Loading...
06-09-20_Action with CommentsANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL ACTION AGENDA JUNE 9, 2020 CITY COUNCIL HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL NOTICE DURING COVID-19 PANDEMIC On March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom proclaimed a State of Emergency in California as a result of the threat of COVID-19. On March 17, 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 (superseding the Brown Act-related provisions of Executive Order N-25-20 issued on March 12, 2020), which allows a local legislative body to hold public meetings via teleconferencing and to make public meetings accessible telephonically or otherwise electronically to all members of the public seeking to observe and to address the local legislative body. Pursuant to Executive Order N-29-20, please be advised that the Anaheim City Council will participate in this meeting telephonically. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: Pursuant to Executive Order N-29-20 and given the current health concerns, members of the public can access the meeting live on-line, with audio and limited video, at www.anaheim.net/councilvideos and on Cable Channel 3. In addition, members of the public can submit comments electronically for City Council consideration by sending them to publiccomment@anaheim.net. To ensure distribution to the City Council prior to consideration of the agenda, please submit comments prior to 1:00 P.M. the day of the meeting. Those comments, as well as any comments received after 1:00 P.M., will be distributed to the City Council and will be made part of the official public record of the meeting. Contact the City Clerk’s Office at 714-765-5166 or cityclerk@anaheim.net with any questions. ACCESSIBILITY: If requested, the agenda and backup materials will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132), and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof. Any person who requires a disability-related modification or accommodation, in order to observe and/or offer public comment may request such reasonable modification, accommodation, aid, or service by contacting the City Clerk’s Office by telephone at (714) 765-5166 or via email to cityclerk@anaheim.net, no later than 8:00 AM on the day of the scheduled meeting.  ORDER OF BUSINESS: Public sessions of all regular meetings of the City Council/Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority/Public Financing Authority/Housing and Public Improvements Authority begin at 5:00 P.M. Public hearings begin at 5:30 P.M. unless otherwise noted. Closed sessions begin at 3:00 P.M. or such other time as noted. Closed sessions may be preceded by one or more public workshops. If a workshop is scheduled, the subject and time of the workshop will appear on the agenda. Not all of the above agencies may be meeting on any given date. The agenda will specify which agencies are meeting. All meetings are in the Anaheim City Hall, Council Chamber, 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA 92805 or such other location as noted. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2(a)(2), no action or discussion by the City Council shall be undertaken on any item not appearing on the posted agenda, except to briefly provide information, ask for clarification, provide direction to staff, or schedule a matter for a future meeting.  REPORTS: All agenda items and reports are available for review in the City Clerk’s Office and www.anaheim.net. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda (other than writings legally exempt from public disclosure) are available at the Office of the City Clerk, located at 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., 2nd Floor, Anaheim, CA 92805 and by contacting the office by phone, 714-765-5166, or email to cityclerk@anaheim.net.  ADDITIONS/DELETIONS: Items of business may be added to the agenda upon a motion adopted by a minimum 2/3 vote finding that there is a need to take immediate action and that the need for action came to the attention of the City or Agency subsequent to the agenda being posted. Items may be deleted from the agenda upon request of staff or upon action of the Council or Agency.  CONSENT CALENDAR: Consent Calendar items will be acted on by one roll call vote unless a member(s) requests an item(s) be discussed and/or removed from the Consent Calendar for separate action. Harry S. Sidhu, P.E. Mayor Stephen Faessel Mayor Pro Tem District 5 Denise Barnes Council Member District 1 Jordan Brandman Council Member District 2 Dr. Jose F. Moreno Council Member District 3 Lucille Kring Council Member District 4 Trevor O’Neil Council Member District 6 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5166 Fax (714) 765-4105 www.anaheim.net 2 June 9, 2020 ANAHEIM CITY COUNCIL ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA JUNE 9, 2020 3:00 P.M. Call to order the Anaheim City Council. 3:02 P.M. 3:00 P.M. – WORKSHOP 3:02 P.M. Proposed Fiscal Year 2020-21 Operating Budget and Capital Improvement Program Overview City Clerk Theresa Bass announced 265 public comments were received via email prior to 1:00 P.M. – See Appendix. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO CLOSED SESSION: None PUBLIC COMMENTS ON CLOSED SESSION ITEMS: 4 public comments received via email prior to 1:00 P.M. – See Appendix. (Submit comments electronically for City Council consideration by sending them to publiccomment@anaheim.net. To ensure distribution to the City Council prior to consideration of the agenda, please submit comments prior to 1:00 P.M. the day of the meeting. Those comments, as well as any comments received after 1:00 P.M., will be distributed to the City Council and will be made part of the official public record of the meeting.) Recess to closed session. 4:37 P.M. CLOSED SESSION 4:37 P.M. 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS (Subdivision (a) of Section 54957.6 of the California Government Code) Agency Designated Representative: Linda Andal, Human Resources Director Name of Employee Organizations: (1) American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (General Management, Professional/Technical, and Confidential Units); (2) Anaheim Police Management Association; (3) Teamsters, Local 952; (4) Anaheim Municipal Employees Association, Police Cadet Unit; (5) International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), Local 47; and IBEW, Local 47 Part-Time Customer Service Employees; (6) Service Employees’ International Union, United Service Workers West; (7) Anaheim Firefighters Association, Local 2899; (8) Anaheim Municipal Employees Association (General, Clerical, Part-Time Units); (9) Anaheim Police Association; (10) International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 47 (Professional Management and Part-Time Management Units) Reconvene the Anaheim City Council. 5:45 P.M. 5:00 P.M. 5:45 P.M. Call to order the Anaheim City Council, followed by Moment of Silence in Memory of George Floyd. Invocation: Council Member Jose F. Moreno Flag Salute: Council Member Lucille Kring 3 June 9, 2020 Acceptance of Other Recognitions (To be presented at a later date): Recognizing June 14 - 20, 2020, as National Flag Week Call to order the Anaheim Housing Authority (in joint session with the City Council). 6:06 P.M. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE AGENDAS: City Clerk Theresa Bass announced Public Hearing Item No. 32 was withdrawn at the request of the appellant/applicant and Item No. 30 was withdrawn at the request of staff. PUBLIC COMMENTS (all agenda items): City Clerk Theresa Bass reported that a total of 740 public comment were received via email prior to 1:00 P.M. (Total of 897 public comments received via email) – See Appendix. (Submit comments electronically for City Council/Housing Authority consideration by sending them to publiccomment@anaheim.net. To ensure distribution to the City Council/Housing Authority prior to consideration of the agenda, please submit comments prior to 1:00 P.M. the day of the meeting. Those comments, as well as any comments received after 1:00 P.M., will be distributed to the City Council/Housing Authority and will be made part of the official public record of the meeting.) CITY MANAGER’S UPDATE: Interim City Manager Greg Garcia addressed events that occurred over the past week, particularly in regards to protests, and thanked all City staff who helped prepare for the community to peacefully protest, including the Police and Public Works Departments. He thanked the community for peacefully exercising their rights through continued powerful statements and expressed pride in the City. Police Chief Jorge Cisneros offered condolences to George Floyd’s family and stated that event was not part of 21st century principles and not Anaheim Police Department policies or practices. He reported 11 peaceful demonstrations were held over the past week, with 25 arrests made on Monday only. He further reported Anaheim Police did not deploy gas or projectiles, referencing an event in Santa Ana, one officer sustained second-degree burns and two vehicles were vandalized. He thanked the entire community, City partners, other law enforcement agencies, and the Chamber of Commerce for their assistance. He referred to an “Eight Can’t Wait” document that was emailed to Council and will be posted on the website and noted the department already does six of the eight policies and he believed there were better processes for the other two than what was proposed and which could be discussed in the future. Recess the Anaheim City Council. 6:13 P.M. 5:00 P.M. - HOUSING AUTHORITY 6:13 P.M. Items pulled for discussion: Council Member Moreno: Item No. 01 MOTION: _LK/SF___ To adopt the consent calendar. ROLL CALL VOTE: 7-0. Motion carried. CONSENT CALENDAR: 1. Approve the revisions to the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Administrative Plan for Fiscal Year 2020-2021 regarding proposed COVID-19 related updates. Item No. 01 Discussion. 4 June 9, 2020 2. Approve minutes of the Housing Authority meeting of May 12, 2020. Adjourn the Anaheim Housing Authority. 6:19 P.M. Reconvene the Anaheim City Council. 6:19 P.M. 5:00 P.M. - CITY COUNCIL 6:19 P.M. Items pulled for discussion: Council Member O’Neil: Item Nos. 05 and 06 Council Member Moreno: Item Nos. 12, 17, 22, and 25 Council Member Barnes: Item No. 19 MOTION: ___LK/SF___ Waive reading of all ordinances and resolutions and adopt the consent calendar. ROLL CALL VOTE: 7-0. Motion carried. CONSENT CALENDAR: 3. Receive and file minutes of the Community Services Board meetings of October 10, 2019, January 9, 2020, and February 13, 2020 and the Public Utilities Board meeting of April 22, 2020. 4. Accept the bid from Hunter Consulting, Inc. dba HCI Environmental & Engineering Services, in the amount of $26,315 plus a 20% contingency, for emergency crime scene clean-up services for a one year period with four one-year optional renewals; and authorize the Purchasing Agent to exercise the renewal options in accordance with Bid #9431. 5. Accept the bid from Airwave Communications Ent., Inc., in the amount of $103,981.90 plus applicable tax, to perform upfitting services to ten police patrol vehicles with the equipment required to be placed into service, in accordance with Bid #9417. Item No. 05 Discussion. MOTION: TO/SF ROLL CALL VOTE: 7-0. Motion carried. 6. Waive the sealed bidding requirement of Council Policy 4.0 and authorize the Purchasing Agent to issue a Master Agreement Purchase Order to Fog Data Science, LLC., in the amount of $40,835 plus applicable tax (to be reimbursed by Urban Area Security Initiative Grant Program), for the purchase of a database subscription to provide geo-spatial information for a one year period for the Orange County Intelligence Assessment Center. Item No. 06 Discussion. MOTION: TO/LK to approve as presented. SUBSIDIARY MOTION: JM/DB to continue until a representative of the Orange County Intelligence Assessment Center can attend a meeting to answer questions. ROLL CALL VOTE: 2-4-1 (AYES: Council Members Barnes and Moreno; NOES: Mayor Sidhu and Council Members Faessel, Kring, and O’Neil; ABSTAIN: Council Member Brandman). Motion failed. MOTION: TO/LK to approve as presented. ROLL CALL VOTE: 6-0-1 (AYES: Mayor Sidhu and Council Faessel, Barnes, Brandman, Kring, and O’Neil; ABSTAIN: Council Member Moreno). Motion carried. 5 June 9, 2020 7. Accept the proposal from Veteran Supply Services, LLC, in the amount of $1,525,186 plus applicable tax, for the purchase of an outdoor metalclad substation switchgear; and authorize the Purchasing Agent, or designee, to execute the Purchase and Sale Agreement and related documents, and take the necessary actions to implement and administer the agreement, in accordance with RFP #9376. 8. Accept the bid from Clean Energy, in the amount of $32,480 plus a 20% contingency, to perform repair and maintenance services for the City’s compressed natural gas compressor equipment for a one year period with four one-year optional renewals; and authorize the Purchasing Agent to execute the renewal options in accordance with Bid #9432. 9. Award the construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Arnaz Engineering Contractors, Inc., in the amount of $1,991,300, for the Rehabilitation of Pressure Regulating Stations No. 30 and No. 31, Demolition and Relocation of Pressure Regulating Stations No. 32 and No. 43, and Construction of New Pressure Regulating Station No. 73 Project; authorize the Director of Public Works to execute the contract, and any other related documents, and take the necessary actions to implement and administer the contract; determine that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Sections 15301(b), 15302(c), 15303(d), and 15304(f) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; and direct the Finance Director to execute the Escrow Agreement pertaining to contract retentions. 10. Award the construction contract to the lowest responsible bidder, Energy Options, Inc., in the amount of $388,950, for the Anaheim Convention Center Hall “D” Cooling Tower Replacement and Support Structure Modification Project; authorize the Director of Public Works to execute the contract, and related documents, and take the necessary actions to implement and administer the contract; determine that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Sections 15301(d) and 15302(c) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations; and authorize the Finance Director to execute the Escrow Agreement pertaining to contract retentions. 11. Approve the proposed Close-Out Change Order (Change Order) with ABB Substations Contracting (US) LLC, n/k/a Linxon US LLC, in the amount of $899,500, which includes the settlement of any City and ABB outstanding claims for the Harbor Substation Design-Build Project; and authorize the Director of Public Works to execute the Change Order and take the necessary actions to implement and administer the Change Order. 12. Waive Council Policy 4.1 and approve an agreement with Townsend Public Affairs, in the amount of $5,000 per month, for supplemental state advocacy services, for a 12-month term with one one-year optional renewal; and authorize the City Manager, or designee, to administer the agreement and any optional renewals. Item No. 12 Discussion. MOTION: LK/TO ROLL CALL VOTE: 5-0-2 (AYES: Mayor Sidhu and Council Members Faessel, Brandman, Kring, and O’Neil; ABSTAIN: Council Members Barnes and Moreno). Motion carried. 13. Approve the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act Agreement with Foster Assessment Center and Testing Services, Inc. dba FACTS, in the amount of $50,000, for the provision of skills assessment services through July 1, 2021; and authorize the Director of Community and Economic Development to execute and the Workforce Development Manager, or designee, to administer the agreement. 6 June 9, 2020 14. Approve Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) agreements for the provision of occupational skills training and on-site job training, each for a term expiring June 30, 2022; and authorize the Director of Community and Economic Development to execute and the Workforce Development Manager, or designee, to administer the agreements with the following training contractors and their respective contract amounts: 1) WIOA Agreement, in an amount not to exceed $50,000 (Employed Security Service Center, Inc.); and 2) WIOA agreements, each in an amount not to exceed $100,000 (Concorde Career College, Inc.; The Regents of the University of California on behalf of UC Irvine Division of Continuing Education; University of LaVerne). Approve California Work Opportunities and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) Agreements for the provision of occupational skills training and on-site job training, each for a term expiring June 30, 2022; and authorize the Director of Community and Economic Development to execute and the Workforce Development Manager, or designee, to administer the agreements with the following training contractors and their respective contract amounts: 1) CalWORKs agreement, in an amount not to exceed $50,000 (Employed Security Service Center, Inc.); 2) CalWORKs agreements, each in an amount not to exceed $100,000 (Concorde Career College, Inc.; University of LaVerne); and 3) CalWORKs agreement, in an amount not to exceed $200,000 (KD Education, LLC dba Healthstaff Training Institute). 15. Approve Direct Payment Agreement No. 20Y-2006 with the State of California, Department of Community Services and Development to receive federally-funded Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program grant funding to be applied to accounts of eligible Anaheim Public Utilities Department electric customers for the term ending March 31, 2023; and authorize the Public Utilities General Manager to execute the agreement, and related documents, and take the necessary actions to implement and administer the agreement. 16. Approve the Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances Treatment Facilities and Program Agreement among the City of Anaheim (City), the Orange County Water District, and other groundwater producers, for reimbursement funding for the City to develop, construct, operate, and maintain groundwater treatment facilities for approximately 30 years; authorize the Public Utilities General Manager, or designee, to execute the agreement, and related documents, and take the necessary actions to implement and administer the agreement; and authorize de minimis changes that do not substantially change the terms and conditions of the agreement, as determined by the City Attorney’s Office. Approve an agreement with Brown and Caldwell, in the annual average sum of $1,000,000 with a 15% contingency for extra services, to provide owner’s engineer consulting services for the design-build of groundwater treatment plants for a five year term; authorize the Public Utilities General Manager, or designee, to execute the agreement and related documents and take the necessary actions to implement and administer the agreement; and authorize de minimis changes that do not substantially change the terms and conditions of the agreement, as determined by the City Attorney’s Office. 17. Approve Professional Services Agreements with seven consulting firms, each in an annual amount not to exceed $250,000, for as-needed consulting services to support the Planning and Building Department, each for a three year period with two one-year optional renewals; and authorize the Planning and Building Director, or designee, to execute the agreements (Bureau Veritas North America, Inc.; CSG Consultants, Inc.; Interwest Consulting Group, Inc.; Jason Addison Smith Consulting Services, Inc.; Scott Fazekas & Associates, Inc.; The Code Group Inc. 7 June 9, 2020 dba VCA Code; and 4 LEAF, Inc.). Item No. 17 Discussion. MOTION: JM/SF ROLL CALL VOTE: 7-0. Motion carried. 18. Approve and authorize the City Manager and Human Resources Director to temporarily suspend applicable personnel rules and pay polices and amend employment contracts in order to reduce the base compensation of all executive management employees by 5% and take any necessary steps to effect the reduction. 19. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-046 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving the acquisition of, and usage and privacy policy related to, cellular communication interception technology equipment. Waive Council Policy 4.0 and authorize the Purchasing Agent to issue a purchase order to Tactical Support Equipment, Inc., in the amount of $701,566 plus applicable tax, for the purchase of a cell phone site simulator, licensing, warranty, support, and maintenance for the Anaheim Police Department for a three year period and one week of on-site training; and increase the Anaheim Police Department’s Fiscal Year 2019/20 Department of Justice Equitable Sharing (asset forfeiture) fund budget by $755,000, to cover the purchase cost of the cell phone site simulator, licensing, warranty, support, and training. Item No. 19 Discussion. MOTION: DB/LK ROLL CALL VOTE: 6-0-1 (AYES: Mayor Sidhu and Council Members Faessel, Barnes, Brandman, Kring, and O’Neil; ABSTAIN: Council Member Moreno). Motion carried. 20. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-047 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, calling for the holding of a General Municipal Election to be held on Tuesday, November 3, 2020, for the election of certain officers as required by the provisions of Article XIII, Section 1300, of the Charter of the City of Anaheim. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-048 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, requesting the Board of Supervisors of the County of Orange to consolidate a General Municipal Election to be held on November 3, 2020, with the Statewide General Election to be held on the date pursuant to § 10403 and 10418 of the California Elections Code. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-049 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA, adopting regulations for candidates for elective office pertaining to candidate statements submitted to the voters at an election to be held on Tuesday, November 3, 2020. 21. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-050 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM concerning the Local Signal Synchronization Plan Update for the Measure M (M2) Program. Adopt the FY 2020-21 Seven-Year Capital Improvement Program and authorize staff to submit it to the Orange County Transportation Authority. 8 June 9, 2020 22. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-051 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM initiating proceedings for the annual levy of assessments in, and accepting an assessment engineer’s report for, the Anaheim Resort Maintenance District. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-052 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM declaring its intention to provide for an annual levy and collection of assessments in the Anaheim Resort Maintenance District, and setting a time and place for public hearing thereon (Public Hearing scheduled for July 28, 2020). Item No. 22 Discussion. MOTION: LK/DB ROLL CALL VOTE: 7-0. Motion carried. 23. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-053 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM accepting certain deeds conveying to the City of Anaheim certain real properties or interests therein (City Deed Nos. 12364, 12373, 12374, 12375, & 12376; for public right-of-way purposes). 24. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-054 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for proposed Reclassification No. 2019- 00322 (DEV2019-00046; 227 North Magnolia Avenue). ORDINANCE NO. 6485 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the Zoning Map referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to zoning (Reclassification No. 2019-00322) (DEV2019-00046; 227 North Magnolia Avenue) [Reclassify the property from the T (Transition) and RM-2 (Multiple-Family Residential) Zones to the RM-3 (Multiple-Family Residential) Zone]. 25. ORDINANCE NO. 6483 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Chapters 18.04 (Single-Family Residential Zones); 18.06 (Multiple-Family Residential Zones); 18.14 (Public and Special-Purpose Zones); 18.36 (Types of Uses); 18.38 (Supplemental Use Regulations); 18.40 (General Development Standards); 18.42 (Parking and Loading); 18.92 (Definitions); and 18.122 (Beach Boulevard Specific Plan No. 2017-1 (SP 2017-1) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Anaheim Municipal Code; and finding and determining that this ordinance is exempt from the requirements to prepare additional environmental documentation per Public Resources Code Section 21080.17 and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Sections 15282(h), 15061(b)(3); 15301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities); and, 15303, Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) because it will not have a significant effect on the environment (Zoning Code Amendment No. 2020-00169) (Adjustment No. 2 to the Beach Boulevard Specific Plan No. 2017-1 (SPN2017-00001b)) (DEV2020-00001) (address changes in State law pertaining to Accessory Dwelling Units and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units; introduced at Council meeting of May 12, 2020, Item No. 16). Item No. 25 Discussion. MOTION: JM/DB ROLL CALL VOTE: 7-0. Motion carried. 26. ORDINANCE NO. 6484 (ADOPTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending Chapter 2.12 (Transient Occupancy Tax) of Title 2 (Taxes) of the Anaheim Municipal Code to modify the operator’s collection duties (require hotel operators to collect rent through direct payment; introduced at Council meeting of May 12, 2020. Item No. 21). 27. Approve minutes of the City Council meetings of July 30, 2019 and August 13, 2019. 9 June 9, 2020 END OF CONSENT CALENDAR 7:34 P.M. 28. ORDINANCE NO. (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA adding Chapter 4.110 to Title 4 of the Anaheim Municipal Code regulating cannabis distribution, manufacturing, cultivation, retail sale, deliveries, and testing laboratories, and repealing Chapters 4.20, 4.21, and 4.100 of the Municipal Code (to take effect only upon passage of a cannabis tax measure at the November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election) (continued from Council meeting of May 12, 2020, Item No. 23). Determine that this ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to sections 15004, 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), 15061(b)(3), 15301, 15303, and 15332 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, because it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, because there is no possibility that it may have a significant effect on the environment, because it is not a project, as defined in section 15378, and because it is also the subject of categorical exemptions from CEQA. (continued from Council meeting of May 12, 2020, Item No. 23). Item No. 28 Discussion. MOTION: JB/LK to approve as amended to increase the distance from schools, etc. from 600 feet to 750 feet, to not allow retail cannabis locations within 500 feet from each other as measured from the closest property line, and to set a maximum of 18 retail licenses citywide with no more than three per district. SUBSIDIARY MOTION: DB/JM to extend limits of debate. Mayor Sidhu denied the request. MOTION OF ORDER: JM/DB to appeal the ruling of the chair. ROLL CALL VOTE: 3-4 (AYES: Council Members Barnes, Moreno, and O’Neil; NOES: Mayor Sidhu and Council Members Faessel, Brandman, and Kring.) Motion failed. MOTION: JB/LK to approve as amended to increase the distance from schools, etc. from 600 feet to 750 feet, to not allow retail cannabis locations within 500 feet from each other as measured from the closest property line, and to set a maximum of 18 retail licenses citywide with no more than three per district. ROLL CALL VOTE: 3-4 (AYES: Mayor Sidhu and Council Members Brandman and Kring; NOES: Mayor Pro Tem Faessel and Council Members Barnes, Moreno, and O’Neil). Motion failed. During discussion of Item No. 29, Mayor Sidhu stated his vote on Item No. 28 was a “no.” City Clerk confirmed the vote for Item No. 28 as follows: VOTE: 2-5 (AYES: Council Members Brandman and Kring; NOES: Mayor Sidhu and Council Members Faessel, Barnes, Moreno, and O’Neil). Motion failed. 29. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA calling for the placement of a general tax measure on the ballot for the November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election submitting to the qualified voters a proposed ordinance adding Chapter 2.15 to Title 2 of the Anaheim Municipal Code establishing a tax on cannabis businesses operating within the City; requesting that the Orange County Board of Supervisors consolidate the City’s Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election to take place on November 3, 2020; setting rules and deadlines for the filing of arguments and rebuttal arguments; and directing the City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis [approval of this resolution includes determination that the ballot measure is not a project within the meaning of California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378(b) 10 June 9, 2020 because it relates to organizational or administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment]. Item No. 29 Discussion. MOTION: TO/HS to lay on the table. MOTION OF ORDER: JM requested a Point of Order and to allow a second round of discussion for each Council Member. Mayor Sidhu denied the Point of Order. MOTION OF ORDER: JM/DB to appeal the ruling of the Chair. ROLL CALL VOTE: 2-5 (AYES: Council Members Barnes and Moreno; NOES: Mayor Sidhu and Council Members Faessel, Brandman, Kring, and O’Neil). Motion failed. MOTION: TO/HS to lay on the table. ROLL CALL VOTE: 4-3 (AYES: Mayor Sidhu and Council Members Faessel, Barnes, and O’Neil; NOES: Council Members Brandman, Moreno, and Kring). Motion carried; item tabled. 30. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest. Item No. 30 Withdrawn by staff. 31. Update on the City's response to COVID-19. Item No. 31 Discussion. Informational - No action taken. 5:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 9:59 P.M. 32. Withdrawn by appellant. CEQA CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION, CLASS 1 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2013-05702A VARIANCE NO. 2014-04989A (DEV2017-00008) OWNER/APPELLANT: Salee Zawerbeck/ Eric Adel PROJECT LOCATION: 1200 South Brookhurst Street. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of an amendment to a conditional use permit to permit and retain the expansion of an existing hookah lounge and restaurant within a multi- tenant commercial center with fewer parking spaces than required by the Anaheim Municipal Code (Nara Bistro). ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City Council will consider whether the proposed action is Categorically Exempt from the requirements to prepare additional environmental documentation per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15301, Class 1 (Existing Facilities). ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Approved with the following modifications: (i) Modified Condition No. 28 to require the installation and permanent maintenance of CCTV’s on the subject premises; (ii) Modified Condition No. 32 to state that within 60 days of the date of approval, the applicant shall submit plans and complete a Building Code analysis for occupancy changes and any tenant improvements within the subject building. In addition, all proper building permits shall be obtained for the smoking lounge within 120 days of the date of this approval. These timelines may be modified in the event that a State of Emergency is declared by the City, State, or Federal government, and shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Director; and (iii) Modified Condition No. 33 to state that this permit shall be subject to a noticed public hearing for modification or revocation review by the Planning 11 June 9, 2020 Commission in six (6) months, commencing from the date of this approval. Planning Department staff will also report back to the Planning Commission as “Reports and Recommendations” (R&R) items twelve (12) and eighteen (18) months after the public hearing in order to verify that the business has been operating in compliance with their conditions of approval. Future compliance reviews may be required if significant violations are identified in the future or a revocation hearing shall be scheduled by the Planning Commission. (PC2020-004). VOTE: 6-1 (Chairperson Lieberman and Commissioners Armstrong, Keys, Meeks, Vadadoria, and White voted yes; Commissioner Mulleady voted no) (Planning Commission meeting of April 13, 2020) (Appealed by Salee Zawerbeck and Eric Adel). Item No. 32 Withdrawn by appellant/applicant. 33. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2019-00527 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2019-00320 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2019-06009 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 19017 (DEV2019-00037) OWNER/APPLICANT: Wayne Anastasi, Anastasi Development Company, LLC, 511 Torrance Blvd., Suite 111, Redondo Beach, CA 90277 PROJECT LOCATION: 1619, 1631, and 1699 W. Lincoln Avenue and an adjacent City-owned parcel with no address assigned. This 7.17-acre site is generally located on the north side Lincoln Avenue, with the Lincoln Street frontage located approximately 557 feet east from the Lincoln Avenue and Euclid Street intersection. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of the following land use entitlements to allow construction of a 115-unit, three-story, attached single-family residential development with modified development standards: (i) amend the General Plan land use designation from General Commercial to Mid Density Residential; (ii) a Zoning Reclassification from the C-G (General Commercial), T (Transitional), and I (Industrial) to the RM-3.5 (Multiple-Family Residential) zone; (iii) a Conditional Use Permit to allow an attached single-family residential development with modified standards in the proposed RM-3.5 zone; and (iv) a Tentative Tract Map to establish a 1- lot, 115-unit condominium subdivision. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City Council will consider whether a Mitigated Negative Declaration is the appropriate environmental documentation for this request under the California Environmental Quality Act and approval and adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 365. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Approved and recommended City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2019-00527, Reclassification No. 2019-00320, Conditional Use Permit No. 2019-06009, and Tentative Tract Map No. 19017. VOTE: 5-2 (Chairperson Lieberman and Commissioners Armstrong, Keys, Meeks, and Vadadoria voted yes; Commissioners Mulleady and White voted no) (Planning Commission meeting of April 13, 2020). RESOLUTION NO. 2020-055 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for proposed General Plan Amendment No. 2019-00527, Reclassification No. 2019-00320, Conditional Use Permit No. 2019-06009, and Tentative Tract Map No. 19017 (DEV2019-00037; 1619, 1631, and 1699 W. Lincoln Avenue and an adjacent city-owned parcel with no address assigned). RESOLUTION NO. 2020-056 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the General Plan of the City of Anaheim (General Plan Amendment No. 2019-00527) (DEV2019-00037; 1619, 1631, and 1699 W. Lincoln Avenue and an adjacent city- 12 June 9, 2020 owned parcel with no address assigned) [Change the property’s land use designation from General Commercial to Mid Density Residential]. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-057 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving and adopting proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2019-06009 (DEV2019-00037; 1619, 1631, and 1699 West Lincoln Avenue and an adjacent city-owned parcel with no address assigned). RESOLUTION NO. 2020-058 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Tentative Tract Map No. 19017 (DEV2019-00037; 1619, 1631, and 1699 West Lincoln Avenue and an adjacent city-owned parcel with no address assigned). ORDINANCE NO. 6486 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the Zoning Map referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to zoning (Reclassification No. 2019-00320; DEV2019-00037) [Reclassify the property from the Transition, Industrial, and General-Commercial Zones to the RM-3.5 (Multiple-Family Residential) Zone]. Item No. 33 Mayor Sidhu opened the public hearing. Comment by Applicant and ten public comments received via email – See Appendix. Mayor Sidhu closed the public hearing. Discussion. MOTION: LK/TO to approve as presented. SUBSIDIARY MOTION: TO/LK to call the question. ROLL CALL VOTE: 4-3 (AYES: Mayor Sidhu and Council Members Faessel, Kring, and O’Neil; NOES: Council Member Barnes, Brandman, and Moreno). Motion failed (pursuant to Rules of Order for the Conduct of City Council Meetings, affirmative votes of at least two-thirds required). Discussion. MOTION: LK/TO to approve as presented. ROLL CALL VOTE: 6-1 (AYES: Mayor Sidhu and Council Members Faessel, Barnes, Brandman, Kring, and O’Neil; NOES: Council Member Moreno). Motion carried. 34. This is a public hearing concerning real property generally located at Lincoln Avenue and Euclid Avenue, which is proposed to be sold by the City of Anaheim to SLF-West Lincoln, LLC (APN No. 072-110-19, City ROW Parcel: No Known APN). RESOLUTION NO. 2020-059 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving a Disposition and Development Agreement by and between the City of Anaheim and SLF West Lincoln, LLC, a Delaware limited partnership; authorizing the Director of Community and Economic Development to execute such Disposition and Development Agreement; authorizing the Director of Community and Economic Development to implement such Disposition and Development Agreement; and making certain other findings in connection therewith. Item No. 34 Mayor Sidhu opened the public hearing. Three public comments received via email. Mayor Sidhu closed the public hearing. Discussion. 13 June 9, 2020 MOTION: LK/TO ROLL CALL VOTE: 6-1 (AYES: Mayor Sidhu and Council Member Faessel, Barnes, Brandman, Kring, and O’Neil; NOES: Council Member Moreno). Motion carried. 35. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2018-00523 RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2018-00316 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2018-05979 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 2019-00001 (DEV2017-00128) OWNER/APPLICANT: Michael Wallace, KNT I Enterprises, LLC c/o Sagecrest Planning + Environmental, 2400 E. Katella Ave., Suite 800, Anaheim, CA 92806 PROJECT LOCATION: 1600 West Lincoln Avenue. This 5.25-acre site is located at the southwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Loara Street. REQUEST: The applicant requests approval of the following land use entitlements to allow construction of a four-story mixed-use development that consists of 315 apartment units, a 2,031 square-foot leasing office for the apartment units and 3,413 square-foot retail space with 639 on- site parking spaces (636 spaces in a parking structure and 3 surface spaces): (i) a General Plan Amendment to amend the General Plan land use designation from General Commercial to Mixed- Use High; (ii) a Zoning Reclassification to apply the Mixed-Use (MU) Overlay Zone to the existing C-G (General Commercial) Zone; (iii) a Conditional Use Permit to allow a mixed-use development with modified standards; and (iv) a Development Agreement to permit a voluntary financial contribution to support the City’s affordable housing programs and projects. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The City Council will consider whether a Mitigated Negative Declaration is the appropriate environmental documentation for this request under the California Environmental Quality Act and approval and adoption of Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring Plan No. 366. ACTION TAKEN BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Approved and recommended City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 2018-00523 and Development Agreement No. 2019-00001 (PC2020-017), Reclassification No. 2018-00316, and Conditional Use Permit No. 2018-05979. VOTE: 6-1 (Chairperson Lieberman and Commissioners Armstrong, Keys, Meeks, Mulleady, and Vadadoria voted yes; Commissioner White voted no) (Planning Commission meeting of April 27, 2020). RESOLUTION NO. 2020-060 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for proposed General Plan Amendment No. 2018-00523, Reclassification No. 2018-00316, Conditional Use Permit No. 2018-05979, and Development Agreement No. 2019-00001 (DEV2017-00128; 1600 West Lincoln Avenue). RESOLUTION NO. 2020-061 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the General Plan of the City of Anaheim (General Plan Amendment No. 2018-00523) (DEV2017-00128; 1600 West Lincoln Avenue) [Change the property’s land designation from General Commercial to Mixed-Use High]. RESOLUTION NO. 2020-062 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving and adopting proposed Conditional Use Permit No. 2018-05979 (DEV2017-00128; 1600 West Lincoln Avenue). ORDINANCE NO. 6487 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM amending the Zoning Map referred to in Title 18 of the Anaheim Municipal Code relating to zoning 14 June 9, 2020 (Reclassification No. 2018-00316; DEV2017-00128) [apply Mixed-Use Overlay Zone to existing General Commercial Base Zone]. ORDINANCE NO. 6488 (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving Development Agreement No. 2019-00001 by and between the City of Anaheim and KNT I Enterprises, LLC, a California limited liability company, and authorizing the Mayor to execute said agreement for and on behalf of the City (Development Agreement No. 2019-00001; DEV2017-00128). Item No. 35 Mayor Sidhu opened the public hearing. Comment by Applicant and seven public comments received via email. Mayor Sidhu closed the public hearing. Discussion. MOTION: LK/DB to approve as presented. ROLL CALL VOTE: 6-1 (AYES: Mayor Sidhu and Council Members Faessel, Barnes, Brandman, Kring, and O’Neil; NOES: Council Member Moreno). Motion carried. 36. This is a public hearing to consider the proposed vacation/abandonment of a portion of excess street right of way known as Mariposa Place located south of Westmont Drive and west of Euclid Street; and approval of a Purchase & Sale Agreement and a Quitclaim Deed with Anaheim Place Partners, LP (Abandonment No. ABA 2018-00377). RESOLUTION NO. 2020-063 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM vacating excess street right of way for a portion of Mariposa Place located south of Westmont Drive and west of Euclid Street (Abandonment No. ABA 2018-00377). Approve a Purchase and Sale Agreement and a Quitclaim Deed with Anaheim Place Partners, L.P.; authorize the Public Works Director, or designee, to execute other documents, including escrow documents, and take all required actions to close escrow; and authorize the City Clerk to deposit the Resolution and Quitclaim Deed into escrow for recordation in the County Recorder’s Office. Item No. 36 Mayor Sidhu opened the public hearing. Two public comments received via email. Mayor Sidhu closed the public hearing. Discussion. MOTION: LK/JM to approve as presented. ROLL CALL VOTE: 7-0. Motion carried. Land Use - Zoning Report on Closed Session Actions: None Public Comments (non-agenda items): None Council Communications/Agenda Requests: Mayor Sidhu formally agendized for the next meeting to have Chief Jorge Cisneros to present the Anaheim Police Department policies. 15 June 9, 2020 Council Member Barnes announced street sweeping enforcement would resume on June 15 and a small Flag Day parade would be held on Sunday, June 14, 1-2 P.M. She asked residents to withhold use of fireworks until July 4. She acknowledged and thanked volunteers for food distributions at the Beach Blvd. Youth Center and Brookhurst Community Center, including the Boys & Girls Club, Vineyard Church, Second Harvest, Orange County Food Bank, and Friends for Families. She expressed thanks for the City providing food to the community. Addressing global protests regarding George Floyd, she felt it important to listen to voices and encouraged dialogue with the minority community and acknowledged Anaheim has been a leader with the Police Review Board and an independent police auditor in seeing positive changes in policies. She requested an agenda item for July 14 for staff look at ways to improve outreach and increase representation of the minority community and reflect the City’s diversity on the Police Review Board. She also requested presentations by the Police Review Board and independent police auditor of their most recent reports, concurred by Council Members Moreno and Brandman. Council Member Moreno thanked Council Member Barnes for agendizing the Police Review Board items. Referring to the Budget Workshop, he requested Council consider an item to place a ballot measure to the voters of a proposed Gate Fee/Tax of $1/ticket for Disneyland, Angel Stadium, and the Honda Center to address budget shortfalls and allow services to continue by receiving additional revenue from visitors/tourists. He was open to discussing a percentage as well as putting a sunset date on the fee/tax, concurred by Council Member Barnes (request failed for lack of second concurrence). He hoped the Council and staff would be open to a special meeting to address additional budget concerns, specifically related to the police and community services budgets and additional revenue streams. He thanked all who worked to keep the city safe and show the world Anaheim can express its rights. He hoped Council would listen to the pleas of the current generation, thanked small businesses for their work and support, and hoped for more trust and less fear. Council Member Brandman provided a statement on the events of the past two weeks and the need to reflect and address inequities in the community. He stated he stands with the black community in their fight against social injustice and iniquities, this was personal for him individually, peacefully protesting is an absolute right of residents, and he was encouraged to see young people standing up and getting involved. He hoped leaders would look at policies and reform for real change and thanked Mayor Sidhu for his leadership and being proactive in looking at how Anaheim can protect and serve its residents. Council Member Kring stated she could not support Council Member Moreno’s ballot measure as she believed taxes at the Stadium and Honda Center would affect local residents. She expressed gratitude for the moment of silence in honor of George Floyd and asked for thoughts and prayers for all injured and killed during recent events. She thanked City staff, Chief Cisneros, and Interim City Manager Garcia for continuing to work and serve the community during the impacts of COVID-19. She further announced mosquito season had started, announced spraying at Modjeska Park and Dad Miller Golf Course, and encouraged residents to tip and toss standing water, use DEET products, and wear long sleeves and pants at dusk and dawn as protective measures. Mayor Pro Tem Faessel thanked Mayor Sidhu for asking Chief Cisneros to present at the next meeting and requested the Chief also address an email he received about police response during last Monday’s march. He requested the meeting adjourn in memory of George Floyd and Sister Mary Peter Travis. He thanked the principals and staff of Benito Juarez, Guinn, and Rio Vista schools for inviting him and Susan to participate in car parades recognizing 5th/6th grade graduates. He reported the Anaheim Hotel donated furniture to the Salvation Army to assist homeless residents and that he participated in a virtual Coffee with a Cop with Chief Cisneros, assisted with a YMCA food distribution in the Sabina/Sycamore neighborhood where they served over 500 meals, he reported the YMCA was now serving 50,000 meals/week, and he joined the Mayor in accepting a $1.8 million CARES funding from the Orange County Board of Supervisors. He further reported that he helped distribute 5,000 donated face masks to the YMCA, Boys & Girls Club, Meals on Wheels, Orange County Conservation Corp, Chrysalis, and the Anaheim Senior Citizens Club. Additionally, last week he and Susan helped facilitate 75 Chromebook 16 June 9, 2020 donations to the YMCA by Dr. Shaw. He thanked Anaheim Public Utilities for upgrading lighting near Ball and Sunkist and thanked all members of the community who joined together peacefully and safely to have constructive dialogue and looked forward to efforts to uplift all communities. Council Member Moreno requested consideration of a resolution in support of the Black Lives Matter movement on June 23, seconded by Council Member Barnes (request failed for lack of second concurrence). Mayor Sidhu thanked City staff for working through the turmoil of the last week, which kept the City safe and mourned the death of George Floyd. Adjournment: 1:36 A.M. on June 10, 2020 in memory of George Floyd and Sister Mary Peter Travis. Next regular City Council meeting is scheduled for June 23, 2020. All agenda items and reports are available for review in the City Clerk’s Office and www.anaheim.net. