the appeal application had been “tentatively scheduled” for the City Council meeting of February 3, 2026. No subsequent correspondence was provided to confirm that the appeal had been finalized on the City Council agenda or that the February 3 date was no longer tentative. The only mailed notice confirming that the appeal would in fact be heard on February 3, 2026 was the public hearing notice addressed to “Occupant.” That envelope bears a USPS postmark dated January 26, 2026, and USPS Informed Delivery records show that the same item entered the local delivery stream on or about January 28, 2026. Under these circumstances, the appellant’s first formal confirmation that the appeal would proceed on February 3, 2026 occurred only days before the scheduled hearing. Where the City itself characterizes a hearing date as tentative and provides no subsequent individualized confirmation, reliance on a late-mailed, generically addressed notice does not provide a meaningful opportunity to prepare or participate. By contrast, the City has demonstrated in unrelated public hearing contexts—such as the March 17, 2026 noticed hearing regarding water, sewer, and recycled water service—that it can and does provide individualized notice addressed to named persons and afford substantially greater advance time for public participation. Generic “Occupant” addressing, combined with a January 26, 2026 mailing date and the absence of prior confirmed notice, was not reasonably calculated to support meaningful participation in this discretionary appeal hearing. These notice and timing deficiencies compound the procedural concerns raised in the appeal and should be considered in evaluating whether final action is appropriate at this time. Please include this correspondence in the administrative record and forward as appropriate for legal review. Respectfully submitted, Edward Gutierrez On behalf of the Sally C. Gutierrez Trust Appellant / Adjoining Property Owner Santa Ana, CA 92704 2