My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSA - SUNSHINE ORDINANCE
Clerk
>
Agenda Packets / Staff Reports
>
City Council (2004 - Present)
>
2012
>
09/17/2012
>
WSA - SUNSHINE ORDINANCE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/1/2012 1:25:41 PM
Creation date
9/13/2012 5:31:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
Doc Type
Agenda Packet
Agency
City Manager's Office
Item #
WSA
Date
9/17/2012
Destruction Year
2017
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Mitre-Ramirez, Norma <br />Subject: FW: Regarding Santa Ana Sunshine Ordinance <br />From: Bryan Starr [mailto:BStarr@biaoc.com] <br />Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 2:17 PM <br />To: 'Ana Siria Urzua' <br />Cc: Tinajero, Sal; Sarmiento, Vince; Victor Cao <br />Subject: RE: Regarding Santa Ana Sunshine Ordinance <br />Thank you Ana, <br />As I stated on the phone, we believe that the CEQA process is exhaustive and provides for ample <br />notification of proposed development projects. That being said, we certainly understand the desire of <br />your group to allow for a more collaborative community process. We encourage all of our members to <br />hold public meetings in order to engage members of the community and get local input from interested <br />citizens. <br />We do not support a mandate that requires development project applicants to send notifications to <br />every single lease tenant surrounding development projects and believe that provision should be <br />eliminated from any proposed ordinance. State law already requires notification to adjacent property <br />owners. The inefficiency and cost associated with tracking down lessees (or renters) would create a <br />host of unintended consequences. For instance, if a lessee is overlooked, they may file a complaint or <br />sue the applicant for a violation of any potential ordinance. Additionally, lessees that oppose a project <br />could potentially claim that they did not receive notification in an attempt to stall the process. These <br />are just two hypothetical situations, but the potential for these kinds of issues will be increased by going <br />beyond existing law. <br />The development industry in California is already one of the most regulated industries in the nation. <br />Adding additional regulation, even well intended regulation, will further burden our member <br />companies. In a time when our industry is suffering horribly from a failed economy, government should <br />be doing all it can to assist the private sector by easing regulations. Adding additional burdens on our <br />industry right now is, at the very least, bad timing. <br />Thank you for seeking our input. <br />Bryan M. Starr <br />Chief Executive Officer <br />BIA Southern California, Orange County Chapter <br />949-554-8563 <br />From: asurzua(5gmail.com fmailto:asurzua(d)gmail.coml On Behalf Of Ana Siria Urzua <br />Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 1:57 PM <br />To: Bryan Starr <br />Cc: stinajero(a)santa-ana.org; vsarmientoCcbsanta-ana.org <br />Subject: Regarding Santa Ana Sunshine Ordinance <br />Hi Brian, <br />I wanted to follow up on our conversation yesterday regarding the proposed Santa Ana Sunshine <br />Ordinance. We do not yet have language available, it should be on the City's website by Friday. <br />But as I shared with you in concept, the goal of the ordinance is to create opportunities and <br />WSA-30
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.