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda (other than writings legally exempt from public disclosure) will be available at the Office of the City Clerk, located at 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., 2nd Floor, Anaheim, CA 92805 and by contacting the office by phone, 714-765-5166, or email to cityclerk@anaheim.net. If requested, the agenda and backup materials will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132), and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof. Any person who requires a disability-related modification or accommodation, in order to observe and/or offer public comment may request such reasonable modification, accommodation, aid, or service by contacting the City Clerk’s Office by telephone at (714) 765-5166 or via email to cityclerk@anaheim.net, no later than 8:00 AM on the day of the scheduled meeting. SERVICIOS DE TRADUCCION: Para servicios de interpretación, comuníquese con la oficina de la Ciudad (City Clerk), cuando menos 24 horas antes de la junta programada. Llamando al 714-765-5166. Debido a que existen muchos dialectos y regionalismos, la Ciudad no puede garantizar que los intérpretes puedan traducir a un dialecto o regionalismo en particular y rehúsa cualquier responsabilidad que surja de tales servicios. TRANSLATION SERVICES: For translation services, contact the City Clerk’s office no later than 24 hours prior to the scheduled meeting by calling 714-765-5166. Because many dialects and regionalisms exist, the City cannot guarantee that interpreters will be able to interpret into a particular dialect or regionalism, and disclaims any liability alleged to arise from such services. VIEW CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS LIVE AND ARCHIVED: Anaheim City Council meeting videos can be viewed live on the City’s website at www.anaheim.net/councilvideos. 17 June 9, 2020 POSTING STATEMENT: On June 4, 2020, a true and correct copy of this agenda was posted on the kiosk outside City Hall, 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA. Internet Access to City Council, Agency, and Authority agendas and related material is available prior to meetings at www.anaheim.net. On June 5, 2020, a true and correct copy of this revised agenda was posted on the kiosk outside City Hall, 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Anaheim, CA. Public Comments Distributed to the Anaheim City Council June 9, 2020 Council Meeting Updated 5:00 P.M. – Tuesday, June 9, 2020 From:Sehr Nazir To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:01:33 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Sehr Nazir and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim Hills, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Sehr Nazir From:Alan Siero To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding!!! Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:00:59 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Alan Siero, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Garden Grove, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Alan Siero From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:08:52 AM -----Original Message----- From: Mikyla Reta Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 7:28 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Mikyla. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Mikyla Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:08:37 AM -----Original Message----- From: Emily Kim Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 10:08 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Emily Kim. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Emily Kim Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:08:18 AM -----Original Message----- From: Shikhar Gupta Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:00 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Testing. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Testing Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:06:11 AM -----Original Message----- From: Eileen Ahn Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:48 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Eileen. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Eileen From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:08:06 AM -----Original Message----- From: Shivani Patel Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:28 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Shivani Patel. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Shivani Patel From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:06:00 AM     From: Madeleine Kristensen  Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:55 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Maddy Kristensen. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Maddy Kristensen -- Madeleine Kristensen University of California, Berkeley Social Welfare, B.A. | Spanish Language & Literature Minor May 2020 From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:05:45 AM -----Original Message----- From: Angelica Fontillas Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:33 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Angelica F.. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Angelica F. Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:55:09 AM Desiree Flaws Administrative Assistant to the City Attorney City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Suite 356 Anaheim, California 92805 Phone: (714) 765-5169 Fax: (714) 765-5123 Email: dflaws@anaheim.net To learn more about Anaheim’s kindness initiatives, visit anaheim.net/kindness. “This communication is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed, and may be confidential or privileged by law. If you are not the intended recipient or you receive this email in error, any review, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. Please notify the Anaheim City Attorney’s Office of the error immediately at 714-765-5169 and delete this communication and any attached documents from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.” -----Original Message----- From: Mursal Bokhari < Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 1:19 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Mursal Bokhari. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Mursal Bokhari Mursal Bokhari From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:54:47 AM -----Original Message----- From: EMILY THOMPSON Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:35 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Emily thompson. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Emily thompson From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:54:32 AM -----Original Message----- From: Kendrick Canizales Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:43 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Kendrick Canizales. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Kendrick Canizales From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:54:20 AM -----Original Message----- From: Chase Ramos Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:01 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Chase Ramos . I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Chase Ramos Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:54:09 AM -----Original Message----- From: Chase Ramos Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:01 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Chase Ramos . I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Chase Ramos Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:53:58 AM -----Original Message----- From: Chase Ramos < Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:01 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Chase Ramos . I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Chase Ramos Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:53:49 AM -----Original Message----- From: Chase Ramos Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:01 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Chase Ramos . I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Chase Ramos Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:53:34 AM -----Original Message----- From: Kimberly Rodriguez Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:17 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Kimberly Rodriguez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Kimberly Rodriguez From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:53:03 AM -----Original Message----- From: Kathia Nogueda Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:31 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Kathia Nogueda. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Kathia Nogueda From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:53:17 AM -----Original Message----- From: Shivani Desai Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:36 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Shivani Desai. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Shivani Desai Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:52:44 AM -----Original Message----- From: Jaztyne Lim Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:44 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Jaztyne Lim. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Jaztyne Lim Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:52:30 AM -----Original Message----- From: Valeria Urbiola Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:06 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Valeria Urbiola. I am a resident of Anaheim, CA and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Valeria Urbiola Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:52:14 AM -----Original Message----- From: Brianna Canizales Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:14 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Brianna Canizales. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Brianna Canizales Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:52:02 AM -----Original Message----- From: Brianna Canizales Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:14 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Brianna Canizales. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Brianna Canizales Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:51:50 AM -----Original Message----- From: Stephanie Canizales Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:17 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Stephanie. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Stephanie Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:51:36 AM -----Original Message----- From: Heather Macias Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:18 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Heather Macias. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Heather Macias, Ph.D. Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:51:23 AM -----Original Message----- From: Heather Macias Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:18 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Heather Macias. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Heather Macias, Ph.D. Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:51:12 AM -----Original Message----- From: Heather Macias Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:18 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Heather Macias. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Heather Macias, Ph.D. Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:50:56 AM -----Original Message----- From: Gabby Enriquez < Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:01 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Nessa Enriquez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Nessa Enriquez From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:50:39 AM -----Original Message----- From: Sabrina Diez Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:02 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Sabrina Diez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Sabrina Diez From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:49:54 AM -----Original Message----- From: Sabrina Diez Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:02 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Sabrina Diez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Sabrina Diez From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:49:31 AM   From: Zyanya Meeks < Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:31 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Zyanya Meeks. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Zyanya Meeks From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:49:02 AM -----Original Message----- From: Sabrina Diez Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 1:15 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Sabrina Diez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Sabrina Diez From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:48:33 AM -----Original Message----- From: Diana Herrera Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:05 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Diana Herrera. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Diana Herrera From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:47:59 AM Desiree Flaws Administrative Assistant to the City Attorney City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Suite 356 Anaheim, California 92805 Phone: (714) 765-5169 Fax: (714) 765-5123 Email: dflaws@anaheim.net To learn more about Anaheim’s kindness initiatives, visit anaheim.net/kindness. “This communication is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed, and may be confidential or privileged by law. If you are not the intended recipient or you receive this email in error, any review, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. Please notify the Anaheim City Attorney’s Office of the error immediately at 714-765-5169 and delete this communication and any attached documents from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.” -----Original Message----- From: Diana Herrera Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:05 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Diana Herrera. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Diana Herrera From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:47:51 AM -----Original Message----- From: Diana Herrera Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:05 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Diana Herrera. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Diana Herrera From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:47:41 AM -----Original Message----- From: Diana Herrera Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:05 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Diana Herrera. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Diana Herrera From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:47:31 AM -----Original Message----- From: Diana Herrera Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:05 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Diana Herrera. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Diana Herrera From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:47:21 AM -----Original Message----- From: Diana Herrera Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:05 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Diana Herrera. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Diana Herrera From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:47:08 AM -----Original Message----- From: Arsal Bokhari Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 5:01 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Arsal Bokhari. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Arsal Bokhari Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:46:36 AM -----Original Message----- From: Michelle De Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 5:39 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Michelle DeSantis. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Michelle DeSantis From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:46:22 AM -----Original Message----- From: Scott Nguyen Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:06 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Scott Nguyen. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Scott Nguyen From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:09:04 AM   From: Ryan Stekkinger < Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 6:40 PM To: City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net>; Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Ryan Stekkinger. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation. Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Ryan Stekkinger From:Emily Johnson To:Public Comment Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:36:24 AM To whom it may concern, I understand there's a budget proposal to cut 20% of the community service budget. Now, more than ever, our children need after school programs, need the employees at the library who read to them, need to be safe and taken care of by our community. Please do not cut the community services budget. Please do not give the police more money for surveillance. After school programs and library programs are perfect examples of how to build strong communities without the need for police intervention. Redistribute the budget. Do not cut our community service programs. Thank you, Emily Johnson From:Choungie Bravo To:Public Comment Subject:Concerns about Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:42:47 AM I'm Adrian Bravo, I lived in Anaheim for 17 years. I graduated at Magnolia High school, and I want to talk to you about the arts just a little bit. The art programs in Anaheim are really good! Trust me, I've seen some amazing things! But the schools campuses for the arts, is not. Magnolia high school, one of the lowest funded schools in the district. It seems like it is. I was in the marching band all 4 years of high school. I would love it if a percentage of the funds for the police department went towards the art programs in the more poor high schools. Whether that be theatre, art, choir, band, marching band, color guard, and dance. These are such important programs to me. Please reconsider where the funds go. Schools need it way more. Thank you for your time!, Adrian Bravo From:Rihab Beituni To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:04:02 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Rihab Beituni, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education (public schools), homelessness(prevention and support), affordable housing, public parks (playgrounds & walking tracks) and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Rihab Beituni From:Tiffany Moo To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:48:25 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Tiffany, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Tiffany From:Suha Sattar To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:45:03 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is [NAME], and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, Ca. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Suha Sartre Sent from my iPhone From:Yi-An Hsieh To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:09:49 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Yi-An Hsieh and I am writing on behalf of myself, as a resident of the city, and the citizens of Anaheim. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Yi-An Hsieh From:Rosa Murillo To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:34:59 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Rosa Murillo, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Rosa Murillo, MSW From:Tabitha Lynne To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Jordan Brandman; Denise Barnes; Lucille Kring; Jose Moreno; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:33:42 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Tabitha Martinez and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Tabitha Martinez From:Kayla Alarcon To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:04:35 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Kayla Alarcon, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Irvine, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Kayla Alarcon From:lauren price To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:52:21 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Lauren Price, and I am taking time out of my day to express my, and many others of Anaheim’s, demands for the future regarding police funding. I live in Anaheim Hills, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. It’s NOT okay for our “protectors” to only be half good at their job. The people of Anaheim deserve better. Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Lauren Price From:Saba Johnson To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:25:22 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Saba J., and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in LA, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Next, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Saba J. From:Savera Bholat To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:13:52 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Savera Bholat, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA.The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Savera Bholat Sent from my iPhone From:Gianna Furumoto To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Demanding Decrease in Police Funding Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:43:16 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Gianna, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Gianna Gianna Furumoto Civil & Environmental Engineering B.S. | UCLA 2020 Outgoing Project Manager | ASCE at UCLA Timber Design-Build From:Geoff Palomino To:Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:The Funding has Got to Go (Down) Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:10:34 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Geoffrey Palomino, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Escondido, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Geoffrey Palomino From:Erik Varho To:Public Comment Subject:City Budget Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:58:39 AM Hello, I was born and raised in Anaheim. I grew up using the Anaheim public library system. Going to readings as a small child at the Euclid branch. Participating in after school programs at the Central branch. One of my first jobs was a page at the Haskett branch. A huge resource for my family and I that we always relied on and deeply appreciated. I understand that Anaheim is currently considering cutting 20% of the community service budget. This is unacceptable. The budget for the police exceeds $150 million? 15 times the budget for community development. This is unacceptable. Our police do not need more military grade gear and weapons to use against its citizens. My friends who work in Anaheim’s after school programs need to keep their jobs. Imagine how many programs that serve the community could be bolstered via a 25% reduction in the police budget. That’s approximately $37,500,000. Fund our libraries. Fund our school. Fund mental health services. Defund the police. Best, Erik Varho Sent from my iPhone From:Christopher Philip To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 8:56:25 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Christopher Philip, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Christopher Philip From:Hadee Makda To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 8:09:11 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Hadee Makda, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim District 6 and was a 2018 Council Member for a Day for Anaheim's Youth in Government Day. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Hadee Makda. From:Adam Sepulveda To:Public Comment Subject:DO NOT CUT COMMUNITY SERVICE BUDGET Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:02:29 AM We are seeing now more than ever how misappropriation of funds are ruining Anaheim. The police department needs to have their funding redirected into programs such as these so we can build a better community. Do the right thing. With respect, Adam Sepulveda From:Denise Barnes To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:16:24 AM Denise Barnes Anaheim City Councilwoman Begin forwarded message: From: Whoop whoop Date: June 6, 2020 at 10:59:44 PM PDT To: Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>  Dear Mrs. Barnes, My name is Merly and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing to ask you to reconsider the proposed budget for the fiscal year of 2020/2021. I care deeply about making our community safer, and I believe that allocating 42% of the city’s general funds to the Anaheim Police Department will hurt the citizenry more than it already has. From 2003 to 2016, 33 people were killed by on-duty Anaheim police officers. 61% of those people who were killed by the police department were Latino and 12% were Black. Additionally, most of these deaths have occurred in Districts two, three, four, and five. According to census data, these four districts have a high concentration of Latinos and is generally low-income. However, District Six has only ever experienced one homicide during the period of 2003-2016. As you can see, this data suggests that the Anaheim Police Department targets low-income, minority neighborhoods, and I am disappointed to see this kind of discrimination in my city. This kind of systemic racism is what will continue to plague the city if nothing is changed. Instead of allocating a majority of the city’s proposed general fund to the police department, the money should go to providing the necessities and ensuring the quality of life, as defined by the proposed city budget for fiscal year 2020/2021. In case the message has not been clear, let me take some time to clarify. Defund the police. You have the power to edit, revise, and the city’s proposed budget, and I personally believe the citizens of Anaheim could use as many resources as possible especially in a time of a global pandemic. The city should help its citizenry instead of harassing it. Thank you. From:Denise Barnes To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: Anaheim Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:16:10 AM Denise Barnes Anaheim City Councilwoman Begin forwarded message: From: isaac membreno Date: June 6, 2020 at 11:05:46 PM PDT To: Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net> Subject: Anaheim  Dear Mrs. Barnes, My name is Isaac and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing to ask you to reconsider the proposed budget for the fiscal year of 2020/2021. I care deeply about making our community safer, and I believe that allocating 42% of the city’s general funds to the Anaheim Police Department will hurt the citizenry more than it already has. From 2003 to 2016, 33 people were killed by on-duty Anaheim police officers. 61% of those people who were killed by the police department were Latino and 12% were Black. Additionally, most of these deaths have occurred in Districts two, three, four, and five. According to census data, these four districts have a high concentration of Latinos and is generally low-income. However, District Six has only ever experienced one homicide during the period of 2003-2016. As you can see, this data suggests that the Anaheim Police Department targets low-income, minority neighborhoods, and I am disappointed to see this kind of discrimination in my city. This kind of systemic racism is what will continue to plague the city if nothing is changed. Instead of allocating a majority of the city’s proposed general fund to the police department, the money should go to providing the necessities and ensuring the quality of life, as defined by the proposed city budget for fiscal year 2020/2021. In case the message has not been clear, let me take some time to clarify. Defund the police. You have the power to edit, revise, and the city’s proposed budget, and I personally believe the citizens of Anaheim could use as many resources as possible especially in a time of a global pandemic. The city should help its citizenry instead of harassing it. Thank you, Isaac From:Denise Barnes To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: budget Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:15:43 AM Denise Barnes Anaheim City Councilwoman Begin forwarded message: From: Valeria Soto Date: June 6, 2020 at 11:11:10 PM PDT To: Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net> Subject: budget  Dear Mrs. Barnes My name is Valeria Soto and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing to ask you to reconsider the proposed budget for the fiscal year of 2020/2021. I care deeply about making our community safer, and I believe that allocating 42% of the city’s general funds to the Anaheim Police Department will hurt the citizenry more than it already has. From 2003 to 2016, 33 people were killed by on-duty Anaheim police officers. 61% of those people who were killed by the police department were Latino and 12% were Black. Additionally, most of these deaths have occurred in Districts two, three, four, and five. According to census data, these four districts have a high concentration of Latinos and is generally low-income. However, District Six has only ever experienced one homicide during the period of 2003-2016. As you can see, this data suggests that the Anaheim Police Department targets low-income, minority neighborhoods, and I am disappointed to see this kind of discrimination in my city. This kind of systemic racism is what will continue to plague the city if nothing is changed. Instead of allocating a majority of the city’s proposed general fund to the police department, the money should go to providing the necessities and ensuring the quality of life, as defined by the proposed city budget for fiscal year 2020/2021. In case the message has not been clear, let me take some time to clarify. Defund the police. You have the power to edit, revise, and the city’s proposed budget, and I personally believe the citizens of Anaheim could use as many resources as possible especially in a time of a global pandemic. The city should help its citizenry instead of harassing it. Thank you, Valeria Soto. From:Denise Barnes To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: Defund police Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:15:34 AM Denise Barnes Anaheim City Councilwoman Begin forwarded message: From: liljdabscrazy Date: June 7, 2020 at 8:43:39 AM PDT To: Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net> Subject: Defund police  Dear Mrs. Barnes, My name is Julio Saul Luna and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing to askyou to reconsider the proposed budget for the fiscal year of 2020/2021. I caredeeply about making our community safer, and I believe that allocating 42% ofthe city’s general funds to the Anaheim Police Department will hurt the citizenrymore than it already has. From 2003 to 2016, 33 people were killed by on-dutyAnaheim police officers. 61% of those people who were killed by the policedepartment were Latino and 12% were Black. Additionally, most of these deathshave occurred in Districts two, three, four, and five. According to census data,these four districts have a high concentration of Latinos and is generally low-income. However, District Six has only ever experienced one homicide during the period of 2003-2016. As you can see, this data suggests that the Anaheim PoliceDepartment targets low-income, minority neighborhoods, and I am disappointedto see this kind of discrimination in my city. This kind of systemic racism is whatwill continue to plague the city if nothing is changed. Instead of allocating amajority of the city’s proposed general fund to the police department, the moneyshould go to providing the necessities and ensuring the quality of life, as definedby the proposed city budget for fiscal year 2020/2021. In case the message has notbeen clear, let me take some time to clarify. Defund the police. You have thepower to edit, revise, and the city’s proposed budget, and I personally believe thecitizens of Anaheim could use as many resources as possible especially in a time of a global pandemic. The city should help its Sent from my iPhone From:Denise Barnes To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: ORANGE COUNTY: RESTRUCTURE THE BUDGET AND DEFUND THE POLICE NOW. Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:30:19 AM Denise Barnes Anaheim City Councilwoman Begin forwarded message: From: Celeste Maldonado Date: June 4, 2020 at 3:56:06 PM PDT To: "Michelle.steel@ocgov.com" <Michelle.steel@ocgov.com> Cc: "Andrew.do@ocgov.com" <Andrew.do@ocgov.com>, "Donald.wagner@ocgov.com" <Donald.wagner@ocgov.com>, "Lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com" <Lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com>, "Jbradman@anaheim.net" <Jbradman@anaheim.net>, Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>, Annie Mezzacappa <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>, "Cityhall@buenapark.com" <Cityhall@buenapark.com>, "Fsmith@buenapark.com" <Fsmith@buenapark.com>, "Eswitf@buenapark.com" <Eswitf@buenapark.com>, "Spark@buenapark.com" <Spark@buenapark.com>, "Abrown@buenapark.com" <Abrown@buenapark.com> Subject: ORANGE COUNTY: RESTRUCTURE THE BUDGET AND DEFUND THE POLICE NOW. My name is Celeste Maldonado. I am a resident of Orange County and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of the budget in all Orange County cities, so as to prioritize more social services for communities, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. I demand of the mayor, controller, and all city council members to prove their love and dedication to the people of their city and reallocate funds to directly benefit those in need. It is absolutely absurd that 50 million of our tax dollars are going to the police force and only 9 million is allocated towards community development. We deserve better than this. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Just this last fiscal year of 2019 Orange County sheriff’s officials outspent their revenue budget by $33 million – prompting county supervisors to pull millions of dollars from other departments like the Health Care Agency to cover the shortfall. Mean while these healthcare workers have to so to work with out proper PPE equipment during a nationwide pandemic. It is clear that we need change and that the way these funds are being spend and overspend needs to change. There are communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Celeste Maldonado From:Denise Barnes To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: ORANGE COUNTY: RESTRUCTURE THE BUDGET AND DEFUND THE POLICE NOW. Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:31:15 AM Denise Barnes Anaheim City Councilwoman Begin forwarded message: From: Raquel Balistreri > Date: June 4, 2020 at 6:11:37 PM PDT To: "Michelle.steel@ocgov.com" <Michelle.steel@ocgov.com> Cc: "Andrew.do@ocgov.com" <Andrew.do@ocgov.com>, "Donald.wagner@ocgov.com" <Donald.wagner@ocgov.com>, "Lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com" <Lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com>, "Jbradman@anaheim.net" <Jbradman@anaheim.net>, Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>, Annie Mezzacappa <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>, "Cityhall@buenapark.com" <Cityhall@buenapark.com>, "Fsmith@buenapark.com" <Fsmith@buenapark.com>, "Eswitf@buenapark.com" <Eswitf@buenapark.com>, "Spark@buenapark.com" <Spark@buenapark.com>, "Abrown@buenapark.com" <Abrown@buenapark.com> Subject: ORANGE COUNTY: RESTRUCTURE THE BUDGET AND DEFUND THE POLICE NOW. My name is Raquel Balistreri. I am a resident of Orange County and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of the budget in all Orange County cities, so as to prioritize more social services for communities, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. I demand of the mayor, controller, and all city council members to prove their love and dedication to the people of their city and reallocate funds to directly benefit those in need. It is absolutely absurd that 50 million of our tax dollars are going to the police force and only 9 million is allocated towards community development. We deserve better than this. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Just this last fiscal year of 2019 Orange County sheriff’s officials outspent their revenue budget by $33 million – prompting county supervisors to pull millions of dollars from other departments like the Health Care Agency to cover the shortfall. Mean while these healthcare workers have to so to work with out proper PPE equipment during a nationwide pandemic. It is clear that we need change and that the way these funds are being spend and overspend needs to change. There are communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Raquel Balistreri Sent from my iPhone From:Denise Barnes To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: ORANGE COUNTY: RESTRUCTURE THE BUDGET AND DEFUND THE POLICE NOW. Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:29:27 AM Denise Barnes Anaheim City Councilwoman Begin forwarded message: From: Mary Frazier Date: June 4, 2020 at 9:47:29 PM PDT To: "Michelle.steel@ocgov.com" <Michelle.steel@ocgov.com> Cc: "Andrew.do@ocgov.com" <Andrew.do@ocgov.com>, "Donald.wagner@ocgov.com" <Donald.wagner@ocgov.com>, "Lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com" <Lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com>, "Jbradman@anaheim.net" <Jbradman@anaheim.net>, Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>, Annie Mezzacappa <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>, "Cityhall@buenapark.com" <Cityhall@buenapark.com>, "Fsmith@buenapark.com" <Fsmith@buenapark.com>, "Eswitf@buenapark.com" <Eswitf@buenapark.com>, "Spark@buenapark.com" <Spark@buenapark.com>, "Abrown@buenapark.com" <Abrown@buenapark.com> Subject: ORANGE COUNTY: RESTRUCTURE THE BUDGET AND DEFUND THE POLICE NOW. My name is [insert name]. I am a resident of Orange County and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of the budget in all Orange County cities, so as to prioritize more social services for communities, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. I demand of the mayor, controller, and all city council members to prove their love and dedication to the people of their city and reallocate funds to directly benefit those in need. It is absolutely absurd that 50 million of our tax dollars are going to the police force and only 9 million is allocated towards community development. We deserve better than this. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Just this last fiscal year of 2019 Orange County sheriff’s officials outspent their revenue budget by $33 million – prompting county supervisors to pull millions of dollars from other departments like the Health Care Agency to cover the shortfall. Mean while these healthcare workers have to so to work with out proper PPE equipment during a nationwide pandemic. It is clear that we need change and that the way these funds are being spend and overspend needs to change. There are communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, [your name] Sent from my iPhone From:Denise Barnes To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: Restructure budget and DEFUND THE POLICE Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:30:18 AM Denise Barnes Anaheim City Councilwoman Begin forwarded message: From: Raquel Balistreri Date: June 4, 2020 at 6:09:28 PM PDT To: "Michelle.steel@ocgov.com" <Michelle.steel@ocgov.com> Cc: "Andrew.do@ocgov.com" <Andrew.do@ocgov.com>, "Donald.wagner@ocgov.com" <Donald.wagner@ocgov.com>, "Lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com" <Lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com>, "Jbradman@anaheim.net" <Jbradman@anaheim.net>, Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>, Annie Mezzacappa <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>, "Cityhall@buenapark.com" <Cityhall@buenapark.com>, "Fsmith@buenapark.com" <Fsmith@buenapark.com>, "Eswitf@buenapark.com" <Eswitf@buenapark.com>, "Spark@buenapark.com" <Spark@buenapark.com>, "Abrown@buenapark.com" <Abrown@buenapark.com> Subject: Restructure budget and DEFUND THE POLICE My name is Raquel Balistreri. I am a resident of Orange County and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of the budget in all Orange County cities, so as to prioritize more social services for communities, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. I demand of the mayor, controller, and all city council members to prove their love and dedication to the people of their city and reallocate funds to directly benefit those in need. It is absolutely absurd that 50 million of our tax dollars are going to the police force and only 9 million is allocated towards community development. We deserve better than this. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Just this last fiscal year of 2019 Orange County sheriff’s officials outspent their revenue budget by $33 million – prompting county supervisors to pull millions of dollars from other departments like the Health Care Agency to cover the shortfall. Mean while these healthcare workers have to so to work with out proper PPE equipment during a nationwide pandemic. It is clear that we need change and that the way these funds are being spend and overspend needs to change. There are communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Raquel Balistreri Sent from my iPhone 1 Public Comment From:Blanca Navarro Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 8:35 PM To:Public Comment Subject:6/9/20 Council Meeting Anaheim City Council, My name is Blanca Navarro and Anaheim is where I’ve called home and attended school all my life. My parents are homeowners in Anaheim, my sister works in Anaheim and it is where I’m looking to buy my first house too. Anaheim is the home that I love – but it has a lot of work to do. First and foremost, I ask that you DEFUND THE POLICE FORCE. APD receives far too large of a budget every year and enough is enough. That taxpayer money can and should be used to better serve the community and youth in so many other ways: after school programs, scholarships, arts, park beautification to name just a few. At the very least, please start by cutting APD budget in HALF every year. Secondly, I am disappointed in the curfew that was set this month. The curfew enforcement was a waste of resources, time and money. Along with being an infringement on freedom to assembly, I find it completely useless. I am sick of our hard earned and hefty taxpayer money being used so poorly. And, I’m sick of helicopters over my home every night. The protests never once bothered me, but the curfew enforcement has. I want to keep our community safe. I want crime to decrease. I want Anaheim to be a place for families, and tourism. But what I do not want is our taxpayer money and property taxes going into what we as a community do not want and do not need. All my best, Blanca 2 Public Comment From:Daisy Avalos Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 8:52 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund the Police My name is Daisy Avalos and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing to ask you to reconsider the proposed budget for the fiscal year of 2020/2021. I care deeply about making our community safer, and I believe that allocating 42% of the city’s general funds to the Anaheim Police Department will continue and increase harm to our citizens. From 2003 to 2016, 33 people were killed by on-duty Anaheim police officers. 61% of those people who were killed by the police department were Latino, and 12% were Black, representing 73% of the deaths due to APD actions. Additionally, most of these deaths occurred in Districts two, three, four, and five. Census data shows these four districts having a high concentration of Latinos and is generally low-income. On the other hand, District Six has only ever experienced one death due to APD during the period of 2003-2016. It is evident that the Anaheim Police Department targets low-income, minority neighborhoods, and I am disappointed to see this kind of systemic discrimination in my city. Systemic racism will continue to plague the city if here is no substantial change. Stop allocating the majority of the city’s proposed general fund to the police department, year after year there have been increases to this budget item & it continues to dominate the budget allocation despite reductions due to covid19. About 42% is still proposed to be allocated to police, the money should go to providing the necessities and ensuring the quality of life, as defined by the proposed city budget for fiscal year 2020/2021. Defund the police. Throughout Southern California we are calling for more police accountability and you have shown that you would rather dominate the streets with force than provide space to discuss the matter. Use your power to edit and revise the city’s proposed budget, quit funding draconian overreach by our militarized police force and provide the citizens of Anaheim with as many resources as possible to endure the global pandemic. The city should help its citizenry instead of harassing it. Thank you. 3 Public Comment From:Thuy-Tien Bui Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:00 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil My name is Thuy-Tien Bui, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Orange, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Thuy-Tien Bui 4 -- Thuy-Tien Bui 5 Public Comment From:William Camargo Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:42 PM To:Public Comment Subject:William Camargo/Public Comment My name is William Camargo and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also demand the council not to approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Furthermore, we are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members and we refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. -- ------------------------------------------------------ William Camargo Claudio Visual Artist/Educator/Organizer/Arts Advocate Commissioner of Heritage and Culture, Anaheim Teaching Artist Fellow, ARMORY Center for the Arts Claremont Graduate University, MFA '20 NALAC Advocacy Leadership Institute '20 Sonneman Photography Prize, CGU www.williamcamargo.com Chicano Art Then and Now(panel participant), March 7th 1-2pm, Riverside Art Museum A Trace Is Not A Map, Jan 25-March 7, Irvine Fine Arts Center Xicanx: New Visions, Feb 13- June 28th, Centro De Artes, San Antonio Origins & Displacements, March 29-April 3, East Gallery, CGU 6 Public Comment From:CJ Miller Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:59 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Public comment on budget allocations To the Anaheim City Council: My name is CJ Miller and I am a resident of Glassell Park, Los Angeles. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health is needed at the municipal level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. CJ Miller From:Scott Nguyen To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:06:07 PM Hello, My name is Scott Nguyen. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Scott Nguyen From:Michelle De To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 5:39:05 PM Hello, My name is Michelle DeSantis. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Michelle DeSantis From:Arsal Bokhari To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 5:01:22 PM Hello, My name is Arsal Bokhari. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Arsal Bokhari Sent from my iPhone From:Diana Herrera To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:05:06 PM Hello, My name is Diana Herrera. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Diana Herrera From:Sabrina Diez To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 1:15:28 PM Hello, My name is Sabrina Diez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Sabrina Diez From:Zyanya Meeks To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:31:23 PM Hello, My name is Zyanya Meeks. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Zyanya Meeks From:Sabrina Diez To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:01:40 PM Hello, My name is Sabrina Diez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Sabrina Diez From:Gabby Enriquez To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:00:39 PM Hello, My name is Nessa Enriquez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Nessa Enriquez From:Heather Macias To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:17:59 AM Hello, My name is Heather Macias. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Heather Macias, Ph.D. Sent from my iPhone From:Stephanie Canizales To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:17:26 AM Hello, My name is Stephanie. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Stephanie Sent from my iPhone From:Brianna Canizales To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:13:57 AM Hello, My name is Brianna Canizales. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Brianna Canizales Sent from my iPhone From:Valeria Urbiola To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:06:15 AM Hello, My name is Valeria Urbiola. I am a resident of Anaheim, CA and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Valeria Urbiola Sent from my iPhone From:Jaztyne Lim To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:43:41 AM Hello, My name is Jaztyne Lim. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Jaztyne Lim Sent from my iPhone From:Shivani Desai To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:35:59 AM Hello, My name is Shivani Desai. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Shivani Desai Sent from my iPhone From:Kathia Nogueda To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:30:53 AM Hello, My name is Kathia Nogueda. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Kathia Nogueda From:Kimberly Rodriguez To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:17:26 AM Hello, My name is Kimberly Rodriguez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Kimberly Rodriguez From:Chase Ramos To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:01:35 AM Hello, My name is Chase Ramos . I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Chase Ramos Sent from my iPhone From:Kendrick Canizales To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:43:00 AM Hello, My name is Kendrick Canizales. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Kendrick Canizales From:EMILY THOMPSON To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:34:50 AM Hello, My name is Emily thompson. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Emily thompson From:Mursal Bokhari To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 1:18:58 AM Hello, My name is Mursal Bokhari. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Mursal Bokhari Mursal Bokhari From:Angelica Fontillas To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:33:18 AM Hello, My name is Angelica F.. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Angelica F. Sent from my iPhone From:Madeleine Kristensen To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:55:22 PM Hello, My name is Maddy Kristensen. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Maddy Kristensen -- Madeleine Kristensen University of California, Berkeley Social Welfare, B.A. | Spanish Language & Literature Minor May 2020 From:Eileen Ahn To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:48:35 PM Hello, My name is Eileen. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Eileen From:Shivani Patel To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:27:45 PM Hello, My name is Shivani Patel. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Shivani Patel From:Shikhar Gupta To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:00:26 PM Hello, My name is Testing. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Testing Sent from my iPhone From:Emily Kim To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Saturday, June 6, 2020 10:07:53 PM Hello, My name is Emily Kim. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Emily Kim Sent from my iPhone From:Mikyla Reta To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Saturday, June 6, 2020 7:28:13 PM Hello, My name is Mikyla. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Mikyla Sent from my iPhone From:Ryan Stekkinger To:City Attorney; City Clerk; City Manager; Denise Barnes; _Finance Administration; Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Saturday, June 6, 2020 6:40:28 PM Hello, My name is Ryan Stekkinger. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation. Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Ryan Stekkinger From:Yautenzi Castro To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:37:58 AM Hello,   My name is Yautenzi Castro. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.   This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need.   Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.   We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that   Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation   Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.   Sincerely, Yautenzi Castro 1 Public Comment From:Harnadar Anand Sent:Saturday, June 6, 2020 10:57 AM To:Public Comment Subject:June 9th meeting public comment Hello, My name is Harnadar Anand, and I am a resident of Anaheim since 2003. I call upon the City of Anaheim to end the inherent structural problems within law enforcement. Specifically, I believe the police budget should be slashed by a minimum 30%. Those funds should be reallocated to public health and social services as we experience a pandemic. Furthermore, I encourage the City of Anaheim to end the use of police chokeholds, disband police unions, end qualified immunity for police, and implement a licensing procedure those in law enforcement. Thank you for taking my comments. Harnadar Anand Zip Code 92808 1 Public Comment From:Lee Thorne <f Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:18 AM To:Public Comment Subject:BUDGET Hello, My name is Lee. I am emailing to demand the restructuring of the Anaheim city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for communities, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. I demand of the mayor, controller, and all city council members to prove their love and dedication to the people of their city and reallocate funds to directly benefit those in need. It is absolutely absurd that the police budget is larger than the allocations to the fire department, Office of Emergency Management, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Street Services, and the Housing and Community Investment Agency combined. While Anaheim PD has more funding than it knows what to do with, there are communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Please defund the police and re-invest that money into social services that serve and better the COMMUNITY, since we're the ones paying for it. Sincerely, Lee Thorne 1 Public Comment From:Sam Terreri Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:59 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Sam, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California . The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Sam 3 Public Comment From:ANDREW MOSHER Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:23 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Budget Reform Request I am a patron of the Anaheim Public Library. I am emailing as a concerned citizen in regards to the City Budgets for Anaheim. There are currently cuts planned for 20% of the community service budget. Consequently, this means money drawn away from after-school-education including many other services offered at the library. I implore you to reconsider these said budget cuts. Additionally, I encourage you to adopt budget cuts per The City of Anaheim in looking into giving Anaheim PD more money for security surveillance. Anaheim PD doesn't need more money. Inversely, They need no money from tax payers. Thank you. Best, Andrew Mosher 4 Public Comment From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:30 AM To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US   From: Yautenzi Castro   Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 9:38 AM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen  Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney  <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>  Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US  Hello,      My name is Yautenzi Castro. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city  budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.      This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.      Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.      We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that      Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation      Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.      Sincerely,  Yautenzi Castro    5 Public Comment From:DDT36 Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:31 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Community service budget Dear city of Anaheim I have become aware that the community service budget will decrease by 20% and as someone who uses and believes in the this community I won’t stand for lack of faith for this community now more than ever we need to our communities more and more for us to have to resources to come together as one and support each other I hope you can see things that way as well and increase the community service budget. 6 Public Comment From:Kayte de la Fuente Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:33 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Kayte de la Fuente and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, Ca. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Kayte de la Fuente 7 Public Comment From:Adrienne Mendoza Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:47 AM To:Public Comment Subject:For Council's Consideration (06/09/2020 Meeting) To Anaheim City Council:    The purpose of the letter is to discourage city employee layoffs. The economic downturn COVID‐19 caused is  undeniable; however, as the city re‐opens, many, if not more, public services will be necessary to ensure that the city is  properly served.      It is to the residents and those who patronage this city that we owe allegiance to protect health and welfare, and to  ensure economic growth.  Layoffs would undoubtedly defeat those purposes.  Each city job is integral to either promote  health and safety, and/or facilitate business which are reasons why residents choose to live and stay here, and why non‐ residents of the city choose to come and spend their hard earned time and money in our city.      As the social and economic climates shift in this country, major cities, such as ours, will need to prepare themselves for  the onslaught of services the public will need to in order to maintain safety and the upward growth of the city.  Many  residents, victims of crimes, voters, families, and business owners may not be adequately served for every position lost  in a layoff.        The pandemic caused a substantial impact; however, layoffs would only perpetuate the negative effects within the city  longer than the pandemic itself.  I implore Council to use other measures in an effort to avoid layoffs.    Thank you for your consideration and for the hard work (and decisions) you make for this city.      Sincerely,    Adrienne L. Mendoza Deputy City Attorney Anaheim City Attorney’s Office- Prosecution Section 1275 N. Berkeley Ave., Room 400 Fullerton, CA 92832   CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed, and may be confidential or privileged by law. If you are not the intended recipient or you receive this email in error, any review, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. Please notify the Anaheim City Attorney’s Office of the error immediately at 714-765-5169 and delete this communication and any attached documents from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.   8 Public Comment From:thelawren Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:57 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim Budget Hi there, The city of Anaheim is greatly overfunding police with this budget and needs to seriously reprioritize their ways! Funding education, housing, and city resources that actually serve and protect people of all races & socioeconomic backgrounds needs to be the new mandate, and will have a dramatic affect on crime. Continuing to perpetrate a cops vs. citizens model disproportionately targeting our black and brown brothers is not what we need in 2020. Listen to the voices protesting around the world. Change is coming. Time to invest in that change in your own community. Thank you, Lauren McElroy 9 Public Comment From:brian ramisch Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:00 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim Budget Hello, The city of Anaheim is greatly overfunding police with this budget and needs to seriously reprioritize their ways! Funding education, housing, and city resources that actually serve and protect people of all races & socioeconomic backgrounds needs to be the new mandate, and will have a dramatic affect on crime. Continuing to perpetrate a cops vs. citizens model disproportionately targeting our black and brown brothers is not what we need in 2020. Listen to the voices protesting around the world. Change is coming. Time to invest in that change in your own community. Thank you, Brian Ramisch 10 Public Comment From:Dennise Rivera Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:00 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Dennise Rivera, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, 11 Dennise R. 12 Public Comment From:Elena Morales Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:01 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Elena Morales, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, Ca. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Elena Morales 13 Sent from my iPhone 14 Public Comment From:Christopher Kent Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:05 AM To:Public Comment Subject:More Community Development...Defund the Police Born and Raised in Anaheim, my wife too. I also worked and for the Anaheim Y for 8 years, and volunteered with their camps programs for 15 years. I worked predominantly with the teen age group. I bet many Police Officers would be surprised at what a little love and support and belief in their abilities would do to a marginalized teenager (now add in racial profiling). More police, and funding for them, isn't helping. Look at what's happening now. And giving them more funding is telling your community that you don't believe in them, or want them to succeed, because you're putting your money into an entity that is waiting for them to fail because you believe they will. Communities with more parks, more enrichment opportunities for youth, more learning programs for parents, more resources to learn and participate and be a part of something is what makes good humans. MORE money needs to be allocated for those programs and opportunities and infrastructure...not more police. #DefundThePolice - Chris Kent Anaheim Resident 15 Public Comment From:Brian Foxx Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:07 AM To:Public Comment Subject:public comments As a long term City employee and 22 year City resident, I am writing to encourage you not to lay off any city  employees.  The impact on both the employees and the citizens of Anaheim would be disastrous.  As a 20 plus year  employee, I would hate to stymie potential growth by putting employees out of work.  Many of Anaheim’s employees  are residents of the City and contribute in more than just employment.  First, the employees, whether or not they live in  Anaheim, spend money in Anaheim and support ancillary businesses.  Second, these employees focus on serving the  needs of the community. Now that things have finally started opening up, citizens are using our services more  often.  The need for public safety always exists, but as the economy opens, parks are being utilized, libraries will come  back to life, and people will need to have access to conduct business.  Eliminating employees will effect this potential  growth.  Cutting jobs and laying off employees would serve to reduce services and, further, the ripple effect of the loss  of money for those families impact everyone.  The pandemic has shown us how important community and a sense of  normalcy is.  Anaheim is at a crossroads.  They can be in the forefront of helping stimulate the economy and its citizens  at the same time.    I would urge you to find a solution that does not involve the loss of jobs for employees.  Several possible solutions could  include a temporary reduction in salary, furlough days, sabbatical leaves or retirement incentives.  I encourage you to  explore all these  and other options before laying off valuable city resources.        Brian R. Foxx  (714)765-1638     CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed, and may be  confidential or privileged by law.  If you are not the intended recipient or you receive this email in error, any review, use,  dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited.  Please notify the Anaheim City Attorney’s Office of the  error immediately at 714‐765‐5169 and delete this communication and any attached documents from your  system.  Thank you for your cooperation.    16 Public Comment From:Cynthia Hicks Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:35 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No layoffs of City employees I urge you to NOT include staff layoffs in any plan you propose to balance the 2020‐21 budget.    We have been here serving our public even though our facilities are closed due to COVID19 and our predominately part‐ time workforce in the Library Division will suffer greatly if their income is reduced or removed.     Since the recession of 2009 we have done incrementally more with less: less staff, less books and other materials, and  no capital improvements while increasing our programs and services. We are essential and will be even more so as  Anaheim residents seek jobs, need support for education and our WiFi will be even more necessary while distance  learning continues for many students.  Please look at all the ways (in the City Librarians weekly updates to the City  Manager and our stakeholders) that we have continued to support and uplift our community.     Sincerely?  Cynthia Hicks    Sent from my iPhone  17 Public Comment From:Amber Langston Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:24 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Community Service Budget Dear Service Representative, I am concerned to hear about the community service budget cuts happening in your city. I would love to see some of the money being allocated to security surveillance for the police force moved to fund community service and after school education. I would love for Anaheim to get publicly behind the BLM movement and act as a leader for this nation by decreasing the funding of your police force and instead allocating those funds to community services, schools, health services, housing, and shelters for those struggling with homelessness. Thank you for your time and consideration, -- Amber Langston 18 Public Comment From:Jenna Santa Maria Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:37 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Jenna Santa Maria, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim Hills. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. 19 Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Jenna Santa Maria 20 Public Comment From:Meg González Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:44 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund Anaheim PD Hello, I am a resident of Anaheim and am disappointed to hear City Council’s plans regarding cutting community service  funds while we are already lacking and funding Anaheim PD even more. I am disappointed because you feel that it’s  more important to fund a violent and racist organization instead of funding community service programs that can keep  people; especially our youth and marginalized folks engaged in our community to help them thrive. I’m disgusted at your  disregard for your people and your constant perpetuation of violence. We need to fund Arts & Community Services and  encourage folks to engage and be excited, instead you’re keeping us distant from each other and making our city cold.   I hope you take this into consideration and think about the future of our city and how good it could be if you encourage  community instead of police violence.     ‐Meg González       Sent from my iPhone  21 Public Comment From:Brenda Chavez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:46 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Invest in Our Community In these times of need, though when is it not times of need for institutionally marginalized people?, I demand that the people of Anaheim be protected. I DO NOT MEAN ADDING FUNDS TO THE ANAHEIM POLICE DEPARTMENT! I mean, FUND AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAMS, FUND COMMUNITY CENTERS, FUND OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, FUND THE SCHOOLS! AND YOU HAVE TO DO IT EQUITABLY!!! Y'all want to keep giving money to the Police Department, an institution that disproportionately criminalizes Black, Indigenous, and People of Color, but you're trying to cut down on the community service budget. I don't care that COVID-19 is happening. Y'all want to cut it down, and then in a couple of years again and again. NO! This is our taxpayer money, and I want to see it given back to us. I have lived in my house for almost 18 years, and the street has never been fixed, but if you go to the predominantly white neighborhood, they get their streets redone every couple of years. My taxpayer money is benefitting a white neighborhood more than my POC community, and I am done with it. Also, your gentrification projects are trying to push us out. Y'all love bringing in the money, and then turn your back on the people that built up this community for you. For you gentrifiers, shame on you. I'm looking at the people who go into the Packing House because it looks bougie and hipster. Y'all keep investing in your whiteness and the city condones it. For those of you moving into our neighborhoods (into those new apartments), but you don't send your children to our schools, shame on you. For the City Council Members that support policies and legislation that hurts our community, shame on you. I want equity policies and legislation coming from you. You can start my allocating OUR taxpayer money in more socially beneficial programs, not the Police Department. 22 Public Comment From:Misty Thompson Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:49 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Comments: City Council Meeting - 6/09/2020 (City Budget impact) To: City Council Members, City Interim Manager, & Mayor:     I am writing to comment specifically on the City Budget & the shortfall as it impacts City of Anaheim employees  (Furloughs, layoffs, pay reductions).       ‐ Can someone address the need for employees to fill in financial shortfalls, when the City Council has made  decisions recently regarding reallocating $6.5 million dollars in funds from the Anaheim Convention Center  reserve to Visit Anaheim for the purpose of Marketing (a non‐city entity that has been getting funding from the  TOT taxes)?  ……..especially when those reserve funds could have been used to keep & maintain the City of  Anaheim staff levels …..it is not the fault of the City nor of the City of Anaheim Employees that Visit Anaheim did  not maintain a reserve of their own for emergency purposes to maintain their own staffing levels during an  economic downturn.  I sympathize with Visit Anaheim, but do not feel that the sympathy should extend to  impacting City of Anaheim staffing or salary/pay rate levels.  Is marketing a $6.5 million necessity in our current  market?       ‐ Another item for discussion is the City Council & Mayors decision to remove the City Manager from office at a  cost to the City…..while I don’t know the specifics of the reasoning behind him being asked to step down, I did  hear that this may have cost the City $500K+ in resources due to him leaving before the end of his term.  Again – another reason why it seems inappropriate to ask City of Anaheim employees to pick up the shortfall when the  City apparently has money to spend on items like this during an economic downturn.     ‐  Is a 5% reduction in base salary enough of a hit for the Executive team at their level?  A $200K impact does not  seem like a very impactful reduction at their salary levels.  I’m assuming City of Anaheim employees will not be  asked to take more of a hit than 5% to salary/pay rate impact?     Thank you for your time & consideration.      23 Public Comment From:Brynn C Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:02 PM To:Public Comment Subject:City Budget Dear City if Anaheim, My name is Brynn Campos and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing to ask you to reconsider the proposed budget for the fiscal year of 2020/2021. I care deeply about making our community safer, and I believe that allocating 42% of the city’s general funds to the Anaheim Police Department will continue and increase harm to our citizens. From 2003 to 2016, 33 people were killed by on-duty Anaheim police officers. 61% of those people who were killed by the police department were Latino, and 12% were Black, representing 73% of the deaths due to APD actions. Additionally, most of these deaths occurred in Districts two, three, four, and five. Census data shows these four districts having a high concentration of Latinos and is generally low-income. On the other hand, District Six has only ever experienced one death due to APD during the period of 2003-2016. It is evident that the Anaheim Police Department targets low-income, minority neighborhoods, and I am disappointed to see this kind of systemic discrimination in my city. Systemic racism will continue to plague the city if here is no substantial change. Stop allocating the majority of the city’s proposed general fund to the police department, year after year there have been increases to this budget item & it continues to dominate the budget allocation despite reductions due to covid19. About 42% is still proposed to be allocated to police, the money should go to providing the necessities and ensuring the quality of life, as defined by the proposed city budget for fiscal year 2020/2021. Defund the police. Throughout Southern California we are calling for more police accountability and you have shown that you would rather dominate the streets with force than provide space to discuss the matter. Use your power to edit and revise the city’s proposed budget, quit funding draconian overreach by our militarized police force and provide the citizens of Anaheim with as many resources as possible to endure the global pandemic. The city should help its citizenry instead of harassing it. Thank you, Brynn Campos. -- Brynn Campos 24 Public Comment From:Sumayyah Jewell Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:08 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund Anaheim PD and Support Communities Dear Anaheim City Council, I urge you to please restructure the budget, in order to orient funds away from the Anaheim Police Department. Do not put community services at risk, especially during a public health crisis. Police surveillance and military grade weapons will not protect communities, and it is the constituents' money that you are disproportionately putting into the hands of the police. Don't invest in stingrays, begin the process of demilitarizing the police. Don't continue to endanger your own community members. Instead, invest in libraries, they are an essential service that help people of all ages. They protect the public and provide a safe haven in ways that the police rarely do. Turn your attention to public health, Anaheim residents need access to care during this global health pandemic. Provide funds to education and supporting the school system. If you cut funding from public services in order to continue to inflate the police budget, you are promoting the idea that you desire to live in a police controlled state and city. That is unacceptable. Your constituents are watching and we will vote you out if you make a choice that further harms Anaheim. Thank you, Sumayyah Jewell 25 Public Comment From:Andrea Pascual Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:25 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Andrea Pascual, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Andrea Pascual 27 Public Comment From:Ernesto Gutierrez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:47 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Budget Hello, my name is Ernesto Gutierrez. I’ve been an Anaheim resident for 21 years, and I love this city with all my heart.  Please reconsider allowing some of the police budget to be used for other services in the city such as better parks, more  mental health resources, and/or other forms of community management. More policing will only make people more  distrustful of our city and of the officials that run it. Thank you for your time.    Best,  Ernesto Gutierrez  28 Public Comment From:Naomi Gruenthal Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:51 PM To:Public Comment Subject:budget cuts Hello Council Members,  These have been extraordinary times. We have been tirelessly working to provide all the services to the citizens of  Anaheim. We want to continue to do the best we can. Since the great depression, the city staff has not increased. We  have been doing more with less colleagues. We are stretched pretty thin. Layoffs will make it almost impossible to meet  your agenda. Please do not lay off employees at this time. Please consider other options maybe closing City hall a couple  of days a month (citywide furlough), continue visiting city hall by appointment only. Thank you for your consideration  and thoughtfulness during these challenging times.    Thank you,     Naomi Gruenthal  Associate Project Planner  Community Services Department  City of Anaheim  200 S. Anaheim Boulevard  Suite 433  Anaheim, CA 92805  T. 714.765.4465  F. 714.765.4454  E. ngruenthal@anaheim.net  "Please consider the environment before printing this email."    29 Public Comment From:April Porteneuve Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:55 PM To:Public Comment Subject:SAVE COMMUNITY SERVICE FUNDING - DEFUND ANAHEIM POLICE Cutting the community service budget is unconscionable. The police department is funded almost twice as much  fire/rescue. Reallocate funds to invest in our community. Fix your priorities!    ‐April Porteneuve     Sent from my iPhone  30 Public Comment From:mariahl Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:55 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Mariah Smith, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in San Diego, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Mariah Smith 32 Public Comment From:smeza keegan Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:55 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Do not cut 20% off the community service budget Hello, I am writing to you all today to request that you revisit your community budget spending and decrease police funding. Cities need to be investing in community education resources and not increasing police. This will hold a sustainable and prosperous Anaheim community in the short and long term. Please do not cut 20% of funding to an already vulnerable population. Kind regards, Smeza K. 1 Theresa Bass From:Lepeka Sagiao Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:41 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello,     My name is Lepeka Uilani Sagiao. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city  budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Lepeka Uilani Sagiao      Sent from my iPhone  2 Theresa Bass From:Egbert Arias Tranquilino Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:23 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:DEFUND THE POLICE Hello, My name is Egbert. I am a resident of Anaheim, CA and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize i.e. cut by 95%, spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that HEAVILY diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerest, Egbert 3 Theresa Bass From:Kristy MORENO Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:27 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Kristy Moreno. I am a resident of Anaheim, CA and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Kristy Moreno 4 Theresa Bass From:Sherwin Rodriguez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:16 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello,     My name is Sherwin Rodriguez . I am a resident of Anaheim, CA and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our  city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It  is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Sherwin Rodriguez      Sent from my iPhone  5 Theresa Bass From:Monica Ayala Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:59 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello,     My name is Monica Roberts. I am a resident of Anaheim, CA and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city  budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Monica Roberts      Sent from my iPhone  6 Theresa Bass From:Lexxy S. Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:48 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello,     My name is Alexis Serrato . I am a resident of Anaheim, CA and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city  budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Alexis Serrato      Sent from my iPhone  7 Theresa Bass From:Stacey Ortiz Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:58 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello,     My name is Stacey. I am a resident of Anaheim, CA and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so  as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Stacey  8 Theresa Bass From:Abraham Juarez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:48 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello,     My name is Abraham. I am a resident of Anaheim, CA and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget,  so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Abraham  9 Theresa Bass From:Viole Velasquez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:44 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello,     My name is Violeta Velasquez . I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city  budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Violeta Velasquez      Sent from my iPhone  10 Theresa Bass From:Damian Torres Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:44 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello,     My name is Damian Torres. I am a resident of Anaheim, CA and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city  budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Damian Torres        11 Theresa Bass From:John Romana Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:27 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello,     My name is John Romana. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget,  so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  John Romana  12 Theresa Bass From:Jannet rios Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:23 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello,     My name is Jannet Rios. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so  as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Jannet Rios  13 Theresa Bass From:Michael Gonzalez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:21 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Michael Gonzalez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Michael Gonzalez 14 Theresa Bass From:Valerie Rubio Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:15 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello,     My name is Valerie . I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as  to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable  that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Valerie        15 Theresa Bass From:Amalia Gudino Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:59 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello,     My name is Amalia Gudino. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city  budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Amalia Gudino  16 Theresa Bass From:Meg González Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:50 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello,     My name is Megan Gonzalez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city  budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Megan Gonzalez      Sent from my iPhone  1 Public Comment From:Erlie Nario Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:28 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NOT LAYFOFF City Employees     Erlie Nario  Sr. Secretary Anaheim Police Department  O: (714) 765‐1530 | M:  F: (714) 765‐1575   425 S. Harbor Blvd.  Anaheim, CA 92805    Community, Teamwork, Excellence      2 Public Comment From:Kayla Rork Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:55 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Kayla Rork, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Mission Viejo, CA and my father works in Anaheim. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, 3 Kayla Rork 4 Public Comment From:Angela Fredman Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:52 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Angela Fredman, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Angela Fredman 5 Sent from my iPhone 6 Public Comment From:Millivu Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:47 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment; Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Millicent, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Westminster, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Millicent Vu 7 Sent from my iPhone 8 Public Comment From:Gabriela Burgos Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:43 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Gabriela Burgos and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Gabriela Burgos 10 Public Comment From:Annette Hernandez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:39 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Stephen Faessel; Jose Moreno; Jordan Brandman; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Annette Hernandez, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Annette Hernandez 11 Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone 12 Public Comment From:Claire Huynh Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:37 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Claire Huynh, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in [CITY, STATE]. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Claire Huynh 14 Public Comment From:Afraah Javed Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:09 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Defund the Police Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Afraah, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Garden Grove, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Afraah Javed 15 Public Comment From:Vinay Venkat Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:07 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Vinay Venkat, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Placentia, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to follow suit and re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles 16  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Vinay Venkat 17 Public Comment From:Natalie Melendez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:53 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Natalie Melendez, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Natalie Melendez 18 Public Comment From:Rocio Reynoso Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:44 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Rocio, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Rocio Reynoso 19 Public Comment From:Justin Chao Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:40 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Justin Chao, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Justin Chao 21 Public Comment From:Areeba Islam Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:18 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Areeba Islam, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles 22  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Areeba Islam 23 Public Comment From:Dulce Benitez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:07 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Dulce Benitez, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Dulce Benitez 25 Public Comment From:siraj bajwa Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:08 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Siraj Bajwa, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Yorba Linda, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Siraj, Bajwa 27 Public Comment From:Cinthya Flores Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:58 PM To:Public Comment Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is [NAME], and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in [CITY, STATE]. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. 28 Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Cinthya Flores 29 Public Comment From:cali thornton Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:57 PM To:Public Comment Subject:DEFUND POLICE AND FUND OUR COMMUNITY To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Cali Thornton and I am a resident of Anaheim, District 1. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Cali Thornton Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone 30 Public Comment From:Aline Pham Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:52 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Aline, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Aline 31 Public Comment From:Rebecca Tankersley Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:52 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease police funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Rebecca Tankersley, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim Hills, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” These events have caused me to second guess calling the police when we needed them the most. When my brother was experiencing psychological distress we hesitated. He is of filipino descent and we first needed to have a conversation on if it was a good idea. While he has never been a threat to anyone but himself we were worried if he would be perceived as a threat because of his dark skin. We were worried if the officer who responds has training to handle psychological issues. We were worried if something happened, would he then be dragged for his disease while the officer is applauded for his actions. The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. 32 Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Rebecca Tankersley 33 Public Comment From:Maria Brito Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:33 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Stephen Faessel; Jose Moreno; Trevor O'Neil; Lucille Kring Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Maria Brito, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds 34 Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Maria Brito 35 Public Comment From:Damar Valentin Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:32 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Prioritize Our Community Not the Police Hello, My name is Damar. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of the Anaheim city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for communities, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is absolutely outrageous that 65% of the city’s proposed budget for 2020/2021 is allocated towards police and fire & rescue alone. At $153,803,336, the amended police budget for the previous year alone is larger than the allocations to Providing Necessities, Ensuring the Quality of Life, Administering Efficient Government, and Supporting Activities combined. Although the proposed police budget for the upcoming year is being reduced, it is not enough. This is the home of the happiest place on earth but many of the residents here are in distress. The poverty rate in Anaheim is 16% which is 7% higher than the national average. Many residents are living paycheck to paycheck. And this same community is very disenfranchised and marginalized. As of April 2020, the city’s unemployment rate is 15.2% which is higher than the national average. This number is alarming considering the national unemployment rate reached its all-time high due to the pandemic. Many families living in the poverty line have been negatively impacted as a result. I demand of all city council members to prove their love and dedication to the people of their city and reallocate funds to directly benefit those in need. While APD has more funding than it knows what to do with, there are communities who desperately need funding, and every day they don’t receive it, their quality of life worsens. With that being said, in light of the recent murder of Mr. George Flloyd at the hands of police I further demand of all the city council members to adopt a program that trains police officers to delink bias from their decision- making. But this is insufficient, I also demand to do training with policy changes and community engagement. Sincerely, Damar Valentin 36 Public Comment From:Brittney Le Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:29 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Brittney Le, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Brittney Le 38 Public Comment From:Louise Marie Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:18 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Louise Marie Maganto and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Louise Marie Maganto 39 -- Thank you, Louise Marie Maganto 40 Public Comment From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:01 PM To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US   ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: Lepeka Sagiao   Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 1:41 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen  Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney  <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>;  _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net>  Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US    Hello,     My name is Lepeka Uilani Sagiao. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city  budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Lepeka Uilani Sagiao      41 Sent from my iPhone  42 Public Comment From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:01 PM To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US     ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: Meg González   Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 1:50 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen  Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney  <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>;  _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net>  Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US    Hello,     My name is Megan Gonzalez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city  budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Megan Gonzalez    43   Sent from my iPhone  44 Public Comment From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:01 PM To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US       ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: Amalia Gudino   Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 1:59 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen  Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney  <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>;  _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net>  Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US    Hello,     My name is Amalia Gudino. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city  budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Amalia Gudino  45 Public Comment From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:01 PM To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US     ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: Valerie Rubio   Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 2:15 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen  Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney  <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>;  _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net>  Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US    Hello,     My name is Valerie . I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as  to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable  that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Valerie    47 Public Comment From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:01 PM To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US   From: Michael Gonzalez   Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 2:21 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen  Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney  <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>;  _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net>  Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US  Hello, My name is Michael Gonzalez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Michael Gonzalez 48 Public Comment From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:00 PM To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US       ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: Jannet rios   Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 2:23 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen  Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney  <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>;  _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net>  Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US    Hello,     My name is Jannet Rios. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so  as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Jannet Rios  49 Public Comment From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:00 PM To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US       ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: John Romana   Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 2:27 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen  Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney  <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>;  _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net>  Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US    Hello,     My name is John Romana. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget,  so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  John Romana  50 Public Comment From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:00 PM To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US   ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: Damian Torres   Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 2:44 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen  Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney  <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>;  _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net>  Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US    Hello,     My name is Damian Torres. I am a resident of Anaheim, CA and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city  budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Damian Torres      52 Public Comment From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:00 PM To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US   ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: Viole Velasquez   Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 2:44 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen  Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney  <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>;  _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net>  Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US    Hello,     My name is Violeta Velasquez . I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city  budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Violeta Velasquez      53 Sent from my iPhone  54 Public Comment From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:59 PM To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US     ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: Abraham Juarez   Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 2:48 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen  Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney  <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>;  _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net>  Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US    Hello,     My name is Abraham. I am a resident of Anaheim, CA and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget,  so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Abraham  55 Public Comment From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:59 PM To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US     ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: Stacey Ortiz   Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 2:58 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen  Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney  <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>;  _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net>  Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US    Hello,     My name is Stacey. I am a resident of Anaheim, CA and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so  as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.     This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.     Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.     We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that     Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation     Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.     Sincerely,  Stacey  56 Public Comment From:Jihad c Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:14 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is [NAME], and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in [CITY, STATE]. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Ibrahim Chaudhry 57 Public Comment From:Katia Price Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:51 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Katia, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim Hills, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Katia 59 Public Comment From:Katy Gerber Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:31 PM To:Public Comment Subject:City Council Meeting Public Comment Council, Mayor, City Staff, I have lived in Anaheim for most of my life and have relied on you and your predecessors to make the decisions which serve to keep me, my family, and my community safe. Tonight, I am asking you to listen to my concerns as I am worried that the proposed budget is not reflective of our community’s needs.Considering our community’s great need for support, I wonder why our city’s budget allocates such a large amount of money to the Police Department. This seems misplaced when there are so many other branches of our community which could benefit from greater financial support. I am asking council and city staff to reevaluate the decision to leave our community services (including our childcare services, after school programs, and neighborhood services) without comparable financial support. If we are able to uplift our communities based on the idea of addressing its basic needs, our need for law enforcement will be even lower. This is future I want for my city, for my family, for my neighbors, for my community. I hope that you will hear the concerns of your community at this unique moment in time. We have the chance to build our community in a way which would necessitate even less police intervention than we currently see. This seems commonsense. I hope that you agree. Thank you, Katy Gerber 1 Public Comment From:Jamie Moser Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:42 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Jamie Moser and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. 2 Best, Jamie Moser -- Thank you, Jamie Moser 3 Public Comment From:pauline doan Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:36 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Pauline Doan, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting 4  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Pauline Doan 5 Public Comment From:Lexis Macias Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:28 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is [NAME], and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in [CITY, STATE]. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Lexis Macias 6 Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone 7 Public Comment From:Lara Elkatat Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:30 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil Subject:URGENT: Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Lara Elkatat, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds 8  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, -- Lara Elkatat AUHSD Student Representative to Board of Trustees Oxford Academy, Class of 2020 9 Public Comment From:Alyza Gutierrez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:29 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Alyza Gutierrez, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Alyza Gutierrez 11 Public Comment From:Abril Alejo Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:17 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Abril Alejo, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Abril Alejo 13 Public Comment From:Ashley Chunadi Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:00 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Ashley Chunadi, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Ashley Chunadi 15 Public Comment From:Yuleysa09 Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:45 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:DEFUND THE POLICE Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Yuleysa, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Yuleysa Baten 17 Public Comment From:Bobbi-Lee Smart Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:43 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; toneil@anaheim.ne Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Bobbi-Lee, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. 18 Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Bobbi-Lee Smart, Ed.D. 19 Public Comment From:Hannah Dela Rosa Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:41 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Hannah Dela Rosa, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Hannah Dela Rosa 21 Public Comment From:cheryl campbell Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:34 PM To:Public Comment; City Clerk Subject:Defund the Police Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Cheryl Campbell , and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Huntington Beach, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Cheryl Campbell 23 Public Comment From:Tyler Neuroth Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:14 PM To:Public Comment; Harry Sidhu (Mayor) Cc:Trevor O'Neil; Lucille Kring; Jose Moreno; Jordan Brandman; Denise Barnes; Stephen Faessel Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Tyler Neuroth, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA near Platinum Triangle. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have again called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. I call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident without pay. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Ever. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, I implore you to not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Tyler Neuroth, Anaheim Citizen 25 Public Comment From:Jennifer Latta Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:10 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Jenny, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I was born and raised in Orange County. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Sincerely, Jenny 26 Public Comment From:Angel Guevara Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:06 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Angel Marie Guevara and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Angel Marie Guevara 28 Public Comment From:Elise Burlace Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:02 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Elise Burlace, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Buena Park, California.The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Elise Burlace 29 Sent from my iPhone 1 Theresa Bass From:cheryl campbell Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:34 PM To:Public Comment; City Clerk Subject:Defund the Police Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Cheryl Campbell , and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Huntington Beach, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Cheryl Campbell 1 Public Comment From:J. hughes Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:39 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members,    My name is Johnny Hughes and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anahiem. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence.    Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.”     The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place.    First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention.    Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department.     Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:     Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum 2  Require Comprehensive Reporting   Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens.    Best, Johnny Hughes  E-mail address:   3 Public Comment From:Esmeralda Mejia Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:29 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Esmeralda Mejia, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim,Ca. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: 4  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Esmeralda Mejia 5 Public Comment From:Brianna Mounts Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:20 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Brianna Mounts, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Brianna Mounts 6 Public Comment From:Christine Souza Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:05 AM To:Public Comment; Harry Sidhu (Mayor) Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding. Increase Social Services Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Christine Souza, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Tustin, but I am an Anaheim business owner. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Christine Souza 7 -- Christine Souza Chief Operating Officer ICM Installations, Inc. Anaheim, CA 92806 8 Public Comment From:Ralph Aloia Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:39 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Ralph Aloia, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Orange, California and have worked in Anaheim for the last six years. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles 9  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Ralph Aloia 10 Public Comment From:Manuela Edwards Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:27 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Manuela Edwards, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in La Mirada, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, 11 Manuela Edwards 12 Public Comment From:Servie Blair Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:14 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Servie Culverwell and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim CA The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Servie Culverwell 13  14 Public Comment From:Jericho Fulgencio Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:51 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Divest and Reinvest Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Jericho Fulgencio, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California and have been a resident of Orange County for over 25 years. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting 15  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Jericho Fulgencio 16 Public Comment From:Kunseo Yook Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:04 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Kunseo Yook, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles 17  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Kunseo Yoo 18 Public Comment From:Donna Miranda-Romo Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:06 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Donna Miranda, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Donna Miranda 19 20 Public Comment From:Janet Ilashi Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:00 AM To:Public Comment; Harry Sidhu (Mayor) Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Janet Ilashi, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Janet Ilashi 21 Public Comment From:maria palomares Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:45 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund the Police Dear Councilmembers, My name is Maria Palomares and I am a resident of District 5, Anaheim. I am writing to ask you to reconsider the proposed budget for the fiscal year of 2020/2021. I care deeply about making our community safer, and I believe that allocating 42% of the city’s general funds to the Anaheim Police Department will continue and increase harm to our citizens. From 2003 to 2016, 33 people were killed by on-duty Anaheim police officers. 61% of those people who were killed by the police department were Latino, and 12% were Black, representing 73% of the deaths due to APD actions. Additionally, most of these deaths occurred in Districts two, three, four, and five. Census data shows these four districts having a high concentration of Latinos and is generally low- income. On the other hand, District Six has only ever experienced one death due to APD during the period of 2003-2016. It is evident that the Anaheim Police Department targets low-income, minority neighborhoods, and I am disappointed to see this kind of systemic discrimination in my city. Systemic racism will continue to plague the city if here is no substantial change. Stop allocating the majority of the city’s proposed general fund to the police department, year after year there have been increases to this budget item & it continues to dominate the budget allocation despite reductions due to covid19. About 42% is still proposed to be allocated to police, the money should go to providing the necessities and ensuring the quality of life, as defined by the proposed city budget for fiscal year 2020/2021. Defund the police. Throughout Southern California we are calling for more police accountability and you have shown that you would rather dominate the streets with force than provide space to discuss the matter. Use your power to edit and revise the city’s proposed budget, quit funding draconian overreach by our militarized police force and provide the citizens of Anaheim with as many resources as possible to endure the global pandemic. The city should help its citizenry instead of harassing it. Thank you for your time, Maria Palomares 22 Public Comment From:Patricia Daileg Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:39 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment; Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Patricia Daileg, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve the quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. 23 Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Patricia Daileg 24 Public Comment From:Vicky Vu Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:36 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Victoria Vu and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Victoria Vu 25 26 Public Comment From:Stephanie Krystal Palomares Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:34 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund the Police Dear Councilmembers, My name is Stephanie Palomares and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing to ask you to reconsider the proposed budget for the fiscal year of 2020/2021. I care deeply about making our community safer, and I believe that allocating 42% of the city’s general funds to the Anaheim Police Department will continue and increase harm to our citizens. From 2003 to 2016, 33 people were killed by on-duty Anaheim police officers. 61% of those people who were killed by the police department were Latino, and 12% were Black, representing 73% of the deaths due to APD actions. Additionally, most of these deaths occurred in Districts two, three, four, and five. Census data shows these four districts having a high concentration of Latinos and is generally low- income. On the other hand, District Six has only ever experienced one death due to APD during the period of 2003-2016. It is evident that the Anaheim Police Department targets low-income, minority neighborhoods, and I am disappointed to see this kind of systemic discrimination in my city. Systemic racism will continue to plague the city if here is no substantial change. Stop allocating the majority of the city’s proposed general fund to the police department, year after year there have been increases to this budget item & it continues to dominate the budget allocation despite reductions due to covid19. About 42% is still proposed to be allocated to police, the money should go to providing the necessities and ensuring the quality of life, as defined by the proposed city budget for fiscal year 2020/2021. Defund the police. Throughout Southern California we are calling for more police accountability and you have shown that you would rather dominate the streets with force than provide space to discuss the matter. Use your power to edit and revise the city’s proposed budget, quit funding draconian overreach by our militarized police force and provide the citizens of Anaheim with as many resources as possible to endure the global pandemic. The city should help its citizenry instead of harassing it. Thank you for your time, Stephanie Palomares 27 Public Comment From:patricia daileg < Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:22 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment; Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Patricia Daileg, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve the quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Patricia Daileg 28 29 Public Comment From:Brian Oldham Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:28 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Budget   To whom it may concern,     I am writing today as a concerned citizen and constituent about the potential budget changes for Anaheim. I strongly  urge the city of Anaheim to act in the interest of it’s people and not cut our community service funds. In light of recent  events, I am calling on our city to defund the police and reallocate those funds towards public service projects and new  task forces to take the place of our current corrupt and violent police system.     Thank you‐  Brian Oldham   30 Public Comment From:Dinorah Ramos Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:23 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is [Dinorah Ramos], and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in [Anaheim, California]. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, [Dinorah Ramos] 31 Get Outlook for iOS 32 Public Comment From:Z Collins Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:07 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Dire.       We need more funding for education & community service. Do not cut costs on the community service  budget.    Do we want our community to be educated & have opportunities?  33 Public Comment From:London Carter <l Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:04 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is London Carter, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I am a homeowner in Orange, Ca. My husband works in Anaheim. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. The $1 million in community funds last year was not enough. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Mrs. London Carter 34 35 Public Comment From:school ilashi Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:01 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Lucille Kring; Jose Moreno; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Ida Ilashi, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I am a resident of Anaheim. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Ida Ilashi 36 37 Public Comment From:Chelsea Halverson Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:58 PM To:Public Comment Subject:City Budget Proposal Hello,    I am writing to express my extreme displeasure and outrage at seeing that 20% of community service funding is being  cut for the City. On top of this, I have been told that there are to be proposed budget increases for the Anaheim PD. This  is both irresponsible and morally tone deaf. I urge you to reconsider both of these suggested budget changes.    You absolutely do not need to increase the Anaheim Police Department budget.    Read the room.    Thank you,  Chelsea Anne    38 Public Comment From:Teresa Womack Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:55 PM To:Public Comment; Harry Sidhu (Mayor) Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Teresa, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Santa Ana, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles 39  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Teresa Womack 40 Public Comment From:Justine Le Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:51 PM To:Public Comment Subject:DEFUND THE POLICE Cutting 20% of the budget towards after school education is outrageous. Our youth are our priority and these after school programs will keep them out of trouble. We should get to the root of our issues and help the people instead of wasting this money on the police, they need to be abolished! 41 Public Comment From:Sam Crane Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:48 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding My name is Sam Crane, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Dana Poibt,CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department.  Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Sam Crane 42 Public Comment From:Cindy Son Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:42 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease APD Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Cindy Ha Soul Son and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Garden Grove, California. I lived in Anaheim for 3 years, my parents live in Anaheim, and I work in Anaheim currently. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Cindy Ha Soul Son 43 44 Public Comment From:Cassie Sanchez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:25 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding My name is Cassandra Sanchez, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Cassandra Sanchez 45 Public Comment From:Kailynn Aguilar Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:12 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Kailynn, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Kailynn 46 Public Comment From:Nicole Alday Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:53 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Nicole Alday and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Nicole Alday 47 48 Public Comment From:Yamileth Rangel Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:45 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Yamileth Rangel, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Yamileth Rangel 49 50 Public Comment From:jaimelynette Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:39 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Defund the Police Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Jaime and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Minneapolis took it a step further and announced their intent to disband the police department due to it being clear that our existing system of policing and public safety is not keeping our communities safe and I ask that you consider taking these steps as well. Defund the police and reallocate that money towards uplifting and caring for the community, it absolutely needs it. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City defund the police and consider implementing the People's Budget. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting 51 Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Jaime 52 Public Comment From:These Real Talks Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:04 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Ashley and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in [CITY, STATE]. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting 53 Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Ashley S 54 Public Comment From:Lizbeth reyes Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:03 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Police budget Greetings, As a concerned voter and anaheim resident, I would like to express my opinion about tomorrow's meeting. I DO NOT believe more funding needs to be given to the police department for tactical gear or body gear. No more money needs to be spent on applications that you are trying to pass for the amount over $700,000 or any amount. Money could be given for community outreach programs or any programs for the children and youth programs like ballet, sports, and art. That being said if the money is needed it should come out from the police department's current budget. Whether it's from general pay cuts or from administrative pay. Cuts can also be from Administration and anyone with pensions as many in these positions end up with a higher than average salary or pension. Anaheim Police Department has had a long history of police brutality by using excessive force. From using their guns as first resort rather than last resort and murdering a resident. Over the years many of these cases have had to settle between the city and the family of the victims. Sincerely a CONCERNED citizen Lizbeth Reyes 55 Public Comment From:Cindy Do Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:48 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Cindy, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Orange County, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting 56 Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Cindy Do ( 57 Public Comment From:Renee Robison Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:24 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Renee Robison and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim and worked for the city in the library for almost 10 years. I love my city and am a proud citizen of Anaheim. So I write in an effort to make it better. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting 58 Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Renee Robison 59 Public Comment From:Emma Flores Ramirez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:01 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Emma Flores, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Thank you  60 -- Emma Flores Ramirez University of California, Los Angeles | 2024 B.S. Cognitive Science Specialization in Computation 61 Public Comment From:monique massey Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:58 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Spending Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Monique Massey, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Costa Mesa, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds 62  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Monique Massey 1 Public Comment From:Lizette Ureño Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:13 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Lizette Ureno and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Lizette Ureno 2 Public Comment From:Pia Aguilar Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:13 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Defund Anaheim PD For my dearest Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Pia Aguilar, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim as a member who lives here. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own gross history of police brutality and obstruction of justice. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. We demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42 percent of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. I understand that this is not popular (especially among white liberals and moderates), but defunding the police will pressure them to spend their budget on things that actually matter instead of stockpiling weapons and other military-grade arsenal (which, to remind you, Anaheim is a city—not a warzone). Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods—something I’m sure that you have seen by the achievement gap between schools of the Anaheim Union High School District (AUHSD). By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. We must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department.  Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, we should not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow—history laughs at the losers, so don’t be a loser. You simply cannot say that you (or your affiliates) stand in solidarity with the people if you do not practice what you preach. 3 This is an open book exam, and there is no reason that you should fail. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Cheers, Pia Aguilar 4 Public Comment From:Sunita Townsen-Gumina Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:13 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Redirect police funding to necessary social programs To my government representatives, My name is Sunita Townsen and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of Anaheim's community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. It is unacceptable that Black, Indigenous, and People of Color communities are living in persistent fear of being killed by state authorities like police, immigration agents or even white vigilantes who are emboldened by state actors. Despite continued profiling, harassment, terror and killing of Black communities, local and federal decision-makers continue to invest in the police, which leaves Black people vulnerable and our communities no safer. Moreover, this deep lack of trust that the government is breeding by terrorizing its own people, rather than safeguarding our health, is an alarming risk for future generations to live peacefully and safely with each other. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. While police and military funding has increased every single year since 1973, funding for public health and community outreach decreased every year, crystallized most recently when the Trump administration eliminated the US Pandemic Response Team in 2018, citing “costs”. The time has come to defund the police. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the United States. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than average for police in California. How can it be that agents funded for "public protection" are responsible for 17% of all homicides in the city (2003-2016)? In the years 2009 and 2016, 36% of all homicides were in the hands of Anaheim officers. Frankly, this is unacceptable. It is inhumane and impossible to ignore as an issue anymore. Our city needs a radical increase for funding towards community services and healthcare, especially now while we are still in the midst of a global pandemic. We need youth programs, increased mental health services, neighborhood infrastructures, childcare, and community outreach for those who need these services most. We need more funds for rehabilitation and the re-entry process for formerly incarcerated individuals, and to help increase employment and education rates. I implore you to redirect funds from the police to the important social programs that will actually strengthen our community. Police officers are usually called to respond to nonviolent issues that trained social workers would be better equipped to handle. Let's redirect funding to these places instead and build a stronger community. 5 Orange County needs to build a society that does not need this level of policing. I join in solidarity with the freedom fighters in Minneapolis, Louisville, and across the United States. And I call for the end to police terror. I call for defunding of police and for those dollars to be rerouted to strengthen community health system. Sincerely, Sunita Townsen Anaheim, CA 92805 6 Public Comment From:Ashkon Parto Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:12 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Ashkon Parto, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. 7 Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Ashkon Parto 8 Public Comment From:Thomas Alban Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:08 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:A call to defund and dismantle the police Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Thomas Alban, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd, and Tony McDadde have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against Black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. 9 Finally, we urge you to take steps to dismantle the police. On June 7th, the Minneapolis City Council made a historic move to dismantle their police force, opting for an alternative and innovative way of thinking about public safety. Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. My Best, Thomas Alban 10 Public Comment From:Maddy Thomas Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:58 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Madelene Thomas, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles 11  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Madelene Thomas 12 Public Comment From:Dulce Soledad Ibarra Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:52 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Dulce, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Long Beach, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Dulce Soledad Ibarra 13 -- Best Regards, D U L C E S O L E D A D I B A R R A Preparatory, Registrar, & Curatorial Work Freelance Art and Design Long Beach, CA 14 Public Comment From:daisy De La Cruz Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:48 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Daisy De La Cruz, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Daisy De La Cruz 15 Sent from my iPhone 16 Public Comment From:Angelica Solis Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:16 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Angelica Solis, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles 17  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Angelica Solis 18 Public Comment From:Juan Perez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:15 AM To:Public Comment Subject:More Support for the community fund Hello, I want to say that cutting funds from the community is wrong and instead there should be more funding put into the community development. The Anaheim PD have enough of a budget and it is the community budget that is suffering. I want it to change and therefore have a better community to live in and support. Thank you 19 Public Comment From:Rachelle Cruz Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:11 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:A call to defund and dismantle the police Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Rachelle Cruz, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd, and Tony McDadde have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against Black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. 20 Finally, we urge you to take steps to dismantle the police. On June 7th, the Minneapolis City Council made a historic move to dismantle their police force, opting for an alternative and innovative way of thinking about public safety. Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. All best, Rachelle Cruz Experiencing Comics: An Intro to Reading, Discussing & Creating Comics | Cognella, 2018 | Buy God's Will for Monsters, a 2018 American Book Award Winner | Inlandia Books, 2017 | Buy Kuwento: Lost Things, An Anthology of New Philippine Myths | Carayan Press, 2015 | Buy 21 Public Comment From:Andre Jocelyne Solis-Flores Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:12 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Jocelyne Solis-Flores, an Anaheim resident. I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  - Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  - Require De-escalation  - Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  - Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  - Implement Use of Force Continuum  - Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Jocelyne Solis-Flores 22 23 Public Comment From:nancy ruiz Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:57 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Nancy Ruiz, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim,CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, Tony McCade, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles 24  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. - Nancy Ruiz 25 Public Comment From:Eunice Youm Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:56 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease police funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Eunice, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in nearby Brea, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Eunice Oh 26 Public Comment From:Kelsey Medlin Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:50 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund the police Good day,    I can’t believe you’re going to cut the community service budget by 20% when it’s already so vastly under funded. Yet  you’re considering giving more money to our police department when it is one of the most violent police departments in  the country. Please begin to defund the police and put that money into community resources.     Thank you   Kelsey Medlin  27 Public Comment From:Jeffrey Craig Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:48 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund the police is not a punishment. Hello. My name is Jeffrey Craig and I am an Anaheim resident. I want to express my opinion about the cuts to  community budgets and additional funding of police resources. I think this is the absolute wrong way to handle things. I  have a masters in Marriage and Family therapy. I got that degree because I wanted to help and serve my community. It  wasn’t until I graduated that I found out our government does not invest in healing their cities, but instead to keep them  under control. I believe the police force having funds 150x of what is invested in community programs is absolutely  devastating. I’m not asking you to dismantle the police force. I’m asking that you simply reallocate funds used for  “busting criminals” toward building up our youth so you won’t have to. When you invest in the people of your city, they  will stand by your side. It’s time to stop looking at the dollar signs and embody what you swore to do for your  community. Part of protecting and serving requires you to advocate for your people. I truly appreciate that the protests  in Anaheim have been peaceful. Now let’s take action together on that message and build this city into something we  ALL can be proud of. Thank you.       Jeffrey Craig    Sent from my iPhone  28 Public Comment From:Marlon Rizo Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:46 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Marlon Rizo, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles 29  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Marlon Rizo 30 Public Comment From:Phuong Vo Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:43 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Mai Vo, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Mai Vo 31 Public Comment From:marilyn < Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:31 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Marilyn Solis, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles 32  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Marilyn Solis 33 Public Comment From:julie vo Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:10 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Public Comments Council Mgt 6.9.20 Dear Council Members,    Please do not lay off City Employees!    Thank you,    Julie Vo  34 Public Comment From:Edson Beley Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:02 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Edson Beley, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim myself. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. 35 Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Edson Beley 36 Public Comment From:Samah Hoque Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:58 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Request to Decrease Police Funding in Anaheim Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Samah Hoque, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim Hills, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles 37  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Samah Hoque 38 Public Comment From:Arisbel Gonzalez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:50 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Arisbel, I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Arisbel 39 Public Comment From:Saif Azam Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:47 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Request to Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Saif Azam, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim Hills, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles 40  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Saif Ali Azam -- B.A. in Biology, Economics, & Chemistry, Cornell University, Class of 2016 M.D. USC Keck School of Medicine, Class of 2020 41 Public Comment From:AT Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:27 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; moreno@anaheim.net; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Review Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Andy, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Punitively enforce limitations on use of Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Provide more training on De-escalation techniques  Provide clear rules to Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting, and Enforce them.  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles without just cause  Implement Use of Force Continuum 42  Require Comprehensive Reporting and Transparency Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Andy Tu 43 Public Comment From:Jason Kornoff Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:17 AM To:Public Comment Subject:An idea for consideration Greetings Honorable Mayor and Council Members,    I have been an Anaheim Public Utilities employee for almost 20 years and have seen many decisions of the Councils over  this time. Some difficult decisions are ahead of you and my thoughts and prayers are for you to navigate them with  wisdom.    I request that you ensure that there are no layoffs for your dedicated City employees. How can the costs be recovered?  An area of savings for the City  that I have always noticed is where folks have used Overtime Pay. Too many individuals  have nearly or more than doubled their salaries simply by overtime. The top 100 paid employees at Anaheim have been  paid $7,015,117.32 in Overtime Pay alone in 2019 (in addition to their Regular Pay of $16,114,057.41) – according to  https://transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/2019/anaheim/.    Eliminating Overtime Pay across the City will significantly reduce the City’s expenditures on labor, pension costs, and  bring fairness across all employee groups – as some are not eligible for overtime. Doing so will also take away the need  for layoffs or any other concessions from all City employees.    Thank you for your time and consideration.    Regards,  ~Jason Kornoff    1 Public Comment From:Bryan Ortiz Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:21 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Bryan Ortiz, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaeim,CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Bryan Ortiz 3 Public Comment From:G. Austin Allen Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:20 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Police funding To my government representatives, My name is Austin Allen and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health my community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. It is unacceptable that Black, Indigenous, and People of Color communities are living in persistent fear of being killed by state authorities like police, immigration agents or even white vigilantes who are emboldened by state actors. Despite continued profiling, harassment, terror and killing of Black communities, local and federal decision- makers continue to invest in the police, which leaves Black people vulnerable and our communities no safer. Moreover, this deep lack of trust that the government is breeding by terrorizing its own people, rather than safeguarding our health, is an alarming risk for future generations to live peacefully and safely with each other. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. While police and military funding has increased every single year since 1973, funding for public health and community outreach decreased every year, crystallized most recently when the Trump administration eliminated the US Pandemic Response Team in 2018, citing “costs”. The time has come to defund the police. Anaheim is the 9th most violent department in the U.S. This is not what we stand for. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than average for police in California. How can it be that agents funded for "public protection" are responsible for 17% of all homicides in the city (2003-2016)? In the years 2009 and 2016, 36% of all homicides were in the hands of Anaheim officers. Frankly, this is unacceptable. It is inhumane and impossible to ignore as an issue anymore. Rather, our city needs a radical increase for funding towards community services and healthcare. We need youth programs, increased mental health services, neighborhood infrastructures, childcare, and community outreach for those who need these services most. We need more funds for rehabilitation and the re-entry process for formerly incarcerated individuals, and to help increase employment and education rates. We need to build a society that does not need the level of policing. I join in solidarity with the freedom fighters in Minneapolis, Louisville, and across the United States. And I call for the end to police terror. I call for defunding of police and for those dollars to be rerouted to strengthen community health system. Sincerely, 4 G. Austin Allen Anaheim, CA 92805 5 Public Comment From:T L Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:21 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund the police Defund the police, allocate the money for community projects. 1 Public Comment From:Emmanuel Castillo Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:28 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Emmanuel Jimenez , and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. 2 Respectfully, -- Emmanuel J. 1 Public Comment From:Tamiko Tinker Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:59 PM To:Public Comment Cc:Christopher Chelko; Zubair Serang; Amy Milum; Julie Perez; Heather Dressen; Jose Medina Subject:City Budget Mayor Sidhu & Council Members,    As City employees, we are writing today with respect to the City’s budget. We understand the significant financial  impact that the City is currently facing due to the COVID‐19 pandemic and that tough decisions will need to be made.  However, we are urging the City to not employ lay‐offs and instead pursue alternate options.    Employees are at the heart of every great organization and Anaheim is no different. City employees are committed  professionals who serve this community and our millions of guests day in and day out. As part of the Anaheim family,  employees look forward to continuing to support this amazing City as we rebound from the COVID‐19 pandemic and  come back stronger than ever.    Respectfully,    Chris Chelko   Heather Dressen   Jose Medina   Amy Milum   Julie Perez   Tamiko Tinker   Zubair Serang   & the rest of the Event Services Team  Anaheim Convention Center      2 Public Comment From:Johanna Bonaparte Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:59 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Budget - Public Comments Good afternoon,    I would like to express my concern with the financial obstacles that the city of Anaheim is currently facing. Although I  know there needs to be drastic reductions to the city’s budget, I’d like to urge the council members to avoid any layoffs  if possible.     Thank you for your time.    Best,  Johanna Bonaparte, MPA  Professional Standards Section Anaheim Police Department  O: (714) 765‐3842   F: (714) 765‐3810   8201 E. Santa Ana Canyon Rd.  Anaheim, CA 92808    Community, Teamwork, Excellence      3 Public Comment From:Jose Sotelo Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:57 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is José Sotelo, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting 4 Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, José Sotelo 5 Public Comment From:Brandon Khong Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:58 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members,    My name is Brandon Khong, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim Hills,  California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial  tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti  recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re‐allocate a  portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence.    Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us  remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick  Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked  Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer‐involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim  police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him,  an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.”    The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a  total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award  the number of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their  actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD.  What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit,  the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But  this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from  happening in the first place.    First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY  2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger  portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly  improve the quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we  will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention.    Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions,  which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them.  Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released  from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty)  and should not be able to be rehired by another department.    Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:    Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De‐escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting    6 Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for  other cities to follow.  We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all  our citizens.    Best,    Brandon Khong      7 Public Comment From:Peter King Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:56 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim Budget Deficit Members of the Anaheim City Council,    As a husband and father who is the sole provider for my family, I ask that the city not layoff any employees. Personally, a  layoff would be a detriment to my household. Anaheim is a world class city and I believe that our staff are essential in  providing world class service. We care greatly about the City and will continue to provide excellent service regardless of  the situation we all face. Again, I strongly believe that a layoff would be detrimental to the residents and employees of  the city of Anaheim.    Kind regards,    Peter King  Assistant GIS Manager  Finance Department | GIS Central  200 South Anaheim Boulevard | Suite 143  Anaheim, CA 92805  Office: (714) 765-5296 FAX: (714) 765-4199 E-mail: PKing@anaheim.net        8 Public Comment From:elise han Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:52 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Elizabeth Han, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. 9 Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Elizabeth Ha Sent from my iPhone 10 Public Comment From:Ivy Tran Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:50 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim Public Library Funding on Euclid Hello, I am a citizen of the city of Anaheim and I would like to inquire about the status of the Euclid branch of the public library between Cerritos and Ball. This library was where I spent the majority of my time as a child from a low income household. In the last 20 years I have not seen any major projects to renovate or improve the library. I would like to call for immediate steps to start renovation for the physical structure of that library. As an adult with much more influence both financially and politically, I am committed to donating my books, my time and my resources to encourage the students and citizens of Anaheim to use the public library by MAKING it a comfortable place to be. However, we all understand that individual commitments are not enough to be sustainable and moreover the financial responsibility to upkeep public resources is NOT a responsibility of the individual citizen but of the collective governing body. I demand that the funds for this renovation be taken out of the Anaheim Police Department budget. To have a police budget that is able to access 153.8 million USD annually and see that this library has not been updated significantly in 2 decades is ludicrous. A library provides a high return of public good and value for any democratic society to make a more educated and economically stable population. Librarians, cleaners and other public employees of the library should be compensated according to their value. The value that they provide is much greater than any service that uses violence to enforce compliance. If there are any librarians whose salaries are lower than the highest paid police officer this needs to be rectified IMMEDIATELY, with back pay. This can also be taken out of discretionary funding that would otherwise be designated to police resources. People who are able to have access to a public space to safely exist and citizens who are taken care of by their city are exponentially less motivated to commit violent crimes. And of the few violent crimes that occur each year, how many individual police officers are needed to defuse 1 or 2 situations each year? The answer is none because the police have access to tools of violent force and what we need is deescalation, not escalation by the mere presence of deadly weapons. We are seeking a better society and that cannot happen without the abolishment of an inherently violent police precinct. I support the dissolution of the police institution in our local government by first divesting Anaheim PD of public funds by taxpayers. For officers that are worried about losing their jobs, I recommend first the dissolution of the police department and then that the jobs that will be created out of investing the funds that rightfully belong to the community into community upkeep and renovation will be open for application such as parks and recreation, community outreach in the creation of public gardens that can feed the food insecure in our city, more teachers for Anaheim schools and building more schools to properly serve the children of Anaheim, and even potentially a charter to start a community college in Anaheim to provide accessible education to our citizens. We are not asking, we are demanding. This is our taxpayer money to do what we want and what the people want is investment in the community that we have sorely neglected for the past few decades. The first step in our local participation is to find an independent contractor with no ties to city officials and therefore no conflict of interest to start construction on the Euclid branch Anaheim public library and take advantage of the time we are forced to stay at home during covid19. Construction, modernization, architectural design, cost of adding more books and media, salary increases to ALL employees of Anaheim public libraries including librarians, cleaners and clerks can all come out of the police budget for 2019-2020 and every single year from here on out. 11 The citizens are mobilized. Make sure you enact the will of the people. We will be keeping an eye out to make sure that the reaches of political corruption will not continue in our city. Abolish the police. From a lawful, hopeful citizen of Anaheim, Ivy Tran. -- Ivy Tran 12 Public Comment From:Alison Pirie Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:48 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund the Anaheim PD Dear Anaheim City Council, As an alumni of Chapman University and past resident of Orange County, I am writing in solidarity with the community of Anaheim to urge the Anaheim City Council to defund the Anaheim Police Department. From 2019-2020, $153.8 MILLION dollars were allocated to the Police, and only $1 Million to Community Development. Instead of arming your police department with stingrays for $700,000, we demand you reallocate funds towards programs that will help people such as public housing, healthcare, education, mental health counseling, drug counseling, and other social services. I am outraged that the city's response to police brutality is to put stingrays in the hands of the police, only further weaponizing the force. This does not tell your community that you are fighting to protect and serve them. I am disgraced to have patronized the city of Anaheim, whose police department ranks NINTH DEADLIEST of 60 major US cities. This is unacceptable, it is racist, and it will not be tolerated. If you TRULY want to protect and serve your communities, you will invest in public programs that are in place to help your community members, not kill and imprison them. Thank you for your time and consideration and I hope you read every single email you receive and take in what each community member is trying to tell you. Please on behalf of your community DO THE RIGHT THING. People's lives are counting on your choices. Sincerely, Alison Pirie 13 Public Comment From:Chris Carter Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:47 PM To:Public Comment Subject:City Budget Dear City Council,    I understand that you have some tough budget decisions to make in the near future. As a long time manager at the City  of Anaheim (20 years), I know how important all staff are, and especially the most vulnerable, part‐time staff. I implore  you to please consider all options besides layoffs. I, personally, would rather accept furloughs or a pay cut before seeing  anyone lose their jobs.    Thank you for your consideration.    Chris Carter  GIS Manager  Finance Department | GIS Central  200 South Anaheim Boulevard | Suite 143  Anaheim, CA 92805  Office: (714) 765-5224 Mobile: (714) 392-8365 FAX: (714) 765-4199 E-mail: ccarter@anaheim.net    14 Public Comment From:Sana Azam Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:45 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Sana Azam, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim Hills, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles 15  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Sana Azam 16 Public Comment From:Edgar Arellano Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:43 PM To:Public Comment; Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Anaheim Police Department Congratulations  What a tremendous display of our over‐bloated Anaheim Police Department. Thank you for showing us the heavy  military grade equipment our police have been hoarding year after year to better dominate our streets. It was a great  display of over allocated budgets, increased militarization, and a local government that will create a warzone out of fear  of its citizens. Our streets look nothing like a ‘world class city’ and more like a violent poverty stricken country. Out of  fear. We remember all the times our own Police Department brutalized our neighbors, one of the latest right down the  street from me, on Palais, after an off‐duty cop harassed and discharged his gun at kids after school. Are you ready to  create change like our community is?   After covid related budget reductions, the budget allocated for the Police is still at about 42%! Only a 17% reduction  from 2019, and still an overwhelming part of our budget. After covid! I don’t see how such a high allocation of the  budget to the Police Department will help guide our city out of this current health & financial disaster.  We need to  diversify our expenses to better deal with the emergencies facing Anaheim & region. Please listen to the many calls for  defunding the Police. They are not equipped to properly address all the situations that will arise due to covid impacts.  They have shown time and time again that they are not the solution. Furthermore, adopt the 8 can’t wait  recommendations to reform police actions NOW! The eight policies include banning chokeholds and strangleholds,  banning shooting at moving vehicles, exhausting all alternatives before shooting, requiring that all use of force be  reported, requiring a warning before shooting, requiring officers to stop another officer from using excessive force, and  limiting the types of force and/or weapons that can be used to respond to specific types of resistance.   There has long been over‐enforcement, and heavy use of force against our own citizens to justify a bloated department  that produces only burdens for our city. Some of you were so proud to show off such a great force. In the streets, like  many times before, were mostly kids & supporters peacefully yet angrily expressing their frustration at the many years  of police brutality on our own streets. You created a warzone around our neighborhood jewel, the library. They had  worked so hard to maintain normalcy, by hosting curbside library lending for the many families that depend on it for  enrichment & child development. I condemn the police for making this community center look like a danger zone,  inaccessible to the community. It is embarrassing.    Do better,     Edgar Arellano  Citizen & Business Owner District 2  Public Comments Distributed to the Anaheim City Council June 9, 2020 Council Meeting Updated 5:00 P.M. – Tuesday, June 9, 2020 From:buddyfitz To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim Closed Session Comment for June 9, 2020 Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:55:20 PM Attachments:Closed Session Comment.pdf Attached Closed Session Comment for June 9, 2020 Council Meeting. Anaheim city council closed Session comments, June gr2020, VIA EMAIL TO: publiccomment@anaheim.net FROM: Home Owners Maintaining our Environment The c&lupt Anaheim City Council has little concern for the people of Anaheim. An example is the secret closed session item that has the completely incompetent Human Resources Director in a position she has no expertise or formal education. The HR Director was made HR Director in order to justiff doubling her yearly compensation to keep her quite about her Magic Black Bag crime. The purpose of squandering city funds in ridicul,ously high compensation to so many Anaheim employees is essentially to keep them quiet about their knowledge of illegal activities within the city of Anaheim. The just terminated Anaheim City Manager has criminal information concerning Mayor Sidue and his cabal of councilmembers. That information could put several members of those Anaheim City Council members in prison. To keep him quite, he has received a "Keep Secret" settlement agreement paying him hundreds of thousands of dollars from the taxpayers of Anaheim. Previouslyo the Anaheim city council terminated the Anaheim police chief and gave him a $750'000 66Keep Secret" agreement. That police chief, like the city manager' had knowledge of criminal conduct by council members and their staff. That information included the Magic Black Bag trick thit cheated the only Latino council member into having his term in office reduced by two years. The Walt Disney Corporation, using the influence from spending in excess of a million dollars to elect Anaheim councilmembers, has selected Assistant City Manager, the 66Uncle Tom" Greg Garcia, to be Anaheim's Interim City Manager. Greg Garcia is a proven Disneyland supporter and neglects the residents of Anaheim that are mostly Latino. Greg Garcia proved his loyalty to Disneyland by his vigorous opposition to the pro-Latino District Elections for Anaheim. He was at the time in charged of the district election informational meetings where he consistently ran the meetings in a bias manner, and falsified the meetings' minutes. 1 Public Comment From:Kira Rubin Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:13 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Public Comment on Closed Session Anaheim City Council:    I am writing to encourage you not to layoff city employees.  The impact on both the employees and the citizens of  Anaheim would be disastrous.  There is no way that services will not be impacted by the proposed cuts.  Further, we do  not want to stymie potential growth by putting employees out of work.      The employees, whether or not they live in Anaheim, spend money in Anaheim and support ancillary businesses.  These  employees focus on serving the needs of our community. Now that things have finally started opening up, citizens are  using our services more often.  The need for public safety always exits, but residents will need other services more than  ever.  For example, parks and recreational areas are being utilized; they need our support.  Further, the city has a rich  tradition of library programming that will need staff to help nurture minds foster learning.  Businesses will need to be re‐ opened and new businesses need to be started.  With that, people will need to feel safe and have access to the city  offices and the city to conduct business.  Cutting services will have a chilling effect.  Cutting employees will nip this  potential growth in the bud.    The ripple effect of the loss of services and jobs will impact everyone.  The pandemic has shown us how important  community and a sense of normalcy is; Anaheim is at a crossroads.  The city is in a position to be in the forefront of  helping stimulate the economy and its citizens at the same time.      I have a personal stake in the layoffs as I am relatively new to the Anaheim City Attorney’s office, although I was hired  with over 15 years of experience.  If I am laid off, the city will lose a very experienced attorney with knowledge and  expertise that cannot be easily replaced.  I urge you to find a create solution that does not involve the loss of jobs for our  hard‐working employees.            Kira Rubin, J.D., M.B.A., M.P.H.  Deputy City Attorney II  Office of the Anaheim City Attorney – Criminal Prosecution Section  1 Public Comment From:Moses Johnson Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:31 AM To:Public Comment; Theresa Bass; Gregory Garcia; Linda Andal; Gretchen R. Beatty Subject:Item 1, Council agenda June 9, 2020 Dear City Clerk, Please distribute to the City Council and confirm that you received this email. Dear Mayor and City Council,   In times of crisis, our fundamental views shift, and for many the COVID-19 pandemic has given us a new view of what’s “essential.” Frontline services that City employees provide as many shelter at home – and the frontline City workers who have provided them – are now visible and valued. City employees have stepped up to the front lines protecting residents, supporting the local community and helping to keep businesses afloat. These actions have served as a model – and they have come at a significant cost. But now the very front lines that kept us safe are in jeopardy. Due to the unprecedented, multifaceted COVID-19 response, including the shutdown of our local economy, the City is facing a revenue shortfall over the next year. The City reports they are considering cutting or furloughing City staff and/or reducing public services, and may take both actions. Public works services will be adversely affected and there will be more cuts to many other municipal services. The crippling impact to the City’s budget will impact residents, businesses and City workers. The same City workers who have been on the front lines throughout this crisis working tirelessly to protect and serve our City’s residents will be facing layoffs, and the community will be hit by cuts to essential services. Job cuts will not only hurt essential City workers and their families but will adversely affect their lives as well. The City will cut planners, public works engineers, prosecutors and other essential local government workers and the core services they deliver. This means delayed repairs to streets and sidewalks, and limited hours for parks and senior centers, just to name a few of the core services under threat. The stakes are too high. 2 The City should support critical local services and the City workers that provide them. Council policymakers face a formidable task building the City’s budget for the coming year. While I know there will be tough decisions about how to allocate funds to best position the City’s recovery, one thing is clear: City workers are essential, both to our safety and to our recovery. City workers are the engine of our City, and the recovery from the COVID-19 crisis starts with them. The road to recovery will be long and hard but it will be even longer if we let our City workers go instead of harnessing their vital economic and social strengths. Providing funding for City workers is not optional – it is a necessity if we want a vibrant City services and strong economy. Please do not layoff City employees. Find another way to balance the budget. Moses Johnson, Acting President AFSCME/MAC 1 Public Comment From:Yazmin Lopez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:21 AM To:Public Comment Subject:CLOSED SESSION for June 9, 2020 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:    I know the City has implemented some cost‐saving measures, but is trying to find other ways to help with the current  economic downturn for the CITY.       PLEASE DO NOT LAYOFF City Employees as a cost‐saving measure during these difficult times for everyone.    Thank you,      Yazmin Lopez Liability Claims Assistant City of Anaheim | Human Resources Department | Risk Management Office 714-765-5193 x5398 | Fax 714-765-5245   Public Comments Distributed to the Anaheim City Council June 9, 2020 Council Meeting Updated 4:00 P.M. – Wednesday, June 10, 2020 1 Public Comment From:Jakki Hernandez Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 12:26 PM To:Public Comment Subject:I support cannabis in Anaheim Hello Anaheim Council Members, My name is Jakki Hernandez. I am a 39 year old married woman who resides in Anaheim district 2. I am a medical cannabis patient who consumes the plant due to multiple autoimmune conditions that affect my nervous system causing chronic pain. Coming from the perspective of a patient, I am pleading with you to allow legal cannabis shops in our city. The sad truth is whether you allow it or not, they are here. As a patient I know first hand how hard it is to obtain medicine that is trusted and consistent to treat my chronic pain. I was fortunate to have found a plant that allowed me to get off of every opiate the doctors prescribed me for a better part of a decade. It also removed a lot of the other prescriptions those opiates caused me to need to help with my digestive tract issues from years of prescribed opiate use. I was born with a condition called Neurofibromatosis. This condition is where tumors grow on and around your nervous system. As many with autoimmune disorder, once you have one you are prone to more. After a fall, I broke my foot and later developed another pain condition called Complex Regional Pain Syndrome that also affects the nervous system and is often described as the most painful chronic pain condition to have. Today, I have more tumors on my body than I can count, I have had 8 surgeries to remove 100s of tumors growing from my head to my feet. Before my first surgery, I was hospitalized for 2 months because the pain had grown so intense, and the tumor was growing internally and externally affecting the way I walked and even sat. As I was hospitalized and pumped full of morphine it occured to me, why are they giving me synthetic heroin (morphine) when they could easily give me a natural plant, cannabis? Fast forward to when they released me from the hospital with a medication list of painkillers, stool softeners and methadone along with instructions that they were too scared to remove any tumors because they were connected to important nerves. I knew this diagnosis was far to bleak for a 22 year old to hear. They were hoping I would find relief through their cocktail of medications, but of course it did not help. It actually affected me way more than any joint ever did. Needless to say, this led me back to the emergency room to get catheterized since all my muscles were so overly doped up. I couldn't go to the bathroom on my own. After a brief candid discussion with my doctor led me to the realization I had been severely over medicated and these medicines were not even helping relieve the pain. I cried to myself, "there has to be a better way." At that moment I told my loved ones, even if I scream do not give me these pills. The next few days led me to a terrible 6 day withdrawal that made me promise myself I would never take another pill again. I was hallucinating, vomiting, shivering, sweating, and even had to stay in a bath of hot water for most of the day to deal with the debilitating pain my body experienced. Over 15 years later, I can now say I am completely off of the drugs the doctors prescribed me. As a consumer/ patient of cannabis for over 15 years I can with 100 percent certainty say there is no withdrawal when omitting the medicine from my life, and I have not developed an addiction. I have gone without, but why would I when this plant is what gives me the ability to be, "pain - less" enough to be a functional member of society. I am able to consume an edible or a cannabis tincture multiple times a day just as I would use a Vicodin or a Norco given by a doctor, to help me with my internal tumor pain and apply cannabis topicals to help with the pain on top of my skin. Cannabis is now the only type of medication I consume. To think, my very own doctors told me that nothing could help me. Actually, the last thing I heard from a pain management doctor was, "I would have to live with a morphine pump in my spine for the rest of my life, in order to find relief and function." Morphine would be like my insulin if I were a diabetic. This should never be someone's way of life if a plant can give a person better relief with no harmful side effects. I am so glad, I did not listen and I did my own research. Plants over pills is now a slogan I use daily. This is why I am an advocate for cannabis legalization. I am close to this industry and recently left the cannabis retail space in Long Beach. I have spent the last 15 years helping other people like myself live a life with less discomfort and little side effects. Not every person has my story, and that is why it is important to have educated people working in these state regulated cannabis shops. The licensed stores not only bring safe and consistent medicine to those that need it most. They also improve the city they are placed in, by following the guidelines in place and bringing security to a neighborhood that normally doesn't have it. 2 I can personally attest to our licensed cannabis shop improving the city; from our security protecting the neighborhood to our local city cleanups I noticed first hand providing safe access not only is a necessity for patients like myself but it can also build up a neighborhood. We checked i.d and only let those 21 years of age or older purchase products, had to enter all items exchanged with vendors into a system tracked by the state and everything had to be tested to enter our store. These are not exclusive to my store, they are the rules all legal shops follow in order to protect the consumer also which the consumer pays heavily for through taxes. This is a major benefit for cities since the taxes they pay can go back to rebuilding roads, schools and also funds anti drug programs. Illicit shops are not obvious to the layman that they are not legal. This means all types of people will walk in and obtain the products behind the counter. By continuing to permit the non licensed cannabis shops in Anaheim your residents and tourists are affected by many consequences of the illicit market. 1. The products sold in unregulated shops are not lab tested. 2. Safety is a large concern, these shops do not have security guards. 3. Often contain harmful chemicals, mold or are sold past the expiration date 4. The products are sold to anyone, with no consideration of any age or health condition. 5. Allow consumption on premise 6. These shops at times place taxes on the consumer, and since the shop is not regulated or licensed 100% of those profits goes directly to the underground drug market in Anaheim. This also confuses your residents, since it appears the shop is more legitimate when they see taxes on the receipt. 7. Our citizens and visitors are duped into shopping at these stores believing they are regulated by the state resulting in the city of Anaheim, it is not common knowledge that the only current city allowing licensed cannabis is Santa Ana. 8. The Anaheim residents do not know they are shopping in a black market store or that these shops are selling counterfeit products in packages that otherwise, are sold in the regulated cannabis market. Not providing competition for these illicit shops allows them to continue to manipulate and harm the Anaheim residents and its visitors. Providing options for the patients and consumers to shop local and buy legal will not only bring in revenue and jobs from these essential workplaces but will provide safe access to regulated products for anyone that visits Anaheim. I am speaking for the patients when I say, this is a public health issue as they are the ones who know they have compromised immune systems but don't know the products they are purchasing may contain harmful chemicals that could exacerbate their issues or much worse cause severe illness like the most recent vape illness, Evali that plagued our country. This unfortunate illness comes from the illicit markets vape products. Sadly, some of these products even used the packaging from legal brands to compel the person to buy. Only, the products sold at illicit stores don't have to follow state guidelines to protect their shoppers. Also patients don't always have the means or ability to drive 45 minutes to a county that can serve them. Please think about the patients, it is so difficult to be able to obtain safe and effective plant medicine. As a former Cannabis Retail Manager, I have seen and spoken to every demographic that would enter my shop. The consensus is, many do not know the difference between a legal and illegal shop. Until that is they have an experience at one. The service is educated and well communicated. The products are all tested and consistent. The brands even come with references for actual medical professionals allowing us to connect actual patients with science based answers to their questions. We can bring this service to our city, we deserve it. Our elderly and immunocompromised citizens deserve safe access without having to drive 40 miles away. Lets have Anaheim be the city that stands up to the other market by showing the public the difference. Clean tested cannabis products available for our city. We can kick out the black market storefronts by providing legal competition. Please pass this ballot measure so the residents of Anaheim can choose for themselves in November whether or not commercial cannabis should be in their town. Thank you for your time and consideration Jakki Hernandez 1 Public Comment From:Andy Murphy Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 10:29 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Comments regarding the upcoming June 16th City Council meeting Dear Mayor Sidhu and members of the City Council,    My name is Andy Murphy and I am a resident of Anaheim living in the Colony Park neighborhood.  I have a few  comments for you to consider regarding the upcoming city council meeting.    Item 19:  I question the need for this purchase.  While I can see that it has value in helping the police department do its  job in investigation crimes, I wonder if we need our own unit. The staff report indicates that the prior unit was only used  approximately 100 days out of the year.  This is a large investment that would only be used 27% of the time.    I wonder if it is possible to share this purchase with other near by cities.  Perhaps Fullerton, Orange, Anaheim, and  Garden Grove can purchase together and share this cost among each other.  Has the police department and/or council  considered this option?  In these tough economic times, we need to think of every possible way to stretch our tax dollars  to provide the most benefit.    Item 22:  I support this consent item    Item 26:  My only question with this consent item/ordinance is to make sure that the end user that is renting the hotel  room is informed of the tax at time of booking.  I would hate for the city of Anaheim to get bad publicity, because they  were asked to pay the TOT tax if they were not advised that it would be collected.      Item 28 & 29:  I do not support allowing marijuana businesses in our beautiful city of Anaheim.  We have to remember  that not only are we a city of residents and businesses, but many people from around the world come to our city to  enjoy the entertainment options that we offer that are unique to Anaheim.  We must remember that some people come  from areas where they might not be exposed to marijuana and the related businesses.  This can be upsetting to many  families who may not want to expose or have to explain to their children what marijuana is.  I must also remind you that  marijuana is still federally an illegal drug.  This has the potential to cause problems with the federal government in the  future.  In addition, I believe that 80 businesses is far to many to have in our city.  Please do not allow these businesses  to ruin our city.    Item 30:  I support this ordinance.  We must do what is necessary to continue to keep our city safe.  While I hope that  protests remain peaceful, we must be prepared in the event that bad people show up and want to cause damage to our  residents, businesses, and properties.    Thank you for considering my opinions.    Sincerely,    Andy Murphy  Anaheim resident  1 Public Comment From:Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com> Sent:Friday, May 29, 2020 12:54 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Jose Moreno; Jordan Brandman; Denise Barnes; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil; Stephen Faessel Cc:Annie Mezzacappa; Justin Glover; Helen Myers; Cynthia Ward; Salvador Figueroa; Samantha Saenz; Amanda Edinger; Nam Bartash; Sarah Bartczak; Marisol Ramirez; Gregory Garcia; Sandra Sagert; Jorge Cisneros; Public Comment Subject:Re: Cannabis Please see article, this is a preview of what will happen in Anaheim... https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/long-beach-pursuit-chase-marijuana-business-burglary/2369094/ Have a great day, Tamara Jimenez Community Relations Manager Lighthouse CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. On May 28, 2020, at 2:56 PM, Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com> wrote: Good afternoon,  Please pay special attention to recommendations NOT implemented. You need to know what  you are about to allow if you vote yes. Here are just a few:    Not implemented: Proper Identifcation Training (Recommendation #1) — The Bureau should  include in its regulations an employee‐training requirement on proper identifcation verifcation  to prevent sales of cannabis and cannabis products to youth at the point of sale or upon the  delivery of product.     Not implemented: Hours of Operation (Recommendation #2) — Restore local control over  hours of operation. The state can establish suggested operating hours however, local  government can waive those hours.     2 Not Implemented: Recommendation #2 — The Bureau and CDPH should work together to  create a document that they could distribute jointly to clarify that local governments may  further limit the types of activities that are permitted to occur under a microbusiness  authorized to engage in level one manufacturing within their jurisdiction. Even though the state  permits multiple activities under the license type, the community could restrict certain types of  activities if they so choose.     Not Implemented: Video Surveillance (Recommendation #3) — All licensing authorities should  require that all areas where waste is stored, processed, handled, and properly disposed of, be  covered by video surveillance. Per Bureau comments, implementing the committee’s  recommendation would increase the costs for licensees to have additional video surveillance  equipment and video storage.     Not Implemented: Youth Education and Prevention Programs (Recommendation #8) — CDPH  should designate staff and necessary resources to the education of youth and youth prevention  programs relating to cannabis.      Not Implemented: Advisory Committee (Recommendation #9) — CDPH should designate / form  an advisory committee that would help establish a more comprehensive program including  prevention, early intervention and continuing of care.     Not Implemented: Health‐Related Claims (Recommendation #5) — The CDPH should develop  enforcement provisions to ensure that the public has the ability to challenge health related  claims about cannabis and a means to adjudicate evidence for their claims.      Not implemented: Product Liability Insurance (Recommendation #8) — Product liability  insurance should be applied to the manufacturer not the retailer within context of statute.     Not implemented: Banking System (Recommendation #9) — The state should continue to  explore establishing a banking system for the California cannabis industry.          https://www.bcc.ca.gov/about_us/documents/cac_annual_report_2018.pdf  BUREAU OF CANNABIS CONTROL Under MAUCRSA, the Bureau of Cannabis Control (Bureau) is the lead agency. The Bureau is charged with licensing, regulation, and enforcement of the following types of commercial cannabis businesses: distributors, retailers, microbusinesses, temporary cannabis events, and testing laboratories. The Manufactured Cannabis www.bcc.ca.gov   Have a beautiful day,  3 Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.    From: Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com>  Sent: Friday, May 15, 2020 1:39 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Jordan  Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring  <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel  <SFaessel@anaheim.net>  Cc: Annie Mezzacappa <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>; Justin Glover <JGlover@anaheim.net>; Helen  Myers <HMyers@anaheim.net>; Cynthia Ward <CWard@anaheim.net>; Salvador Figueroa  <SFigueroa@anaheim.net>; Samantha Saenz <SSaenz@anaheim.net>; Amanda Edinger  <AEdinger@anaheim.net>; Nam Bartash <NBartash@anaheim.net>; Sarah Bartczak  <SBartczak@anaheim.net>; maramirez@anaheim.net <maramirez@anaheim.net>; Gregory Garcia  <GGarcia@anaheim.net>; Sandra Sagert <SSagert@anaheim.net>; Jorge Cisneros  <JCisneros@anaheim.net>; publiccomment@anaheim.net <publiccomment@anaheim.net>  Subject: Re: Cannabis‐CDC  Good afternoon,  Here is another link with good, legitimate information.    https://www.cdc.gov/marijuana/health‐effects.html  Health Effects | Marijuana | CDC Marijuana is the most commonly used illegal drug in the United States, with 37.6 million users in the past year, 1 and marijuana use may have a wide range of health effects on the body and brain. Click on the sections below to learn more about how marijuana use can affect your health. About 1 in 10 marijuana users will become addicted. www.cdc.gov   Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  4 Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.    From: Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com>  Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 9:38 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Jordan  Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring  <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel  <SFaessel@anaheim.net>  Cc: Annie Mezzacappa <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>; Justin Glover <JGlover@anaheim.net>; Helen  Myers <HMyers@anaheim.net>; Cynthia Ward <CWard@anaheim.net>; Salvador Figueroa  <SFigueroa@anaheim.net>; Samantha Saenz <SSaenz@anaheim.net>; Amanda Edinger  <AEdinger@anaheim.net>; Nam Bartash <NBartash@anaheim.net>; Sarah Bartczak  <SBartczak@anaheim.net>; maramirez@anaheim.net <maramirez@anaheim.net>; Gregory Garcia  <GGarcia@anaheim.net>; Sandra Sagert <SSagert@anaheim.net>; Jorge Cisneros  <JCisneros@anaheim.net>; publiccomment@anaheim.net <publiccomment@anaheim.net>  Subject: Cannabis‐the facts, not info from lobbyists Good evening,  Although I understand some of you will not change your vote by June 9th and I do not believe you will  even take the time to go to the follow links and read the information, I do know some of you will. I hope  those of you who are waivering in how to vote will take a serious look at the links provided and  everything available on the site. Please look at the facts provided by HIDTA, DEA, and the Surgeon  General. I would think that as responsible leaders you would hold their opinions in high regard.  https://rmhidta.org/files/D2DF/FINAL‐Volume6.pdf  https://www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/reports‐and‐publications/addiction‐and‐substance‐ misuse/advisory‐on‐marijuana‐use‐and‐developing‐brain/index.html  https://www.thenmi.org/surgeon‐general‐no‐such‐thing‐as‐medical‐marijuana/      Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse  5   CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.    From: Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com>  Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 4:09 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Jordan  Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring  <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel  <SFaessel@anaheim.net>  Cc: publiccomments@anaheim.net <publiccomments@anaheim.net>; Annie Mezzacappa  <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>; Justin Glover <JGlover@anaheim.net>; Helen Myers  <HMyers@anaheim.net>; Cynthia Ward <CWard@anaheim.net>; Salvador Figueroa  <SFigueroa@anaheim.net>; Samantha Saenz <SSaenz@anaheim.net>; Amanda Edinger  <AEdinger@anaheim.net>; Nam Bartash <NBartash@anaheim.net>; Sarah Bartczak  <SBartczak@anaheim.net>; maramirez@anaheim.net <maramirez@anaheim.net>  Subject: Re: NO on Item #23 Hello,  Sorry for the additional note but I also was wondering why there is not one single report from  ANY city department that has been battling the ordinance over the past 16 years? I do not  understand why  these reports would not be included. Is there anyone that can offer an  explanation? And have you all seen the packaging that is used at the dispensaries? Are you  aware that glass pipe and GLASS SYRINGES are sold among every other type of drug  paraphernalia you could possibly think of? These are the types of things that should be  considered among many others.     Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.    6 From: Tamara Jimenez  Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 1:28 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Jordan  Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring  <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel  <SFaessel@anaheim.net>  Cc: publiccomments@anaheim.net <publiccomments@anaheim.net>  Subject: NO on Item #23 Good afternoon,  I find it quite concerning that to my knowledge no one in the addiction industry, especially right here in  Anaheim was consulted regarding the cannabis item. The fact that you would consider an item as  serious as this without a comprehensive study is unbelievably irresponsible. Not one treatment center  or expert was contacted, nor was any governmental agency that deals with addiction on this matter.  Why would you even consider voting on an item like this until a comprehensive study is completed and  have fully exhausted all aspects of a decision like this? Besides the simple fact that a decision like this  goes completely against 2 major initiatives that the City of Anaheim has poured hundreds of thousands  of dollars into. The first being the Drug Free Anaheim Program which has placed almost 600 addicts into  treatment and the second being the effort in addressing homelessness. Where are the studies on the  effect of marijuana in these two areas? Let’s also not forget about our children. How shall we continue  to teach our children to not use drugs and alcohol if passing an item such as this? Anaheim also has a  gang problem if you are unaware. The drug dealers and gang members will go to the dispensaries. The  problems will get worse. Meet with HIDTA in Colorado. This item is, even if passed, should not be passed  without some basic common sense, public safety regulations . Let us also remember to be realistic in the  fact that these businesses still cannot legally bank their money, nor are they federally legal. So if you  think you will get you monies worth out of them, whatever that looks like‐not sure how you can ethically  put a dollar amount of people’s lives and our children’s values, you won’t. They will never report what  they actually make, they will cause more problems with law enforcement, the clientele they attract is  not typically law abiding citizens, and if you believe any different you are listening to the lobbyists as  opposed to the governmental agencies who have to deal with the fall out. Have any of you met with or  spoken with HIDTA in Colorado? Do you know what that is? Have you met with the DEA? Or the ONDCP?  The FDA?  If you have not met with any of these agencies and received in depth studies in this area you  should in no way be voting on an item like this as it would be incredibly irresponsible and dangerous.  AND TO PUT THIS IN THE IN THE HANDS OF THE PUBLIC BY BALLOT MEASURE WITHOUT THE PROPER  RESEARCH IS JUST WRONG!!!        Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    7 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.  1 Public Comment From:Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com> Sent:Thursday, May 28, 2020 2:56 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Jose Moreno; Jordan Brandman; Denise Barnes; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil; Stephen Faessel Cc:Annie Mezzacappa; Justin Glover; Helen Myers; Cynthia Ward; Salvador Figueroa; Samantha Saenz; Amanda Edinger; Nam Bartash; Sarah Bartczak; Marisol Ramirez; Gregory Garcia; Sandra Sagert; Jorge Cisneros; Public Comment Subject:Re: Cannabis Good afternoon,  Please pay special attention to recommendations NOT implemented. You need to know what you are about to  allow if you vote yes. Here are just a few:    Not implemented: Proper Identifcation Training (Recommendation #1) — The Bureau should include in its  regulations an employee‐training requirement on proper identifcation verifcation to prevent sales of cannabis  and cannabis products to youth at the point of sale or upon the delivery of product.     Not implemented: Hours of Operation (Recommendation #2) — Restore local control over hours of operation.  The state can establish suggested operating hours however, local government can waive those hours.     Not Implemented: Recommendation #2 — The Bureau and CDPH should work together to create a document  that they could distribute jointly to clarify that local governments may further limit the types of activities that  are permitted to occur under a microbusiness authorized to engage in level one manufacturing within their  jurisdiction. Even though the state permits multiple activities under the license type, the community could  restrict certain types of activities if they so choose.     Not Implemented: Video Surveillance (Recommendation #3) — All licensing authorities should require that all  areas where waste is stored, processed, handled, and properly disposed of, be covered by video surveillance.  Per Bureau comments, implementing the committee’s recommendation would increase the costs for licensees  to have additional video surveillance equipment and video storage.     Not Implemented: Youth Education and Prevention Programs (Recommendation #8) — CDPH should  designate staff and necessary resources to the education of youth and youth prevention programs relating to  cannabis.      Not Implemented: Advisory Committee (Recommendation #9) — CDPH should designate / form an advisory  committee that would help establish a more comprehensive program including prevention, early intervention  and continuing of care.     Not Implemented: Health‐Related Claims (Recommendation #5) — The CDPH should develop enforcement  provisions to ensure that the public has the ability to challenge health related claims about cannabis and a  means to adjudicate evidence for their claims.      Not implemented: Product Liability Insurance (Recommendation #8) — Product liability insurance should be  applied to the manufacturer not the retailer within context of statute.   2   Not implemented: Banking System (Recommendation #9) — The state should continue to explore establishing  a banking system for the California cannabis industry.          https://www.bcc.ca.gov/about_us/documents/cac_annual_report_2018.pdf  BUREAU OF CANNABIS CONTROL Under MAUCRSA, the Bureau of Cannabis Control (Bureau) is the lead agency. The Bureau is charged with licensing, regulation, and enforcement of the following types of commercial cannabis businesses: distributors, retailers, microbusinesses, temporary cannabis events, and testing laboratories. The Manufactured Cannabis www.bcc.ca.gov   Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.    From: Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com>  Sent: Friday, May 15, 2020 1:39 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor  O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>  Cc: Annie Mezzacappa <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>; Justin Glover <JGlover@anaheim.net>; Helen Myers  <HMyers@anaheim.net>; Cynthia Ward <CWard@anaheim.net>; Salvador Figueroa <SFigueroa@anaheim.net>;  Samantha Saenz <SSaenz@anaheim.net>; Amanda Edinger <AEdinger@anaheim.net>; Nam Bartash  <NBartash@anaheim.net>; Sarah Bartczak <SBartczak@anaheim.net>; maramirez@anaheim.net  <maramirez@anaheim.net>; Gregory Garcia <GGarcia@anaheim.net>; Sandra Sagert <SSagert@anaheim.net>; Jorge  Cisneros <JCisneros@anaheim.net>; publiccomment@anaheim.net <publiccomment@anaheim.net>  Subject: Re: Cannabis‐CDC  Good afternoon,  3 Here is another link with good, legitimate information.    https://www.cdc.gov/marijuana/health‐effects.html  Health Effects | Marijuana | CDC Marijuana is the most commonly used illegal drug in the United States, with 37.6 million users in the past year, 1 and marijuana use may have a wide range of health effects on the body and brain. Click on the sections below to learn more about how marijuana use can affect your health. About 1 in 10 marijuana users will become addicted. www.cdc.gov   Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.    From: Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com>  Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 9:38 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor  O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>  Cc: Annie Mezzacappa <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>; Justin Glover <JGlover@anaheim.net>; Helen Myers  <HMyers@anaheim.net>; Cynthia Ward <CWard@anaheim.net>; Salvador Figueroa <SFigueroa@anaheim.net>;  Samantha Saenz <SSaenz@anaheim.net>; Amanda Edinger <AEdinger@anaheim.net>; Nam Bartash  <NBartash@anaheim.net>; Sarah Bartczak <SBartczak@anaheim.net>; maramirez@anaheim.net  <maramirez@anaheim.net>; Gregory Garcia <GGarcia@anaheim.net>; Sandra Sagert <SSagert@anaheim.net>; Jorge  Cisneros <JCisneros@anaheim.net>; publiccomment@anaheim.net <publiccomment@anaheim.net>  Subject: Cannabis‐the facts, not info from lobbyists Good evening,  Although I understand some of you will not change your vote by June 9th and I do not believe you will even take the  time to go to the follow links and read the information, I do know some of you will. I hope those of you who are  waivering in how to vote will take a serious look at the links provided and everything available on the site. Please look at  4 the facts provided by HIDTA, DEA, and the Surgeon General. I would think that as responsible leaders you would hold  their opinions in high regard.  https://rmhidta.org/files/D2DF/FINAL‐Volume6.pdf  https://www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/reports‐and‐publications/addiction‐and‐substance‐misuse/advisory‐on‐ marijuana‐use‐and‐developing‐brain/index.html  https://www.thenmi.org/surgeon‐general‐no‐such‐thing‐as‐medical‐marijuana/      Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.    From: Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com>  Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 4:09 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor  O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>  Cc: publiccomments@anaheim.net <publiccomments@anaheim.net>; Annie Mezzacappa  <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>; Justin Glover <JGlover@anaheim.net>; Helen Myers <HMyers@anaheim.net>; Cynthia  Ward <CWard@anaheim.net>; Salvador Figueroa <SFigueroa@anaheim.net>; Samantha Saenz <SSaenz@anaheim.net>;  Amanda Edinger <AEdinger@anaheim.net>; Nam Bartash <NBartash@anaheim.net>; Sarah Bartczak  <SBartczak@anaheim.net>; maramirez@anaheim.net <maramirez@anaheim.net>  Subject: Re: NO on Item #23 Hello,  Sorry for the additional note but I also was wondering why there is not one single report from ANY city  department that has been battling the ordinance over the past 16 years? I do not understand why  these  reports would not be included. Is there anyone that can offer an explanation? And have you all seen the  packaging that is used at the dispensaries? Are you aware that glass pipe and GLASS SYRINGES are sold among  every other type of drug paraphernalia you could possibly think of? These are the types of things that should  be considered among many others.     Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  5 Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.    From: Tamara Jimenez  Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 1:28 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor  O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>  Cc: publiccomments@anaheim.net <publiccomments@anaheim.net>  Subject: NO on Item #23 Good afternoon,  I find it quite concerning that to my knowledge no one in the addiction industry, especially right here in Anaheim was  consulted regarding the cannabis item. The fact that you would consider an item as serious as this without a  comprehensive study is unbelievably irresponsible. Not one treatment center or expert was contacted, nor was any  governmental agency that deals with addiction on this matter. Why would you even consider voting on an item like this  until a comprehensive study is completed and have fully exhausted all aspects of a decision like this? Besides the simple  fact that a decision like this goes completely against 2 major initiatives that the City of Anaheim has poured hundreds of  thousands of dollars into. The first being the Drug Free Anaheim Program which has placed almost 600 addicts into  treatment and the second being the effort in addressing homelessness. Where are the studies on the effect of marijuana  in these two areas? Let’s also not forget about our children. How shall we continue to teach our children to not use  drugs and alcohol if passing an item such as this? Anaheim also has a gang problem if you are unaware. The drug dealers  and gang members will go to the dispensaries. The problems will get worse. Meet with HIDTA in Colorado. This item is,  even if passed, should not be passed without some basic common sense, public safety regulations . Let us also  remember to be realistic in the fact that these businesses still cannot legally bank their money, nor are they federally  legal. So if you think you will get you monies worth out of them, whatever that looks like‐not sure how you can ethically  put a dollar amount of people’s lives and our children’s values, you won’t. They will never report what they actually  make, they will cause more problems with law enforcement, the clientele they attract is not typically law abiding  citizens, and if you believe any different you are listening to the lobbyists as opposed to the governmental agencies who  have to deal with the fall out. Have any of you met with or spoken with HIDTA in Colorado? Do you know what that is?  Have you met with the DEA? Or the ONDCP? The FDA?  If you have not met with any of these agencies and received in  depth studies in this area you should in no way be voting on an item like this as it would be incredibly irresponsible and  dangerous. AND TO PUT THIS IN THE IN THE HANDS OF THE PUBLIC BY BALLOT MEASURE WITHOUT THE PROPER  RESEARCH IS JUST WRONG!!!    6     Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.  1 Public Comment From:Dana Cisneros <dana@cisnerosfirm.com> Sent:Tuesday, May 26, 2020 6:47 AM To:Theresa Bass Cc:Lucille Kring; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Denise Barnes; sfassel@anaheim.net; Trevor O'Neil; Robert Fabela; Cynthia Ward; Public Comment; Council; City Manager Subject:Re: Cannabis Activities in Anaheim - Banking and Cash Management Solutions (FINRA compliant) Dear Council,     I hope you all enjoyed the Memorial Day holiday.      I just read that Dama Financial was selected by the City of Los Angeles to assist them in processing taxes.  This is the  cashless financial services company that I informed you about in the email below.      The press release is here:  https://www.prnewswire.com/news‐releases/city‐of‐los‐angeles‐and‐dama‐financial‐partner‐ to‐provide‐cannabis‐cash‐alternative‐tax‐payments‐during‐covid‐19‐crisis‐301062326.html    I do hope you reach out or have already reached out to Ms. Sullivan so she can explain their banking solution to you.  As  indicated below, I have vetted several financial i situations and financial services companies and this is the only one I am  able to confidently recommend to my clients at this time.          Sincerely,     Dana Leigh Cisneros, Esq.   The Cisneros Firm,  a Professional Law Corporation    1240 N. Lakeview Ave., Suite 125  Anaheim Hills, CA 92807  Phone:  (714) 660‐9045  Cell:    eFax: (949) 258‐9332   dana@cisnerosfirm.com  www.cisnerosfirm.com    Sent from my iPhone; please pardon any typographical errors.    WARNING/CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:      This e‐mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. It  may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt, or protected from disclosure under applicable law.  2 If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the  intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of this  communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender  immediately and destroy all copies and attachments.     The Cisneros Firm is a green company and uses every effort to engage and encourage paperless practices. Please use  email whenever possible and consider the environment before printing this email. If you are not the intended recipient  of this email please delete it. All confidentiality, rights and privileges are expressly preserved.        On May 18, 2020, at 12:08 PM, Dana Cisneros <dana@cisnerosfirm.com> wrote:    Dear Anaheim City Council,     One of the issues presented during the last council meeting was access to banking and related services,  including use of credit cards.     I wanted to introduce you to Michelle Sullivan at DAMA Financial. Dama is an account servicing company  that assists cannabis operators with their banking needs and has a cashless payment solution for  retailers to use so consumers can make purchases without cash at the dispensary (most operators are  violating the rules by using MCC codes that do not transparently disclose that they are processing  payments for the sale of cannabis).  After vetting half a dozen different institutions over the last two  years, Dama is the only company I recommend to my clients.  Michelle is the Chief Risk Officer and Chief  Operating Officer at Dama and is happy to discuss cannabis banking, cash deliveries and deposits and  whatever else finance related.  Richie Thorne of Dama Financial is also in charge of their regulatory  division; prior to joining Dama, Mr. Thorne was with the Federal Reserve for almost 20 years.     Sincerely, Dana Leigh Cisneros, Esq. The Cisneros Firm 1240 N. Lakeview Ave., Suite 125  Anaheim Hills, CA 92807  Phone: (714) 660-9045  Cell: eFax: (949) 258-9332 dana@cisnerosfirm.com   www.cisnerosfirm.com WARNING/CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt, or protected from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies and attachments. The Cisneros Firm is a green company and uses every effort to engage and encourage 3 paperless practices. Please use email whenever possible and consider the environment before printing this email. If you are not the intended recipient of this email please delete it. All confidentiality, rights and privileges are expressly preserved.     From: Dana Cisneros   Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 10:30 AM  To: tbass@anaheim.net  Cc: lkring@anaheim.net; jbrandman@anaheim.net; jmoreno@anaheim.net; dbarnes@anaheim.net;  sfassel@anaheim.net; toneil@anaheim.net; HarrySidhu@harrysidhu.com; Robert Fabela ANAHEIM CITY  ATTORNEY <rfabela@anaheim.net>; hsidhu@anaheim.net  Subject: Re: Thank you re Serrano Center meeting     Dear Ms. Bass,     I am following up on my prior public records requests from early January and also to inquire about the  process of requesting a rehearing, ballot initiatives and referenda.  I have limited time to file as I  understand it.       The council was flatly lied to last night and we, the residents, had no opportunity to comment on the  revised CUP, specifically that set backs be required and additional soils reports since our homes rely on  support from the land below (the Center), not just from the street.  Four feet is ridiculous.  Removing  soil that supports our properties is ridiculous, especially since we have pools. One tenant was sitting  next to me and shared that he pays $1.89 a square foot.  The entire motion last night was premised on  this not being a viable center at $1.35 a square foot and that simply wasn’t true.  The developer  confessed that at $1.80 it would be viable.  They are currently fetching more than that and I think the  council should have the true facts before them and reconsider.  We also would like them to consider  permitting the parking on the surrounding streets since the new residences will have overflow that  burdens us.       The county clerk also advised that I need to check with you regarding the numbers required to run a) a  ballot initiative and b) a referendum.  We have limited time to file those papers as well.       Thank you for your prompt response as time is of the essence.       Sincerely,    Dana Leigh Cisneros, Esq.   The Cisneros Firm,  a Professional Law Corporation  1240 N. Lakeview Ave., Suite 125  Anaheim Hills, CA 92807  Phone:  (714) 660‐9045  Cell:    eFax: (949) 258‐9332   dana@cisnerosfirm.com  www.cisnerosfirm.com    Sent from my iPhone; please pardon any typographical errors.  4   WARNING/CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:      This e‐mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is  addressed. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt, or protected from  disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the  employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that  any review, use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you  have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies  and attachments.     The Cisneros Firm is a green company and uses every effort to engage and encourage paperless  practices. Please use email whenever possible and consider the environment before printing this email.  If you are not the intended recipient of this email please delete it. All confidentiality, rights and  privileges are expressly preserved.        On Jan 16, 2020, at 5:54 PM, Dana Cisneros <dana@cisnerosfirm.com> wrote:     Dear Mayor, Council and City Clerk,     I need to correct a statement in my email below:     My son attends a preschool in Yorba Linda, but will be returning to Anaheim Hills  Montessori.  In the excitement of registering him for Kindergarten this morning (for  Anaheim Hills Elementary) I wrote the wrong school.     I also noticed that I was relying on the original plan for 9 affordable housing units, but  later realized the developer is now proposing 12.       I apologize for those errors and any confusion it may have caused.     Sincerely,   Dana Leigh Cisneros, Esq. Managing Attorney The Cisneros Firm 1240 N. Lakeview Ave., Suite 125  Anaheim Hills, CA 92807  Phone:  (714) 676‐2035  Cell:    eFax: (949)258‐9332   dana@cisnerosfirm.com  http://cisnerosfirm.com/  WARNING/CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: 5 This e-mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt, or protected from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies and attachments. The Cisneros Firm is a green company and uses every effort to engage and encourage paperless practices. Please use email whenever possible and consider the environment before printing this email. If you are not the intended recipient of this email please delete it. All confidentiality, rights and privileges are expressly preserved.        From: Dana Cisneros   Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2020 11:43 AM  To: HarrySidhu@harrysidhu.com; hsidhu@anaheim.net  Cc: lkring@anaheim.net; jbrandman@anaheim.net; jmoreno@anaheim.net;  dbarnes@anaheim.net; sfassel@anaheim.net; toneil@anaheim.net; Robert Fabela  ANAHEIM CITY ATTORNEY <rfabela@anaheim.net>; tbass@anaheim.net  Subject: Thank you re Serrano Center meeting     Dear Mayor Sidhu,     First, I am so sorry you have to endure the horrible and racist comments from the  public.  That is truly shameful behavior.  The comments directed at Councilwoman Kring  caused me to lose my  composure and I apologize for speaking out of order; I could no  longer stand by as she was demeaned and attacked from the podium.       I wanted to personally thank you for your support during the last City Council meeting.  I  hope your fellow council members are equally committed to the general plan’s guidance  and maintaining the overall SFR, rural aesthetic of Anaheim Hills.  The attached letter  from the City in 2014 confirms the precise reason this property needs to remain zoned  as it is.     I know it was an emotionally charged evening, and I appreciate your patience as this is  so very important to all of us in the community. These are our homes, families and lives  that we are talking about.     I hope the council recognizes that not a single speaker in favor of the project is actually  from Anaheim Hills or even Anaheim for that matter as far as I am aware.     I wanted to also provide another copy of my General Plan analysis that should have  been part of the administrative record.  I was shocked that the developer’s counsel  falsely represented that the Planning Commission did not consider thoroughly the  analysis under the General Plan.  This has been part of the record since 2017 when I first  learned (about 2 months after closing on my home) that the commercial center that was  a large part of the decision to purchase my home was in jeopardy.       I also wanted to share with you the recent traffic accident that took place near the  Serrano Center. Click here and let me know if this link does not work.  This is the reason  6 all of us residents are trying to convey that the traffic study on total trips is  misleading.  Contrary to the nurse that spoke at the meeting, I do not think that my life,  or that of my son, or any person for that matter, is a sufficient exchange for  development of 9 “moderately” affordable housing units.  I certainly hope the council  will press the developer as to what “affordable” actually means – as in real  numbers.  Risking our lives so 12 unknown families could possibly afford to live on that  property, is not a risk I think the council should take.  For reference, I also attached the  HUD report for the affordable homes in Anaheim Hills – options are clearly abundant.     Finally, I also wanted it to be part of the record that I worked three jobs in law school  and actually supported my mother in my final year of law school because she had fallen  on hard economic times (when I was at the age of 25).  I attended Van Buren  Elementary School, then Bernardo Yorba Middle School, then Esperanza High School,  then UCLA (where I also worked several jobs to pay my own way through school and to  support myself) and finally Southwestern School of Law.  I am the poster child for public  education and growing up with limited means.  So are many of my friends.  Of the 7  girlfriends I maintain friendships with since middle school, only one has received  assistance in buying her home from her parents.       Two of us live in Anaheim Hills, one in Orange and three in Yorba Linda (the other one  recently moved to Idaho).  We all own our homes and we all worked extremely hard to  achieve the success we have; most of us also own our own businesses.  I am an  attorney, two are realtors, two are nurses (one that lives in Anaheim Hills and is a single  mom of 2 and her children attend Friend’s Christian private school, the other in Orange  and her children attend school in Anaheim Hills – also a single mom), one is a wedding  planner and one is a stay at home mom in Idaho.  The point is, we were able to grow up  here and buy homes in the area.  Please do not be fooled by the people cherry picked by  the developer to speak at the meeting.       It is truly offensive to have to listen to a billionaire’s attorney claim that the residents of  Anaheim Hills lack the work ethic to buy our own homes and become successful in  life.  The gentleman who prepared the EIR falsely accused us of also being racist and  discriminatory against individuals of modest means, and the public outcry was  palatable.  Not a single resident (we are not claiming the guy that made the horrible  comments throughout the night to you and the council and he was not at the planning  commission meeting) ever said anything remotely like that.  We were all focused on the  fact that there is affordable housing in the area and that this location is not suited to  condos.       Similarly, claiming that Anaheim Hills lacks diversity is ridiculous.  In looking at the  council, it looks like the United Nations; so does my street Carnegie, that the Serrano  Center backs up to.  My son is the only white kid at his current preschool and was one of  I think 2 or 3 at Anaheim Hills Elementary where he will be returning on February 1,  2020.     It should be highly telling that not a single Anaheim resident spoke in favor of this  development.  The strong opposition is documented as well in our community forums  attached to this email.     I do strongly agree that housing and affordable housing is an issue, but to eliminate the  only commercial center in that area that the residents are clearly dependent on and that  supports the community would be a great mistake.  This is simply the wrong  7 location.  Moreover, I think we all know this development has nothing to do with  providing affordable housing to people.          Sincerely,   Dana Leigh Cisneros, Esq. Managing Attorney The Cisneros Firm 1240 N. Lakeview Ave., Suite 125  Anaheim Hills, CA 92807  Phone:  (714) 676‐2035  Cell:    eFax: (949)258‐9332   dana@cisnerosfirm.com  http://cisnerosfirm.com/  WARNING/CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt, or protected from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies and attachments. The Cisneros Firm is a green company and uses every effort to engage and encourage paperless practices. Please use email whenever possible and consider the environment before printing this email. If you are not the intended recipient of this email please delete it. All confidentiality, rights and privileges are expressly preserved.        1 Public Comment From:No Toll Road 2020 Sent:Tuesday, May 19, 2020 4:21 PM To:No Toll Road 2020 Subject:Please read into the meeting record The TCA or tollroads a government agency in March of this year voted unanimously to stop looking for an extension to the underused 241 southern portion of the 241 Toll Road. This was after pursuing it for over 20 plus years and spending Hundreds of Millions of Dollars. The Board concluded in March the numerous traffic studies showed that extending the 241 would not alleviate traffic now or 50 years in the future. Based on the evidence that this road would not do anything for tax payers and would cost a fortune the board wisely voted to stop the process. However, the TCA Board is not ready to stop the excessive spending and want to be able to study it a third time in the future, at what point will this failed agency call it a day? It is important to realize that the TCA collects development fees which makes the our daily life cost more than it should, this is in addition to the TOLLS and penalties. Please think about your City looking into pulling out the the Joint Power Agreement with the TCA and give tax payers a break. I am not sure if you saw the article but this is just one example of the waste and abuse at the TCA. The article is tittled While you sit in traffic, these tollway consultants charge the public $185 an hour for reading news, a consultant was billing for 26 hours in a day and raked in $230,000 for reading the news. The TCA has many consultants and a army of lobbyists on its payroll - for what no one is certain since they have nothing new to say. https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-toll-road-consultants-20190311-story.html 1 Public Comment From:Denise Colber Sent:Tuesday, May 19, 2020 4:20 PM Subject:Public Comments for the council meeting Please read at the Public comments for the meeting. Dear City Council, I am writing to bring to your attention a serious fiscal crisis that may be brewing within the TCA. The TCA – or Toll Roads is a government agency that is also known as the Foothill Eastern and San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor Agencies. Since you may have Councilmembers sitting on the board, I am hopefully not telling you something at least some of you don’t already know. TCA ridership is down and will be using is facing a potential revenue crisis that could ultimately cause a collapse of the carefully arranged deck of cards that forms its enormous long term debt burden. The TCA has been feeding a growing debt machine for decades. A total long term debt of $2.9 billion at completion of the two toll roads in 1998 has somehow grown to $4.9 billion today, despite 20 years of principal and interest payments. The TCA has never had sufficient revenue to handle its enormous debt, but rather than admitting that and allowing another agency to over, somehow your directors and others endorsed repeated refinancing’s with capital appreciation bonds, meaning that unpaid interest has been added to the principal each year so that outstanding debt grows rather than diminishes. At this point, it will take another $11 billion before these toll roads are “freeways”- if ever. And worse, payoff dates have been extended from 2033 and 2040 San Joaquin to 2050 and 2053 for Foothill. Our grandchildren’s children may be the first to benefit from decades of tolls and developer impact fees – fees and taxes that will have been paid by your constituents either as tolls or increases in the costs of housing and doing business in the County for over half a century. All of this for two roads that we will have paid for several times over. Now, with the impact of the covid-19 pandemic, these grossly over-leveraged agencies are poised to finally pay the piper. It is doubtful that revenue will be sufficient to cover debt covenants. While there are some unrestricted assets, these may have to be sold at a loss and may not be sufficient to carry the agencies through an extended period of economic downturn. At the same time, TCA has recently placed 5 of its board members on the OCTA board and is poised to extend its reach outside its original scope, now wanting to build un-tolled roads for OCTA, and no doubt, get the debt ball rolling all over again. Please stop this. Enough is enough. A comprehensive State audit of TCA’s huge debt load, its bloated expenses and unsustainable financial prospects is long overdue. Taxpayers need you to be responsible and protect us from an agency that has exploded beyond its original intent, burdening taxpayers with unending fees and tolls to feed a ravenous debt machine. I strongly urge your TCA representatives to take a good look at these agencies and take action now to stop this while we still can. TCA needs to focus on its original charter – stop expanding, pay off its debt, and go out of business as soon as possible. Thank you. Marie S. 1 Public Comment From:Michelle Schumacher Sent:Monday, May 18, 2020 11:32 PM To:Michelle Schumacher Subject:Public Comments for the Next Meeting - please read into the record & share the chart - thank you Attachments:fiscal comparison 2014-2019 .xlsx The TCA – the Toll Roads - the Transportation Corridor Agency a Government Agency with Broken Agreements, Broken Trust and over all a Financial Boondoggle. Tax Payers Deserve Better The 73 toll road was supposed to be free in 30 years, instead billions of dollars are still owed and the TCA is now automatically increasing tolls 2% a year, continuing to drive up housing costs and the cost to do business in Orange County. The TCA is a Joint Powers Agreement a government agency that was trusted to build the toll roads, pay down the bonds then go away. Instead the least amount of the bond debt is being paid due to the continuous TCA refinances, not only is the bond DEBT growing in the wrong direction but also pushing out the years the toll roads will have to be tolled before being made free as was thier initial promise. We will have paid for the roads 5 times by the time they are ever free to the public. The TCA wastes millions of dollars on consultants and an army of lobbyist, many TCA employees make over $300,000 a year, with benefits and pensions that barely anyone in the public sector receive. They sponsor many events from golf to galas, enjoy international travel. They even spent $35,000 dollars on ONE dinner. They are not good stewards of our hard earned money. The Joint Power Agreement for the TCA clearly states that Development Fees are to be reviewed annually by the Board of Directors, this is not being done, instead they are automatically increased without required Board review or approval. The Board of Directors has abdicated its power to lobbyists. The Foothill TCA has been collecting Development Fees and has not built anything in over 20 years, with no routes approved on the legislative maps, why are development fees still being collected? Development Fees are a silent tax and are driving up the costs of housing and business in the County. This needs to stop, we have OCTA and Caltrans, we do not need a duplicative redundant agency fleecing residents in Orange County. In March 2020 the TCA’s Board of Directors UNANIMOUSLY voted to stop the South Orange County Traffic Relief Effort which they threw hundreds of millions of dollars at to try and extend the Southern most portion of the 241 which does not get many cars per 2 day, a complete waste of money and boondoggle. While taxpayers were so thankful of this vote to STOP the process, only 2 months later they are back to thier old tricks and trying to oppose legislation that would legitimize thier unanimous vote 2 months ago. The TCA is speaking out of both sides of thier mouth as usual and sadly tax payers are the ones getting the short end of the stick while consultants and lobbyists bask in the money. In 2014 the OC Grand Jury issued a solvency warning to the TCA and the County for thier debt level, the Pacific Research Institute found that the TCA’s business model was probably not sustainable from the start and the TCA in 2008 asked for a 1.1 Billion dollar bailout, with times getting tough potentially in the future it is time Orange County cuts the fat. The TCA needs to go, it is a good time for you to see if it is still prudent to be a member City of the TCA - it takes 8 cities to pull out. Attached is a current TCA debt snap shot - please note the time period is of the last TCA CEO’s reign - he was making more than the President of the USA to manage less than 90 people. Please stand up for Orange County tax payers and stop the development fees and the untenable future of the TCA, it is time to get smart. FE ‐ T C A FE ‐ C T A SJ H ‐ T C A SJ H ‐ T C A B o t h   A g e n c i e s   B o t h   A g e n c i e s   20 1 4 20 1 9 20 1 4 20 1 9 20 1 4 2019 To t a l   l o n g   t e r m   d e b t   * $2 , 4 2 3 , 5 1 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 2 , 4 6 7 , 8 2 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 2 , 1 4 8 , 6 0 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 2 , 4 2 3 , 6 9 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 4 , 5 7 2 , 1 2 4 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 4 , 8 9 1 , 5 1 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 To t a l   d e b t   s e r v i c e   t o   m a t u r i t y   $7 , 0 7 3 , 0 1 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 6 , 2 9 7 , 0 1 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 4 , 6 0 8 , 9 3 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 4 , 8 7 3 , 8 9 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $1 1 , 6 8 1 , 9 4 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 1 1 , 1 7 0 , 9 1 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Ye a r   o f   m a t u r i t y   20 5 3 20 5 3 20 4 2 20 5 0 To t a l   t o l l   r e v e n u e   $1 3 8 , 9 2 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 1 9 3 , 7 9 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 1 2 9 , 0 1 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 1 9 1 , 4 7 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 2 6 7 , 9 3 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 3 8 5 , 2 6 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 De v e l o p m e n t   I m p a c t   F e e s   ( D I F s ) $1 9 , 8 1 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 1 4 , 8 6 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 3 , 8 0 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 7 , 4 6 4 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 2 3 , 6 2 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 2 2 , 3 2 4 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Ot h e r   $4 1 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $7 3 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $0 . 0 0 $4 1 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 7 3 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 To t a l   R e v e n u e   $1 5 9 , 1 4 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 2 0 9 , 3 8 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 1 3 2 , 9 1 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 1 9 8 , 9 4 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 2 9 2 , 0 6 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 4 0 8 , 3 2 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Op e r a t i n g   E x p e n s e s   ‐$ 2 4 , 0 6 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ‐ $ 3 1 , 8 3 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ‐ $ 1 3 , 8 5 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ‐ $ 2 4 , 8 0 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ‐ $ 3 7 , 9 2 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ‐ $ 5 6 , 6 3 4 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 In t e r e s t   e x p e n s e ‐$ 1 4 0 , 6 2 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ‐ $ 1 4 4 , 0 0 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ‐ $ 1 1 5 , 4 4 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ‐ $ 1 2 2 , 0 1 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ‐ $ 2 5 6 , 0 6 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ‐ $ 2 6 6 , 0 1 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Ot h e r   i n c o m e / ( e x p e n s e ) ‐$ 1 5 , 0 7 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $8 , 4 5 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $3 , 2 7 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $2 , 3 9 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ‐$ 1 1 , 7 9 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 1 0 , 8 4 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Ne t   i n c o m e / ( l o s s ) ‐$ 2 0 , 6 1 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 4 1 , 9 9 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 6 , 8 8 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 5 4 , 5 1 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ‐ $ 1 3 , 7 2 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 9 6 , 5 1 6 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Ca s h   &   e q u i v a l e n t s   $6 4 7 , 3 3 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 7 7 7 , 5 6 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 3 9 4 , 4 8 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 6 9 4 , 9 5 4 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 1 , 0 4 1 , 8 1 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 1 , 4 7 2 , 5 1 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Un r e s t r i c t e d   p o r t i o n   $1 4 9 , 6 3 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 4 1 5 , 7 7 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 2 3 , 6 5 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 2 2 4 , 0 3 7 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 1 7 3 , 2 8 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 $ 6 3 9 , 8 1 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Ne t   p o s i t i o n   ‐$ 1 , 4 5 3 , 7 0 1 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # ‐ $ 1 , 7 7 3 , 5 4 8 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ‐ $ 1 , 6 9 4 , 5 3 3 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ‐ $ 3 , 2 2 7 , 2 4 9 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 ‐ $ 3 , 2 3 2 , 3 3 2 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 *  i n c l u d e s   s h o r t   t e r m   p o r t i o n   o f   l o n g   t e r m   d e b t   Ob s e r v a t i o n s : 1.   I n   t h e   5   y e a r   p e r i o d ,   l o n g   t e r m   d e b t   a c t u a l l y   i n c r e a s e d   b y   $ 3 1 9   m i l l i o n   o r   7 % ,   d e s p i t e   p r i n c i p a l   r e p a y m e n t s   ‐   d u e   t o   i n t e r e s t   a c c r e t i o n .   2.   T o t a l   d e b t   s e r v i c e   t o   m a t u r i t y   o n   f i r s t   g l a n c e   i m p r o v e d   b y     $ 5 1 1   m i l l i o n ,   u n t i l   w e     r e a l i z e   t h a t   t h e   m a t u r i t y   d a t e   f o r          S J H T C A   m o v e d   o u t   t o   2 0 5 0   ‐   a n o t h e r   8   y e a r s   o f   p a y i n g   t o l l s ,   p e n a l t i e s   a n d   D e v e l o p m e n t   I m p a c t   F e e s .   3.   T o l l   r e v e n u e   i n c r e a s e d   4 4 %   a n d   t o t a l   r e v e n u e   b y   4 0 %   b u t   t h e   t o t a l   n e t   p o s i t i o n   o f   t h e   t w o   a g e n c i e s   i s   a l m o s t   t h e   s a m e   ( d o w n   $ 5 M ) 4.   O p e r a t i n g   e x p e n s e s     i n c r e a s e d   4 9 %   d u r i n g   t h e   p e r i o d   .   P r o f e s s i o n a l   f e e s   i n c r e a s e d   8   ‐ f o l d   ( $ 9 3 3 K   t o   $ 7 . 3   m i l l i o n ) 5.   S a l a r i e s   i n c r e a s e d   4 9 %   a s   w e l l ,   f r o m   $ 5 . 9   m i l l i o n   t o   $ 8 . 9   m i l l i o n .     6.   B o t t o m   l i n e   ‐   r e v e n u e   i s   u p   b u t   t h e y ' r e   s p e n d i n g   m o s t   o f   i t   a n d   m a k i n g   l i t t l e   i m p a c t   o n   n e t   p o s i t i o n . 7.   O n e   b r i g h t   s p o t   ‐   c a s h   a n d   e q u i v l e n t s   a r e   u p   $ 4 3 1   m i l l i o n ,   b u t   a   g r e a t e r   p o r t i o n   i s   r e s t r i c t e d   b y   b o n d h o l d e r s .        T h e   $ 6 4 0   m i l l i o n   i n   u n r e s t r i c t e d   c a s h   w i l l   b u y   s o m e   t i m e ,   b u t   m a n y   i n v e s t m e n t s   m a y   h a v e   t o   b e   s o l d   a t   a   l o s s   t o   m e e t   d e b t   o b l i g a t i o n s .     8.   W i t h   r e v e n u e   d o w n   s i g n i f i c a n t l y   ‐   6 0   ‐   7 0 %   i n   M a r c h ,   t h e   r e v e n u e   i m p a c t   w i l l   l i k e l y   p u s h   T C A   o u t   o f   c o m p l i a n c e   w i t h   d e b t   c o v e n a n t s . So u r c e :   A l l   d a t a   d e r i v e d   f r o m   a u d i t e d   f i n a n c i a l   s t a t e m e n t s   o f   F E T C A   a n d   S J H T C A   a s   p u b l i s h e d   i n   C o m p r e h e n s i v e   A n n u a l   F i n a n c i a l   R e p o r t s FI S C A L     C O M P A R I S O N   2 0 1 4 ‐ 2 0 1 9 Mi c h a e l   K r a m a n ,   C E O   o f   t h e   T C A   s t a r t e d   w i t h   t h e   T C A   i n   2 0 1 4   a n d   e n d e d   i n   2 0 2 0     1 Public Comment From:Dana Cisneros <dana@cisnerosfirm.com> Sent:Monday, May 18, 2020 12:09 PM To:Theresa Bass Cc:Lucille Kring; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Denise Barnes; 'sfassel@anaheim.net'; Trevor O'Neil; Robert Fabela; Cynthia Ward; Public Comment; Council; City Manager Subject:Cannabis Activities in Anaheim - Banking and Cash Management Solutions (FINRA compliant) Importance:High Dear Anaheim City Council,    One of the issues presented during the last council meeting was access to banking and related services, including use of  credit cards.    I wanted to introduce you to Michelle Sullivan at DAMA Financial. Dama is an account servicing company that assists  cannabis operators with their banking needs and has a cashless payment solution for retailers to use so consumers can  make purchases without cash at the dispensary (most operators are violating the rules by using MCC codes that do not  transparently disclose that they are processing payments for the sale of cannabis).  After vetting half a dozen different  institutions over the last two years, Dama is the only company I recommend to my clients.  Michelle is the Chief Risk  Officer and Chief Operating Officer at Dama and is happy to discuss cannabis banking, cash deliveries and deposits and  whatever else finance related.  Richie Thorne of Dama Financial is also in charge of their regulatory division; prior to  joining Dama, Mr. Thorne was with the Federal Reserve for almost 20 years.    Sincerely, Dana Leigh Cisneros, Esq. The Cisneros Firm 1240 N. Lakeview Ave., Suite 125  Anaheim Hills, CA 92807  Phone: (714) 660-9045  Cell: eFax: (949) 258-9332 dana@cisnerosfirm.com   www.cisnerosfirm.com WARNING/CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt, or protected from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies and attachments. The Cisneros Firm is a green company and uses every effort to engage and encourage paperless practices. Please use email whenever possible and consider the environment before printing this email. If you are not the intended recipient of this email please delete it. All confidentiality, rights and privileges are expressly preserved.  2   From: Dana Cisneros   Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 10:30 AM  To: tbass@anaheim.net  Cc: lkring@anaheim.net; jbrandman@anaheim.net; jmoreno@anaheim.net; dbarnes@anaheim.net;  sfassel@anaheim.net; toneil@anaheim.net; HarrySidhu@harrysidhu.com; Robert Fabela ANAHEIM CITY ATTORNEY  <rfabela@anaheim.net>; hsidhu@anaheim.net  Subject: Re: Thank you re Serrano Center meeting    Dear Ms. Bass,    I am following up on my prior public records requests from early January and also to inquire about the process of  requesting a rehearing, ballot initiatives and referenda.  I have limited time to file as I understand it.      The council was flatly lied to last night and we, the residents, had no opportunity to comment on the revised CUP,  specifically that set backs be required and additional soils reports since our homes rely on support from the land below  (the Center), not just from the street.  Four feet is ridiculous.  Removing soil that supports our properties is ridiculous,  especially since we have pools. One tenant was sitting next to me and shared that he pays $1.89 a square foot.  The  entire motion last night was premised on this not being a viable center at $1.35 a square foot and that simply wasn’t  true.  The developer confessed that at $1.80 it would be viable.  They are currently fetching more than that and I think  the council should have the true facts before them and reconsider.  We also would like them to consider permitting the  parking on the surrounding streets since the new residences will have overflow that burdens us.      The county clerk also advised that I need to check with you regarding the numbers required to run a) a ballot initiative  and b) a referendum.  We have limited time to file those papers as well.      Thank you for your prompt response as time is of the essence.      Sincerely,    Dana Leigh Cisneros, Esq.   The Cisneros Firm,  a Professional Law Corporation  1240 N. Lakeview Ave., Suite 125  Anaheim Hills, CA 92807  Phone:  (714) 660‐9045  Cell:    eFax: (949) 258‐9332   dana@cisnerosfirm.com  www.cisnerosfirm.com    Sent from my iPhone; please pardon any typographical errors.    WARNING/CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:      This e‐mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. It  may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt, or protected from disclosure under applicable law.  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the  3 intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of this  communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender  immediately and destroy all copies and attachments.     The Cisneros Firm is a green company and uses every effort to engage and encourage paperless practices. Please use  email whenever possible and consider the environment before printing this email. If you are not the intended recipient  of this email please delete it. All confidentiality, rights and privileges are expressly preserved.      On Jan 16, 2020, at 5:54 PM, Dana Cisneros <dana@cisnerosfirm.com> wrote:     Dear Mayor, Council and City Clerk,     I need to correct a statement in my email below:     My son attends a preschool in Yorba Linda, but will be returning to Anaheim Hills Montessori.  In the  excitement of registering him for Kindergarten this morning (for Anaheim Hills Elementary) I wrote the  wrong school.     I also noticed that I was relying on the original plan for 9 affordable housing units, but later realized the  developer is now proposing 12.       I apologize for those errors and any confusion it may have caused.     Sincerely,   Dana Leigh Cisneros, Esq. Managing Attorney The Cisneros Firm 1240 N. Lakeview Ave., Suite 125  Anaheim Hills, CA 92807  Phone:  (714) 676‐2035  Cell:    eFax: (949)258‐9332   dana@cisnerosfirm.com  http://cisnerosfirm.com/  WARNING/CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt, or protected from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies and attachments. The Cisneros Firm is a green company and uses every effort to engage and encourage paperless 4 practices. Please use email whenever possible and consider the environment before printing this email. If you are not the intended recipient of this email please delete it. All confidentiality, rights and privileges are expressly preserved.        From: Dana Cisneros   Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2020 11:43 AM  To: HarrySidhu@harrysidhu.com; hsidhu@anaheim.net  Cc: lkring@anaheim.net; jbrandman@anaheim.net; jmoreno@anaheim.net; dbarnes@anaheim.net;  sfassel@anaheim.net; toneil@anaheim.net; Robert Fabela ANAHEIM CITY ATTORNEY  <rfabela@anaheim.net>; tbass@anaheim.net  Subject: Thank you re Serrano Center meeting     Dear Mayor Sidhu,     First, I am so sorry you have to endure the horrible and racist comments from the public.  That is truly  shameful behavior.  The comments directed at Councilwoman Kring caused me to lose my  composure  and I apologize for speaking out of order; I could no longer stand by as she was demeaned and attacked  from the podium.       I wanted to personally thank you for your support during the last City Council meeting.  I hope your  fellow council members are equally committed to the general plan’s guidance and maintaining the  overall SFR, rural aesthetic of Anaheim Hills.  The attached letter from the City in 2014 confirms the  precise reason this property needs to remain zoned as it is.     I know it was an emotionally charged evening, and I appreciate your patience as this is so very important  to all of us in the community. These are our homes, families and lives that we are talking about.     I hope the council recognizes that not a single speaker in favor of the project is actually from Anaheim  Hills or even Anaheim for that matter as far as I am aware.     I wanted to also provide another copy of my General Plan analysis that should have been part of the  administrative record.  I was shocked that the developer’s counsel falsely represented that the Planning  Commission did not consider thoroughly the analysis under the General Plan.  This has been part of the  record since 2017 when I first learned (about 2 months after closing on my home) that the commercial  center that was a large part of the decision to purchase my home was in jeopardy.       I also wanted to share with you the recent traffic accident that took place near the Serrano Center. Click  here and let me know if this link does not work.  This is the reason all of us residents are trying to convey  that the traffic study on total trips is misleading.  Contrary to the nurse that spoke at the meeting, I do  not think that my life, or that of my son, or any person for that matter, is a sufficient exchange for  development of 9 “moderately” affordable housing units.  I certainly hope the council will press the  developer as to what “affordable” actually means – as in real numbers.  Risking our lives so 12 unknown  families could possibly afford to live on that property, is not a risk I think the council should take.  For  reference, I also attached the HUD report for the affordable homes in Anaheim Hills – options are clearly  abundant.     Finally, I also wanted it to be part of the record that I worked three jobs in law school and actually  supported my mother in my final year of law school because she had fallen on hard economic times  (when I was at the age of 25).  I attended Van Buren Elementary School, then Bernardo Yorba Middle  School, then Esperanza High School, then UCLA (where I also worked several jobs to pay my own way  5 through school and to support myself) and finally Southwestern School of Law.  I am the poster child for  public education and growing up with limited means.  So are many of my friends.  Of the 7 girlfriends I  maintain friendships with since middle school, only one has received assistance in buying her home from  her parents.       Two of us live in Anaheim Hills, one in Orange and three in Yorba Linda (the other one recently moved to  Idaho).  We all own our homes and we all worked extremely hard to achieve the success we have; most  of us also own our own businesses.  I am an attorney, two are realtors, two are nurses (one that lives in  Anaheim Hills and is a single mom of 2 and her children attend Friend’s Christian private school, the  other in Orange and her children attend school in Anaheim Hills – also a single mom), one is a wedding  planner and one is a stay at home mom in Idaho.  The point is, we were able to grow up here and buy  homes in the area.  Please do not be fooled by the people cherry picked by the developer to speak at  the meeting.       It is truly offensive to have to listen to a billionaire’s attorney claim that the residents of Anaheim Hills  lack the work ethic to buy our own homes and become successful in life.  The gentleman who prepared  the EIR falsely accused us of also being racist and discriminatory against individuals of modest means,  and the public outcry was palatable.  Not a single resident (we are not claiming the guy that made the  horrible comments throughout the night to you and the council and he was not at the planning  commission meeting) ever said anything remotely like that.  We were all focused on the fact that there  is affordable housing in the area and that this location is not suited to condos.       Similarly, claiming that Anaheim Hills lacks diversity is ridiculous.  In looking at the council, it looks like  the United Nations; so does my street Carnegie, that the Serrano Center backs up to.  My son is the only  white kid at his current preschool and was one of I think 2 or 3 at Anaheim Hills Elementary where he  will be returning on February 1, 2020.     It should be highly telling that not a single Anaheim resident spoke in favor of this development.  The  strong opposition is documented as well in our community forums attached to this email.     I do strongly agree that housing and affordable housing is an issue, but to eliminate the only commercial  center in that area that the residents are clearly dependent on and that supports the community would  be a great mistake.  This is simply the wrong location.  Moreover, I think we all know this development  has nothing to do with providing affordable housing to people.          Sincerely,   Dana Leigh Cisneros, Esq. Managing Attorney The Cisneros Firm 1240 N. Lakeview Ave., Suite 125  Anaheim Hills, CA 92807  Phone:  (714) 676‐2035  Cell:    eFax: (949)258‐9332   dana@cisnerosfirm.com  http://cisnerosfirm.com/  6 WARNING/CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt, or protected from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies and attachments. The Cisneros Firm is a green company and uses every effort to engage and encourage paperless practices. Please use email whenever possible and consider the environment before printing this email. If you are not the intended recipient of this email please delete it. All confidentiality, rights and privileges are expressly preserved.        1 Public Comment From:Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com> Sent:Sunday, May 17, 2020 1:46 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Jose Moreno; Jordan Brandman; Denise Barnes; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil; Stephen Faessel Cc:Annie Mezzacappa; Justin Glover; Helen Myers; Cynthia Ward; Salvador Figueroa; Samantha Saenz; Amanda Edinger; Nam Bartash; Sarah Bartczak; Marisol Ramirez; Gregory Garcia; Sandra Sagert; Jorge Cisneros; Public Comment Subject:Re: Cannabis-Explosion in LA https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/05/16/los-angeles-downtown-explosion- firefighters/5208200002/ Have a great day, Tamara Jimenez Community Relations Manager Lighthouse CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. On May 15, 2020, at 1:39 PM, Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com> wrote: Good afternoon,  Here is another link with good, legitimate information.    https://www.cdc.gov/marijuana/health‐effects.html  Health Effects | Marijuana | CDC Marijuana is the most commonly used illegal drug in the United States, with 37.6 million users in the past year, 1 and marijuana use may have a wide range of health effects on the body and brain. Click on the sections below to learn more about how marijuana use can affect your health. About 1 in 10 marijuana users will become addicted. www.cdc.gov 2   Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.    From: Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com>  Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 9:38 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Jordan  Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring  <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel  <SFaessel@anaheim.net>  Cc: Annie Mezzacappa <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>; Justin Glover <JGlover@anaheim.net>; Helen  Myers <HMyers@anaheim.net>; Cynthia Ward <CWard@anaheim.net>; Salvador Figueroa  <SFigueroa@anaheim.net>; Samantha Saenz <SSaenz@anaheim.net>; Amanda Edinger  <AEdinger@anaheim.net>; Nam Bartash <NBartash@anaheim.net>; Sarah Bartczak  <SBartczak@anaheim.net>; maramirez@anaheim.net <maramirez@anaheim.net>; Gregory Garcia  <GGarcia@anaheim.net>; Sandra Sagert <SSagert@anaheim.net>; Jorge Cisneros  <JCisneros@anaheim.net>; publiccomment@anaheim.net <publiccomment@anaheim.net>  Subject: Cannabis‐the facts, not info from lobbyists Good evening,  Although I understand some of you will not change your vote by June 9th and I do not believe you will  even take the time to go to the follow links and read the information, I do know some of you will. I hope  those of you who are waivering in how to vote will take a serious look at the links provided and  everything available on the site. Please look at the facts provided by HIDTA, DEA, and the Surgeon  General. I would think that as responsible leaders you would hold their opinions in high regard.  https://rmhidta.org/files/D2DF/FINAL‐Volume6.pdf  https://www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/reports‐and‐publications/addiction‐and‐substance‐ misuse/advisory‐on‐marijuana‐use‐and‐developing‐brain/index.html  https://www.thenmi.org/surgeon‐general‐no‐such‐thing‐as‐medical‐marijuana/      3 Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.    From: Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com>  Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 4:09 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Jordan  Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring  <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel  <SFaessel@anaheim.net>  Cc: publiccomments@anaheim.net <publiccomments@anaheim.net>; Annie Mezzacappa  <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>; Justin Glover <JGlover@anaheim.net>; Helen Myers  <HMyers@anaheim.net>; Cynthia Ward <CWard@anaheim.net>; Salvador Figueroa  <SFigueroa@anaheim.net>; Samantha Saenz <SSaenz@anaheim.net>; Amanda Edinger  <AEdinger@anaheim.net>; Nam Bartash <NBartash@anaheim.net>; Sarah Bartczak  <SBartczak@anaheim.net>; maramirez@anaheim.net <maramirez@anaheim.net>  Subject: Re: NO on Item #23 Hello,  Sorry for the additional note but I also was wondering why there is not one single report from  ANY city department that has been battling the ordinance over the past 16 years? I do not  understand why  these reports would not be included. Is there anyone that can offer an  explanation? And have you all seen the packaging that is used at the dispensaries? Are you  aware that glass pipe and GLASS SYRINGES are sold among every other type of drug  paraphernalia you could possibly think of? These are the types of things that should be  considered among many others.     Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless 4 otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.    From: Tamara Jimenez  Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 1:28 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Jordan  Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring  <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel  <SFaessel@anaheim.net>  Cc: publiccomments@anaheim.net <publiccomments@anaheim.net>  Subject: NO on Item #23 Good afternoon,  I find it quite concerning that to my knowledge no one in the addiction industry, especially right here in  Anaheim was consulted regarding the cannabis item. The fact that you would consider an item as  serious as this without a comprehensive study is unbelievably irresponsible. Not one treatment center  or expert was contacted, nor was any governmental agency that deals with addiction on this matter.  Why would you even consider voting on an item like this until a comprehensive study is completed and  have fully exhausted all aspects of a decision like this? Besides the simple fact that a decision like this  goes completely against 2 major initiatives that the City of Anaheim has poured hundreds of thousands  of dollars into. The first being the Drug Free Anaheim Program which has placed almost 600 addicts into  treatment and the second being the effort in addressing homelessness. Where are the studies on the  effect of marijuana in these two areas? Let’s also not forget about our children. How shall we continue  to teach our children to not use drugs and alcohol if passing an item such as this? Anaheim also has a  gang problem if you are unaware. The drug dealers and gang members will go to the dispensaries. The  problems will get worse. Meet with HIDTA in Colorado. This item is, even if passed, should not be passed  without some basic common sense, public safety regulations . Let us also remember to be realistic in the  fact that these businesses still cannot legally bank their money, nor are they federally legal. So if you  think you will get you monies worth out of them, whatever that looks like‐not sure how you can ethically  put a dollar amount of people’s lives and our children’s values, you won’t. They will never report what  they actually make, they will cause more problems with law enforcement, the clientele they attract is  not typically law abiding citizens, and if you believe any different you are listening to the lobbyists as  opposed to the governmental agencies who have to deal with the fall out. Have any of you met with or  spoken with HIDTA in Colorado? Do you know what that is? Have you met with the DEA? Or the ONDCP?  The FDA?  If you have not met with any of these agencies and received in depth studies in this area you  should in no way be voting on an item like this as it would be incredibly irresponsible and dangerous.  AND TO PUT THIS IN THE IN THE HANDS OF THE PUBLIC BY BALLOT MEASURE WITHOUT THE PROPER  RESEARCH IS JUST WRONG!!!        Have a beautiful day,  5 Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.  1 Public Comment From:Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com> Sent:Friday, May 15, 2020 1:40 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Jose Moreno; Jordan Brandman; Denise Barnes; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil; Stephen Faessel Cc:Annie Mezzacappa; Justin Glover; Helen Myers; Cynthia Ward; Salvador Figueroa; Samantha Saenz; Amanda Edinger; Nam Bartash; Sarah Bartczak; Marisol Ramirez; Gregory Garcia; Sandra Sagert; Jorge Cisneros; Public Comment Subject:Re: Cannabis-CDC Good afternoon,  Here is another link with good, legitimate information.    https://www.cdc.gov/marijuana/health‐effects.html  Health Effects | Marijuana | CDC Marijuana is the most commonly used illegal drug in the United States, with 37.6 million users in the past year, 1 and marijuana use may have a wide range of health effects on the body and brain. Click on the sections below to learn more about how marijuana use can affect your health. About 1 in 10 marijuana users will become addicted. www.cdc.gov   Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.    From: Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com>  Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2020 9:38 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor  O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>  2 Cc: Annie Mezzacappa <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>; Justin Glover <JGlover@anaheim.net>; Helen Myers  <HMyers@anaheim.net>; Cynthia Ward <CWard@anaheim.net>; Salvador Figueroa <SFigueroa@anaheim.net>;  Samantha Saenz <SSaenz@anaheim.net>; Amanda Edinger <AEdinger@anaheim.net>; Nam Bartash  <NBartash@anaheim.net>; Sarah Bartczak <SBartczak@anaheim.net>; maramirez@anaheim.net  <maramirez@anaheim.net>; Gregory Garcia <GGarcia@anaheim.net>; Sandra Sagert <SSagert@anaheim.net>; Jorge  Cisneros <JCisneros@anaheim.net>; publiccomment@anaheim.net <publiccomment@anaheim.net>  Subject: Cannabis‐the facts, not info from lobbyists Good evening,  Although I understand some of you will not change your vote by June 9th and I do not believe you will even take the  time to go to the follow links and read the information, I do know some of you will. I hope those of you who are  waivering in how to vote will take a serious look at the links provided and everything available on the site. Please look at  the facts provided by HIDTA, DEA, and the Surgeon General. I would think that as responsible leaders you would hold  their opinions in high regard.  https://rmhidta.org/files/D2DF/FINAL‐Volume6.pdf  https://www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/reports‐and‐publications/addiction‐and‐substance‐misuse/advisory‐on‐ marijuana‐use‐and‐developing‐brain/index.html  https://www.thenmi.org/surgeon‐general‐no‐such‐thing‐as‐medical‐marijuana/      Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.    From: Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com>  Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 4:09 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor  O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>  Cc: publiccomments@anaheim.net <publiccomments@anaheim.net>; Annie Mezzacappa  <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>; Justin Glover <JGlover@anaheim.net>; Helen Myers <HMyers@anaheim.net>; Cynthia  Ward <CWard@anaheim.net>; Salvador Figueroa <SFigueroa@anaheim.net>; Samantha Saenz <SSaenz@anaheim.net>;  Amanda Edinger <AEdinger@anaheim.net>; Nam Bartash <NBartash@anaheim.net>; Sarah Bartczak  3 <SBartczak@anaheim.net>; maramirez@anaheim.net <maramirez@anaheim.net>  Subject: Re: NO on Item #23 Hello,  Sorry for the additional note but I also was wondering why there is not one single report from ANY city  department that has been battling the ordinance over the past 16 years? I do not understand why  these  reports would not be included. Is there anyone that can offer an explanation? And have you all seen the  packaging that is used at the dispensaries? Are you aware that glass pipe and GLASS SYRINGES are sold among  every other type of drug paraphernalia you could possibly think of? These are the types of things that should  be considered among many others.     Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.    From: Tamara Jimenez  Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 1:28 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor  O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>  Cc: publiccomments@anaheim.net <publiccomments@anaheim.net>  Subject: NO on Item #23 Good afternoon,  I find it quite concerning that to my knowledge no one in the addiction industry, especially right here in Anaheim was  consulted regarding the cannabis item. The fact that you would consider an item as serious as this without a  comprehensive study is unbelievably irresponsible. Not one treatment center or expert was contacted, nor was any  governmental agency that deals with addiction on this matter. Why would you even consider voting on an item like this  until a comprehensive study is completed and have fully exhausted all aspects of a decision like this? Besides the simple  fact that a decision like this goes completely against 2 major initiatives that the City of Anaheim has poured hundreds of  thousands of dollars into. The first being the Drug Free Anaheim Program which has placed almost 600 addicts into  treatment and the second being the effort in addressing homelessness. Where are the studies on the effect of marijuana  in these two areas? Let’s also not forget about our children. How shall we continue to teach our children to not use  drugs and alcohol if passing an item such as this? Anaheim also has a gang problem if you are unaware. The drug dealers  and gang members will go to the dispensaries. The problems will get worse. Meet with HIDTA in Colorado. This item is,  even if passed, should not be passed without some basic common sense, public safety regulations . Let us also  4 remember to be realistic in the fact that these businesses still cannot legally bank their money, nor are they federally  legal. So if you think you will get you monies worth out of them, whatever that looks like‐not sure how you can ethically  put a dollar amount of people’s lives and our children’s values, you won’t. They will never report what they actually  make, they will cause more problems with law enforcement, the clientele they attract is not typically law abiding  citizens, and if you believe any different you are listening to the lobbyists as opposed to the governmental agencies who  have to deal with the fall out. Have any of you met with or spoken with HIDTA in Colorado? Do you know what that is?  Have you met with the DEA? Or the ONDCP? The FDA?  If you have not met with any of these agencies and received in  depth studies in this area you should in no way be voting on an item like this as it would be incredibly irresponsible and  dangerous. AND TO PUT THIS IN THE IN THE HANDS OF THE PUBLIC BY BALLOT MEASURE WITHOUT THE PROPER  RESEARCH IS JUST WRONG!!!        Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.  1 Public Comment From:Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com> Sent:Thursday, May 14, 2020 9:38 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Jose Moreno; Jordan Brandman; Denise Barnes; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil; Stephen Faessel Cc:Annie Mezzacappa; Justin Glover; Helen Myers; Cynthia Ward; Salvador Figueroa; Samantha Saenz; Amanda Edinger; Nam Bartash; Sarah Bartczak; Marisol Ramirez; Gregory Garcia; Sandra Sagert; Jorge Cisneros; Public Comment Subject:Cannabis-the facts, not info from lobbyists Good evening,  Although I understand some of you will not change your vote by June 9th and I do not believe you will even take the  time to go to the follow links and read the information, I do know some of you will. I hope those of you who are  waivering in how to vote will take a serious look at the links provided and everything available on the site. Please look at  the facts provided by HIDTA, DEA, and the Surgeon General. I would think that as responsible leaders you would hold  their opinions in high regard.  https://rmhidta.org/files/D2DF/FINAL‐Volume6.pdf  https://www.hhs.gov/surgeongeneral/reports‐and‐publications/addiction‐and‐substance‐misuse/advisory‐on‐ marijuana‐use‐and‐developing‐brain/index.html  https://www.thenmi.org/surgeon‐general‐no‐such‐thing‐as‐medical‐marijuana/      Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.    From: Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com>  Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 4:09 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor  O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>  2 Cc: publiccomments@anaheim.net <publiccomments@anaheim.net>; Annie Mezzacappa  <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>; Justin Glover <JGlover@anaheim.net>; Helen Myers <HMyers@anaheim.net>; Cynthia  Ward <CWard@anaheim.net>; Salvador Figueroa <SFigueroa@anaheim.net>; Samantha Saenz <SSaenz@anaheim.net>;  Amanda Edinger <AEdinger@anaheim.net>; Nam Bartash <NBartash@anaheim.net>; Sarah Bartczak  <SBartczak@anaheim.net>; maramirez@anaheim.net <maramirez@anaheim.net>  Subject: Re: NO on Item #23 Hello,  Sorry for the additional note but I also was wondering why there is not one single report from ANY city  department that has been battling the ordinance over the past 16 years? I do not understand why  these  reports would not be included. Is there anyone that can offer an explanation? And have you all seen the  packaging that is used at the dispensaries? Are you aware that glass pipe and GLASS SYRINGES are sold among  every other type of drug paraphernalia you could possibly think of? These are the types of things that should  be considered among many others.     Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.    From: Tamara Jimenez  Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 1:28 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor  O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>  Cc: publiccomments@anaheim.net <publiccomments@anaheim.net>  Subject: NO on Item #23 Good afternoon,  I find it quite concerning that to my knowledge no one in the addiction industry, especially right here in Anaheim was  consulted regarding the cannabis item. The fact that you would consider an item as serious as this without a  comprehensive study is unbelievably irresponsible. Not one treatment center or expert was contacted, nor was any  governmental agency that deals with addiction on this matter. Why would you even consider voting on an item like this  until a comprehensive study is completed and have fully exhausted all aspects of a decision like this? Besides the simple  fact that a decision like this goes completely against 2 major initiatives that the City of Anaheim has poured hundreds of  thousands of dollars into. The first being the Drug Free Anaheim Program which has placed almost 600 addicts into  treatment and the second being the effort in addressing homelessness. Where are the studies on the effect of marijuana  in these two areas? Let’s also not forget about our children. How shall we continue to teach our children to not use  3 drugs and alcohol if passing an item such as this? Anaheim also has a gang problem if you are unaware. The drug dealers  and gang members will go to the dispensaries. The problems will get worse. Meet with HIDTA in Colorado. This item is,  even if passed, should not be passed without some basic common sense, public safety regulations . Let us also  remember to be realistic in the fact that these businesses still cannot legally bank their money, nor are they federally  legal. So if you think you will get you monies worth out of them, whatever that looks like‐not sure how you can ethically  put a dollar amount of people’s lives and our children’s values, you won’t. They will never report what they actually  make, they will cause more problems with law enforcement, the clientele they attract is not typically law abiding  citizens, and if you believe any different you are listening to the lobbyists as opposed to the governmental agencies who  have to deal with the fall out. Have any of you met with or spoken with HIDTA in Colorado? Do you know what that is?  Have you met with the DEA? Or the ONDCP? The FDA?  If you have not met with any of these agencies and received in  depth studies in this area you should in no way be voting on an item like this as it would be incredibly irresponsible and  dangerous. AND TO PUT THIS IN THE IN THE HANDS OF THE PUBLIC BY BALLOT MEASURE WITHOUT THE PROPER  RESEARCH IS JUST WRONG!!!        Have a beautiful day,  Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.  1 Public Comment From:Brad Chapman Sent:Thursday, May 14, 2020 5:37 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Angels Baseball Dear Mayor Sidhu and City Council: Last December, the City Council approved a historic agreement with the Angels. The team committed to staying in Anaheim until at least 2050 and agreed to purchase Angel Stadium from the city at a market-rate price of $325 million – getting the city out of the stadium business. We urge you to support Agenda Item 20 on the May 12th City Council meeting agenda by sending an email. It will speed up the benefits of that agreement. The COVID-19 crisis has interfered with the completion of the site inspection segment of the contract. In exchange for moving that deadline from June 30th to September 30th, the Angels agree to move up their Third Deposit payment to the city of $10 million to October 2nd of this year – instead of sometime in 2021-23. Furthermore, the team will also speed-up submittal of its Master Plan for the site to May 30th, 2020 – rather than sometime in 2021. This agreement provides the city with $10 million in badly needed revenue sooner rather than later. And it quickens the timeline for the development of the stadium site, which will generate hundreds of millions of dollars in economic activity and tax revenue. Thank you for your understanding and believe you will do the right thing for the residents of Anaheim. Sincerely, Brad Chapman and Family From:Sehr Nazir To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:01:33 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Sehr Nazir and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim Hills, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Sehr Nazir From:Alan Siero To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding!!! Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:00:59 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Alan Siero, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Garden Grove, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Alan Siero From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:08:52 AM -----Original Message----- From: Mikyla Reta Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 7:28 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Mikyla. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Mikyla Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:08:37 AM -----Original Message----- From: Emily Kim Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 10:08 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Emily Kim. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Emily Kim Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:08:18 AM -----Original Message----- From: Shikhar Gupta Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:00 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Testing. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Testing Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:06:11 AM -----Original Message----- From: Eileen Ahn Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:48 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Eileen. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Eileen From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:08:06 AM -----Original Message----- From: Shivani Patel Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:28 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Shivani Patel. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Shivani Patel From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:06:00 AM     From: Madeleine Kristensen  Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:55 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Maddy Kristensen. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Maddy Kristensen -- Madeleine Kristensen University of California, Berkeley Social Welfare, B.A. | Spanish Language & Literature Minor May 2020 From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:05:45 AM -----Original Message----- From: Angelica Fontillas Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:33 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Angelica F.. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Angelica F. Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:55:09 AM Desiree Flaws Administrative Assistant to the City Attorney City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Suite 356 Anaheim, California 92805 Phone: (714) 765-5169 Fax: (714) 765-5123 Email: dflaws@anaheim.net To learn more about Anaheim’s kindness initiatives, visit anaheim.net/kindness. “This communication is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed, and may be confidential or privileged by law. If you are not the intended recipient or you receive this email in error, any review, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. Please notify the Anaheim City Attorney’s Office of the error immediately at 714-765-5169 and delete this communication and any attached documents from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.” -----Original Message----- From: Mursal Bokhari < Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 1:19 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Mursal Bokhari. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Mursal Bokhari Mursal Bokhari From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:54:47 AM -----Original Message----- From: EMILY THOMPSON Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:35 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Emily thompson. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Emily thompson From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:54:32 AM -----Original Message----- From: Kendrick Canizales Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:43 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Kendrick Canizales. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Kendrick Canizales From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:54:20 AM -----Original Message----- From: Chase Ramos Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:01 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Chase Ramos . I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Chase Ramos Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:54:09 AM -----Original Message----- From: Chase Ramos Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:01 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Chase Ramos . I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Chase Ramos Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:53:58 AM -----Original Message----- From: Chase Ramos < Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:01 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Chase Ramos . I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Chase Ramos Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:53:49 AM -----Original Message----- From: Chase Ramos Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:01 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Chase Ramos . I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Chase Ramos Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:53:34 AM -----Original Message----- From: Kimberly Rodriguez Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:17 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Kimberly Rodriguez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Kimberly Rodriguez From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:53:03 AM -----Original Message----- From: Kathia Nogueda Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:31 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Kathia Nogueda. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Kathia Nogueda From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:53:17 AM -----Original Message----- From: Shivani Desai Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:36 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Shivani Desai. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Shivani Desai Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:52:44 AM -----Original Message----- From: Jaztyne Lim Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:44 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Jaztyne Lim. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Jaztyne Lim Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:52:30 AM -----Original Message----- From: Valeria Urbiola Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:06 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Valeria Urbiola. I am a resident of Anaheim, CA and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Valeria Urbiola Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:52:14 AM -----Original Message----- From: Brianna Canizales Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:14 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Brianna Canizales. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Brianna Canizales Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:52:02 AM -----Original Message----- From: Brianna Canizales Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:14 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Brianna Canizales. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Brianna Canizales Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:51:50 AM -----Original Message----- From: Stephanie Canizales Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:17 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Stephanie. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Stephanie Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:51:36 AM -----Original Message----- From: Heather Macias Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:18 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Heather Macias. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Heather Macias, Ph.D. Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:51:23 AM -----Original Message----- From: Heather Macias Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:18 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Heather Macias. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Heather Macias, Ph.D. Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:51:12 AM -----Original Message----- From: Heather Macias Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:18 AM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Heather Macias. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Heather Macias, Ph.D. Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:50:56 AM -----Original Message----- From: Gabby Enriquez < Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:01 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Nessa Enriquez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Nessa Enriquez From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:50:39 AM -----Original Message----- From: Sabrina Diez Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:02 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Sabrina Diez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Sabrina Diez From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:49:54 AM -----Original Message----- From: Sabrina Diez Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:02 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Sabrina Diez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Sabrina Diez From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:49:31 AM   From: Zyanya Meeks < Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:31 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Zyanya Meeks. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Zyanya Meeks From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:49:02 AM -----Original Message----- From: Sabrina Diez Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 1:15 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Sabrina Diez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Sabrina Diez From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:48:33 AM -----Original Message----- From: Diana Herrera Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:05 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Diana Herrera. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Diana Herrera From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:47:59 AM Desiree Flaws Administrative Assistant to the City Attorney City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., Suite 356 Anaheim, California 92805 Phone: (714) 765-5169 Fax: (714) 765-5123 Email: dflaws@anaheim.net To learn more about Anaheim’s kindness initiatives, visit anaheim.net/kindness. “This communication is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed, and may be confidential or privileged by law. If you are not the intended recipient or you receive this email in error, any review, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. Please notify the Anaheim City Attorney’s Office of the error immediately at 714-765-5169 and delete this communication and any attached documents from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.” -----Original Message----- From: Diana Herrera Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:05 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Diana Herrera. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Diana Herrera From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:47:51 AM -----Original Message----- From: Diana Herrera Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:05 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Diana Herrera. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Diana Herrera From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:47:41 AM -----Original Message----- From: Diana Herrera Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:05 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Diana Herrera. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Diana Herrera From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:47:31 AM -----Original Message----- From: Diana Herrera Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:05 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Diana Herrera. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Diana Herrera From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:47:21 AM -----Original Message----- From: Diana Herrera Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:05 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Diana Herrera. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Diana Herrera From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:47:08 AM -----Original Message----- From: Arsal Bokhari Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 5:01 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Arsal Bokhari. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Arsal Bokhari Sent from my iPhone From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:46:36 AM -----Original Message----- From: Michelle De Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 5:39 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Michelle DeSantis. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Michelle DeSantis From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:46:22 AM -----Original Message----- From: Scott Nguyen Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:06 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Scott Nguyen. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Scott Nguyen From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:09:04 AM   From: Ryan Stekkinger < Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 6:40 PM To: City Attorney <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; _Finance Administration <FinanceAdministration@anaheim.net>; Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net> Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US Hello, My name is Ryan Stekkinger. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation. Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Ryan Stekkinger From:Emily Johnson To:Public Comment Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:36:24 AM To whom it may concern, I understand there's a budget proposal to cut 20% of the community service budget. Now, more than ever, our children need after school programs, need the employees at the library who read to them, need to be safe and taken care of by our community. Please do not cut the community services budget. Please do not give the police more money for surveillance. After school programs and library programs are perfect examples of how to build strong communities without the need for police intervention. Redistribute the budget. Do not cut our community service programs. Thank you, Emily Johnson From:Choungie Bravo To:Public Comment Subject:Concerns about Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:42:47 AM I'm Adrian Bravo, I lived in Anaheim for 17 years. I graduated at Magnolia High school, and I want to talk to you about the arts just a little bit. The art programs in Anaheim are really good! Trust me, I've seen some amazing things! But the schools campuses for the arts, is not. Magnolia high school, one of the lowest funded schools in the district. It seems like it is. I was in the marching band all 4 years of high school. I would love it if a percentage of the funds for the police department went towards the art programs in the more poor high schools. Whether that be theatre, art, choir, band, marching band, color guard, and dance. These are such important programs to me. Please reconsider where the funds go. Schools need it way more. Thank you for your time!, Adrian Bravo From:Rihab Beituni To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:04:02 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Rihab Beituni, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education (public schools), homelessness(prevention and support), affordable housing, public parks (playgrounds & walking tracks) and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Rihab Beituni From:Tiffany Moo To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:48:25 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Tiffany, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Tiffany From:Suha Sattar To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:45:03 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is [NAME], and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, Ca. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Suha Sartre Sent from my iPhone From:Yi-An Hsieh To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:09:49 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Yi-An Hsieh and I am writing on behalf of myself, as a resident of the city, and the citizens of Anaheim. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Yi-An Hsieh From:Rosa Murillo To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:34:59 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Rosa Murillo, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Rosa Murillo, MSW From:Tabitha Lynne To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Jordan Brandman; Denise Barnes; Lucille Kring; Jose Moreno; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:33:42 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Tabitha Martinez and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Tabitha Martinez From:Kayla Alarcon To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:04:35 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Kayla Alarcon, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Irvine, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Kayla Alarcon From:lauren price To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:52:21 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Lauren Price, and I am taking time out of my day to express my, and many others of Anaheim’s, demands for the future regarding police funding. I live in Anaheim Hills, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. It’s NOT okay for our “protectors” to only be half good at their job. The people of Anaheim deserve better. Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Lauren Price From:Saba Johnson To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:25:22 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Saba J., and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in LA, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Next, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Saba J. From:Savera Bholat To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:13:52 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Savera Bholat, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA.The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Savera Bholat Sent from my iPhone From:Gianna Furumoto To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Demanding Decrease in Police Funding Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:43:16 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Gianna, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Gianna Gianna Furumoto Civil & Environmental Engineering B.S. | UCLA 2020 Outgoing Project Manager | ASCE at UCLA Timber Design-Build From:Geoff Palomino To:Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:The Funding has Got to Go (Down) Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:10:34 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Geoffrey Palomino, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Escondido, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Geoffrey Palomino From:Erik Varho To:Public Comment Subject:City Budget Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:58:39 AM Hello, I was born and raised in Anaheim. I grew up using the Anaheim public library system. Going to readings as a small child at the Euclid branch. Participating in after school programs at the Central branch. One of my first jobs was a page at the Haskett branch. A huge resource for my family and I that we always relied on and deeply appreciated. I understand that Anaheim is currently considering cutting 20% of the community service budget. This is unacceptable. The budget for the police exceeds $150 million? 15 times the budget for community development. This is unacceptable. Our police do not need more military grade gear and weapons to use against its citizens. My friends who work in Anaheim’s after school programs need to keep their jobs. Imagine how many programs that serve the community could be bolstered via a 25% reduction in the police budget. That’s approximately $37,500,000. Fund our libraries. Fund our school. Fund mental health services. Defund the police. Best, Erik Varho Sent from my iPhone From:Christopher Philip To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 8:56:25 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Christopher Philip, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Christopher Philip From:Hadee Makda To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 8:09:11 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Hadee Makda, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim District 6 and was a 2018 Council Member for a Day for Anaheim's Youth in Government Day. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Hadee Makda. From:Adam Sepulveda To:Public Comment Subject:DO NOT CUT COMMUNITY SERVICE BUDGET Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:02:29 AM We are seeing now more than ever how misappropriation of funds are ruining Anaheim. The police department needs to have their funding redirected into programs such as these so we can build a better community. Do the right thing. With respect, Adam Sepulveda From:Denise Barnes To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:16:24 AM Denise Barnes Anaheim City Councilwoman Begin forwarded message: From: Whoop whoop Date: June 6, 2020 at 10:59:44 PM PDT To: Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>  Dear Mrs. Barnes, My name is Merly and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing to ask you to reconsider the proposed budget for the fiscal year of 2020/2021. I care deeply about making our community safer, and I believe that allocating 42% of the city’s general funds to the Anaheim Police Department will hurt the citizenry more than it already has. From 2003 to 2016, 33 people were killed by on-duty Anaheim police officers. 61% of those people who were killed by the police department were Latino and 12% were Black. Additionally, most of these deaths have occurred in Districts two, three, four, and five. According to census data, these four districts have a high concentration of Latinos and is generally low-income. However, District Six has only ever experienced one homicide during the period of 2003-2016. As you can see, this data suggests that the Anaheim Police Department targets low-income, minority neighborhoods, and I am disappointed to see this kind of discrimination in my city. This kind of systemic racism is what will continue to plague the city if nothing is changed. Instead of allocating a majority of the city’s proposed general fund to the police department, the money should go to providing the necessities and ensuring the quality of life, as defined by the proposed city budget for fiscal year 2020/2021. In case the message has not been clear, let me take some time to clarify. Defund the police. You have the power to edit, revise, and the city’s proposed budget, and I personally believe the citizens of Anaheim could use as many resources as possible especially in a time of a global pandemic. The city should help its citizenry instead of harassing it. Thank you. From:Denise Barnes To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: Anaheim Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:16:10 AM Denise Barnes Anaheim City Councilwoman Begin forwarded message: From: isaac membreno Date: June 6, 2020 at 11:05:46 PM PDT To: Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net> Subject: Anaheim  Dear Mrs. Barnes, My name is Isaac and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing to ask you to reconsider the proposed budget for the fiscal year of 2020/2021. I care deeply about making our community safer, and I believe that allocating 42% of the city’s general funds to the Anaheim Police Department will hurt the citizenry more than it already has. From 2003 to 2016, 33 people were killed by on-duty Anaheim police officers. 61% of those people who were killed by the police department were Latino and 12% were Black. Additionally, most of these deaths have occurred in Districts two, three, four, and five. According to census data, these four districts have a high concentration of Latinos and is generally low-income. However, District Six has only ever experienced one homicide during the period of 2003-2016. As you can see, this data suggests that the Anaheim Police Department targets low-income, minority neighborhoods, and I am disappointed to see this kind of discrimination in my city. This kind of systemic racism is what will continue to plague the city if nothing is changed. Instead of allocating a majority of the city’s proposed general fund to the police department, the money should go to providing the necessities and ensuring the quality of life, as defined by the proposed city budget for fiscal year 2020/2021. In case the message has not been clear, let me take some time to clarify. Defund the police. You have the power to edit, revise, and the city’s proposed budget, and I personally believe the citizens of Anaheim could use as many resources as possible especially in a time of a global pandemic. The city should help its citizenry instead of harassing it. Thank you, Isaac From:Denise Barnes To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: budget Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:15:43 AM Denise Barnes Anaheim City Councilwoman Begin forwarded message: From: Valeria Soto Date: June 6, 2020 at 11:11:10 PM PDT To: Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net> Subject: budget  Dear Mrs. Barnes My name is Valeria Soto and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing to ask you to reconsider the proposed budget for the fiscal year of 2020/2021. I care deeply about making our community safer, and I believe that allocating 42% of the city’s general funds to the Anaheim Police Department will hurt the citizenry more than it already has. From 2003 to 2016, 33 people were killed by on-duty Anaheim police officers. 61% of those people who were killed by the police department were Latino and 12% were Black. Additionally, most of these deaths have occurred in Districts two, three, four, and five. According to census data, these four districts have a high concentration of Latinos and is generally low-income. However, District Six has only ever experienced one homicide during the period of 2003-2016. As you can see, this data suggests that the Anaheim Police Department targets low-income, minority neighborhoods, and I am disappointed to see this kind of discrimination in my city. This kind of systemic racism is what will continue to plague the city if nothing is changed. Instead of allocating a majority of the city’s proposed general fund to the police department, the money should go to providing the necessities and ensuring the quality of life, as defined by the proposed city budget for fiscal year 2020/2021. In case the message has not been clear, let me take some time to clarify. Defund the police. You have the power to edit, revise, and the city’s proposed budget, and I personally believe the citizens of Anaheim could use as many resources as possible especially in a time of a global pandemic. The city should help its citizenry instead of harassing it. Thank you, Valeria Soto. From:Denise Barnes To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: Defund police Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:15:34 AM Denise Barnes Anaheim City Councilwoman Begin forwarded message: From: liljdabscrazy Date: June 7, 2020 at 8:43:39 AM PDT To: Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net> Subject: Defund police  Dear Mrs. Barnes, My name is Julio Saul Luna and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing to askyou to reconsider the proposed budget for the fiscal year of 2020/2021. I caredeeply about making our community safer, and I believe that allocating 42% ofthe city’s general funds to the Anaheim Police Department will hurt the citizenrymore than it already has. From 2003 to 2016, 33 people were killed by on-dutyAnaheim police officers. 61% of those people who were killed by the policedepartment were Latino and 12% were Black. Additionally, most of these deathshave occurred in Districts two, three, four, and five. According to census data,these four districts have a high concentration of Latinos and is generally low-income. However, District Six has only ever experienced one homicide during the period of 2003-2016. As you can see, this data suggests that the Anaheim PoliceDepartment targets low-income, minority neighborhoods, and I am disappointedto see this kind of discrimination in my city. This kind of systemic racism is whatwill continue to plague the city if nothing is changed. Instead of allocating amajority of the city’s proposed general fund to the police department, the moneyshould go to providing the necessities and ensuring the quality of life, as definedby the proposed city budget for fiscal year 2020/2021. In case the message has notbeen clear, let me take some time to clarify. Defund the police. You have thepower to edit, revise, and the city’s proposed budget, and I personally believe thecitizens of Anaheim could use as many resources as possible especially in a time of a global pandemic. The city should help its Sent from my iPhone From:Denise Barnes To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: ORANGE COUNTY: RESTRUCTURE THE BUDGET AND DEFUND THE POLICE NOW. Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:30:19 AM Denise Barnes Anaheim City Councilwoman Begin forwarded message: From: Celeste Maldonado Date: June 4, 2020 at 3:56:06 PM PDT To: "Michelle.steel@ocgov.com" <Michelle.steel@ocgov.com> Cc: "Andrew.do@ocgov.com" <Andrew.do@ocgov.com>, "Donald.wagner@ocgov.com" <Donald.wagner@ocgov.com>, "Lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com" <Lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com>, "Jbradman@anaheim.net" <Jbradman@anaheim.net>, Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>, Annie Mezzacappa <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>, "Cityhall@buenapark.com" <Cityhall@buenapark.com>, "Fsmith@buenapark.com" <Fsmith@buenapark.com>, "Eswitf@buenapark.com" <Eswitf@buenapark.com>, "Spark@buenapark.com" <Spark@buenapark.com>, "Abrown@buenapark.com" <Abrown@buenapark.com> Subject: ORANGE COUNTY: RESTRUCTURE THE BUDGET AND DEFUND THE POLICE NOW. My name is Celeste Maldonado. I am a resident of Orange County and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of the budget in all Orange County cities, so as to prioritize more social services for communities, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. I demand of the mayor, controller, and all city council members to prove their love and dedication to the people of their city and reallocate funds to directly benefit those in need. It is absolutely absurd that 50 million of our tax dollars are going to the police force and only 9 million is allocated towards community development. We deserve better than this. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Just this last fiscal year of 2019 Orange County sheriff’s officials outspent their revenue budget by $33 million – prompting county supervisors to pull millions of dollars from other departments like the Health Care Agency to cover the shortfall. Mean while these healthcare workers have to so to work with out proper PPE equipment during a nationwide pandemic. It is clear that we need change and that the way these funds are being spend and overspend needs to change. There are communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Celeste Maldonado From:Denise Barnes To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: ORANGE COUNTY: RESTRUCTURE THE BUDGET AND DEFUND THE POLICE NOW. Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:31:15 AM Denise Barnes Anaheim City Councilwoman Begin forwarded message: From: Raquel Balistreri > Date: June 4, 2020 at 6:11:37 PM PDT To: "Michelle.steel@ocgov.com" <Michelle.steel@ocgov.com> Cc: "Andrew.do@ocgov.com" <Andrew.do@ocgov.com>, "Donald.wagner@ocgov.com" <Donald.wagner@ocgov.com>, "Lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com" <Lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com>, "Jbradman@anaheim.net" <Jbradman@anaheim.net>, Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>, Annie Mezzacappa <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>, "Cityhall@buenapark.com" <Cityhall@buenapark.com>, "Fsmith@buenapark.com" <Fsmith@buenapark.com>, "Eswitf@buenapark.com" <Eswitf@buenapark.com>, "Spark@buenapark.com" <Spark@buenapark.com>, "Abrown@buenapark.com" <Abrown@buenapark.com> Subject: ORANGE COUNTY: RESTRUCTURE THE BUDGET AND DEFUND THE POLICE NOW. My name is Raquel Balistreri. I am a resident of Orange County and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of the budget in all Orange County cities, so as to prioritize more social services for communities, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. I demand of the mayor, controller, and all city council members to prove their love and dedication to the people of their city and reallocate funds to directly benefit those in need. It is absolutely absurd that 50 million of our tax dollars are going to the police force and only 9 million is allocated towards community development. We deserve better than this. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Just this last fiscal year of 2019 Orange County sheriff’s officials outspent their revenue budget by $33 million – prompting county supervisors to pull millions of dollars from other departments like the Health Care Agency to cover the shortfall. Mean while these healthcare workers have to so to work with out proper PPE equipment during a nationwide pandemic. It is clear that we need change and that the way these funds are being spend and overspend needs to change. There are communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Raquel Balistreri Sent from my iPhone From:Denise Barnes To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: ORANGE COUNTY: RESTRUCTURE THE BUDGET AND DEFUND THE POLICE NOW. Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:29:27 AM Denise Barnes Anaheim City Councilwoman Begin forwarded message: From: Mary Frazier Date: June 4, 2020 at 9:47:29 PM PDT To: "Michelle.steel@ocgov.com" <Michelle.steel@ocgov.com> Cc: "Andrew.do@ocgov.com" <Andrew.do@ocgov.com>, "Donald.wagner@ocgov.com" <Donald.wagner@ocgov.com>, "Lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com" <Lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com>, "Jbradman@anaheim.net" <Jbradman@anaheim.net>, Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>, Annie Mezzacappa <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>, "Cityhall@buenapark.com" <Cityhall@buenapark.com>, "Fsmith@buenapark.com" <Fsmith@buenapark.com>, "Eswitf@buenapark.com" <Eswitf@buenapark.com>, "Spark@buenapark.com" <Spark@buenapark.com>, "Abrown@buenapark.com" <Abrown@buenapark.com> Subject: ORANGE COUNTY: RESTRUCTURE THE BUDGET AND DEFUND THE POLICE NOW. My name is [insert name]. I am a resident of Orange County and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of the budget in all Orange County cities, so as to prioritize more social services for communities, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. I demand of the mayor, controller, and all city council members to prove their love and dedication to the people of their city and reallocate funds to directly benefit those in need. It is absolutely absurd that 50 million of our tax dollars are going to the police force and only 9 million is allocated towards community development. We deserve better than this. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Just this last fiscal year of 2019 Orange County sheriff’s officials outspent their revenue budget by $33 million – prompting county supervisors to pull millions of dollars from other departments like the Health Care Agency to cover the shortfall. Mean while these healthcare workers have to so to work with out proper PPE equipment during a nationwide pandemic. It is clear that we need change and that the way these funds are being spend and overspend needs to change. There are communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, [your name] Sent from my iPhone From:Denise Barnes To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: Restructure budget and DEFUND THE POLICE Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:30:18 AM Denise Barnes Anaheim City Councilwoman Begin forwarded message: From: Raquel Balistreri Date: June 4, 2020 at 6:09:28 PM PDT To: "Michelle.steel@ocgov.com" <Michelle.steel@ocgov.com> Cc: "Andrew.do@ocgov.com" <Andrew.do@ocgov.com>, "Donald.wagner@ocgov.com" <Donald.wagner@ocgov.com>, "Lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com" <Lisa.bartlett@ocgov.com>, "Jbradman@anaheim.net" <Jbradman@anaheim.net>, Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>, Annie Mezzacappa <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>, "Cityhall@buenapark.com" <Cityhall@buenapark.com>, "Fsmith@buenapark.com" <Fsmith@buenapark.com>, "Eswitf@buenapark.com" <Eswitf@buenapark.com>, "Spark@buenapark.com" <Spark@buenapark.com>, "Abrown@buenapark.com" <Abrown@buenapark.com> Subject: Restructure budget and DEFUND THE POLICE My name is Raquel Balistreri. I am a resident of Orange County and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of the budget in all Orange County cities, so as to prioritize more social services for communities, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. I demand of the mayor, controller, and all city council members to prove their love and dedication to the people of their city and reallocate funds to directly benefit those in need. It is absolutely absurd that 50 million of our tax dollars are going to the police force and only 9 million is allocated towards community development. We deserve better than this. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Just this last fiscal year of 2019 Orange County sheriff’s officials outspent their revenue budget by $33 million – prompting county supervisors to pull millions of dollars from other departments like the Health Care Agency to cover the shortfall. Mean while these healthcare workers have to so to work with out proper PPE equipment during a nationwide pandemic. It is clear that we need change and that the way these funds are being spend and overspend needs to change. There are communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Raquel Balistreri Sent from my iPhone 1 Public Comment From:Blanca Navarro Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 8:35 PM To:Public Comment Subject:6/9/20 Council Meeting Anaheim City Council, My name is Blanca Navarro and Anaheim is where I’ve called home and attended school all my life. My parents are homeowners in Anaheim, my sister works in Anaheim and it is where I’m looking to buy my first house too. Anaheim is the home that I love – but it has a lot of work to do. First and foremost, I ask that you DEFUND THE POLICE FORCE. APD receives far too large of a budget every year and enough is enough. That taxpayer money can and should be used to better serve the community and youth in so many other ways: after school programs, scholarships, arts, park beautification to name just a few. At the very least, please start by cutting APD budget in HALF every year. Secondly, I am disappointed in the curfew that was set this month. The curfew enforcement was a waste of resources, time and money. Along with being an infringement on freedom to assembly, I find it completely useless. I am sick of our hard earned and hefty taxpayer money being used so poorly. And, I’m sick of helicopters over my home every night. The protests never once bothered me, but the curfew enforcement has. I want to keep our community safe. I want crime to decrease. I want Anaheim to be a place for families, and tourism. But what I do not want is our taxpayer money and property taxes going into what we as a community do not want and do not need. All my best, Blanca 2 Public Comment From:Daisy Avalos Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 8:52 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund the Police My name is Daisy Avalos and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing to ask you to reconsider the proposed budget for the fiscal year of 2020/2021. I care deeply about making our community safer, and I believe that allocating 42% of the city’s general funds to the Anaheim Police Department will continue and increase harm to our citizens. From 2003 to 2016, 33 people were killed by on-duty Anaheim police officers. 61% of those people who were killed by the police department were Latino, and 12% were Black, representing 73% of the deaths due to APD actions. Additionally, most of these deaths occurred in Districts two, three, four, and five. Census data shows these four districts having a high concentration of Latinos and is generally low-income. On the other hand, District Six has only ever experienced one death due to APD during the period of 2003-2016. It is evident that the Anaheim Police Department targets low-income, minority neighborhoods, and I am disappointed to see this kind of systemic discrimination in my city. Systemic racism will continue to plague the city if here is no substantial change. Stop allocating the majority of the city’s proposed general fund to the police department, year after year there have been increases to this budget item & it continues to dominate the budget allocation despite reductions due to covid19. About 42% is still proposed to be allocated to police, the money should go to providing the necessities and ensuring the quality of life, as defined by the proposed city budget for fiscal year 2020/2021. Defund the police. Throughout Southern California we are calling for more police accountability and you have shown that you would rather dominate the streets with force than provide space to discuss the matter. Use your power to edit and revise the city’s proposed budget, quit funding draconian overreach by our militarized police force and provide the citizens of Anaheim with as many resources as possible to endure the global pandemic. The city should help its citizenry instead of harassing it. Thank you. 3 Public Comment From:Thuy-Tien Bui Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:00 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil My name is Thuy-Tien Bui, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Orange, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Thuy-Tien Bui 4 -- Thuy-Tien Bui 5 Public Comment From:William Camargo Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:42 PM To:Public Comment Subject:William Camargo/Public Comment My name is William Camargo and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also demand the council not to approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Furthermore, we are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members and we refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. -- ------------------------------------------------------ William Camargo Claudio Visual Artist/Educator/Organizer/Arts Advocate Commissioner of Heritage and Culture, Anaheim Teaching Artist Fellow, ARMORY Center for the Arts Claremont Graduate University, MFA '20 NALAC Advocacy Leadership Institute '20 Sonneman Photography Prize, CGU www.williamcamargo.com Chicano Art Then and Now(panel participant), March 7th 1-2pm, Riverside Art Museum A Trace Is Not A Map, Jan 25-March 7, Irvine Fine Arts Center Xicanx: New Visions, Feb 13- June 28th, Centro De Artes, San Antonio Origins & Displacements, March 29-April 3, East Gallery, CGU 6 Public Comment From:CJ Miller Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:59 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Public comment on budget allocations To the Anaheim City Council: My name is CJ Miller and I am a resident of Glassell Park, Los Angeles. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health is needed at the municipal level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. CJ Miller From:Scott Nguyen To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:06:07 PM Hello, My name is Scott Nguyen. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Scott Nguyen From:Michelle De To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 5:39:05 PM Hello, My name is Michelle DeSantis. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Michelle DeSantis From:Arsal Bokhari To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 5:01:22 PM Hello, My name is Arsal Bokhari. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Arsal Bokhari Sent from my iPhone From:Diana Herrera To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:05:06 PM Hello, My name is Diana Herrera. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Diana Herrera From:Sabrina Diez To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 1:15:28 PM Hello, My name is Sabrina Diez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Sabrina Diez From:Zyanya Meeks To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:31:23 PM Hello, My name is Zyanya Meeks. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Zyanya Meeks From:Sabrina Diez To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:01:40 PM Hello, My name is Sabrina Diez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Sabrina Diez From:Gabby Enriquez To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:00:39 PM Hello, My name is Nessa Enriquez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Nessa Enriquez From:Heather Macias To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:17:59 AM Hello, My name is Heather Macias. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Heather Macias, Ph.D. Sent from my iPhone From:Stephanie Canizales To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:17:26 AM Hello, My name is Stephanie. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Stephanie Sent from my iPhone From:Brianna Canizales To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:13:57 AM Hello, My name is Brianna Canizales. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Brianna Canizales Sent from my iPhone From:Valeria Urbiola To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:06:15 AM Hello, My name is Valeria Urbiola. I am a resident of Anaheim, CA and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Valeria Urbiola Sent from my iPhone From:Jaztyne Lim To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:43:41 AM Hello, My name is Jaztyne Lim. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Jaztyne Lim Sent from my iPhone From:Shivani Desai To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:35:59 AM Hello, My name is Shivani Desai. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Shivani Desai Sent from my iPhone From:Kathia Nogueda To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:30:53 AM Hello, My name is Kathia Nogueda. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Kathia Nogueda From:Kimberly Rodriguez To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:17:26 AM Hello, My name is Kimberly Rodriguez. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Kimberly Rodriguez From:Chase Ramos To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 10:01:35 AM Hello, My name is Chase Ramos . I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Chase Ramos Sent from my iPhone From:Kendrick Canizales To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:43:00 AM Hello, My name is Kendrick Canizales. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Kendrick Canizales From:EMILY THOMPSON To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:34:50 AM Hello, My name is Emily thompson. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Emily thompson From:Mursal Bokhari To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 1:18:58 AM Hello, My name is Mursal Bokhari. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Mursal Bokhari Mursal Bokhari From:Angelica Fontillas To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:33:18 AM Hello, My name is Angelica F.. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Angelica F. Sent from my iPhone From:Madeleine Kristensen To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:55:22 PM Hello, My name is Maddy Kristensen. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Maddy Kristensen -- Madeleine Kristensen University of California, Berkeley Social Welfare, B.A. | Spanish Language & Literature Minor May 2020 From:Eileen Ahn To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:48:35 PM Hello, My name is Eileen. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Eileen From:Shivani Patel To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:27:45 PM Hello, My name is Shivani Patel. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Shivani Patel From:Shikhar Gupta To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:00:26 PM Hello, My name is Testing. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Testing Sent from my iPhone From:Emily Kim To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Saturday, June 6, 2020 10:07:53 PM Hello, My name is Emily Kim. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Emily Kim Sent from my iPhone From:Mikyla Reta To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk; _Finance Administration Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Saturday, June 6, 2020 7:28:13 PM Hello, My name is Mikyla. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Mikyla Sent from my iPhone From:Ryan Stekkinger To:City Attorney; City Clerk; City Manager; Denise Barnes; _Finance Administration; Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Saturday, June 6, 2020 6:40:28 PM Hello, My name is Ryan Stekkinger. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department. This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need. Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable. We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation. Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Sincerely, Ryan Stekkinger From:Yautenzi Castro To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil; City Attorney; City Manager; City Clerk Subject:We Need a Budget That Represents US Date:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:37:58 AM Hello,   My name is Yautenzi Castro. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.   This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to benefit those in need.   Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.   We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets. Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that   Enrich our public schools and students Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small businesses struggling due to COVID-19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation   Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.   Sincerely, Yautenzi Castro 1 Public Comment From:Harnadar Anand Sent:Saturday, June 6, 2020 10:57 AM To:Public Comment Subject:June 9th meeting public comment Hello, My name is Harnadar Anand, and I am a resident of Anaheim since 2003. I call upon the City of Anaheim to end the inherent structural problems within law enforcement. Specifically, I believe the police budget should be slashed by a minimum 30%. Those funds should be reallocated to public health and social services as we experience a pandemic. Furthermore, I encourage the City of Anaheim to end the use of police chokeholds, disband police unions, end qualified immunity for police, and implement a licensing procedure those in law enforcement. Thank you for taking my comments. Harnadar Anand Zip Code 92808 1 Public Comment From:Lee Thorne <f Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:18 AM To:Public Comment Subject:BUDGET Hello, My name is Lee. I am emailing to demand the restructuring of the Anaheim city budget, so as to prioritize more social services for communities, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. I demand of the mayor, controller, and all city council members to prove their love and dedication to the people of their city and reallocate funds to directly benefit those in need. It is absolutely absurd that the police budget is larger than the allocations to the fire department, Office of Emergency Management, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Street Services, and the Housing and Community Investment Agency combined. While Anaheim PD has more funding than it knows what to do with, there are communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. You have the ability to change this, so do it. Please defund the police and re-invest that money into social services that serve and better the COMMUNITY, since we're the ones paying for it. Sincerely, Lee Thorne 1 Public Comment From:Sam Terreri Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:59 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Sam, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California . The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Sam 3 Public Comment From:ANDREW MOSHER Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:23 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Budget Reform Request I am a patron of the Anaheim Public Library. I am emailing as a concerned citizen in regards to the City Budgets for Anaheim. There are currently cuts planned for 20% of the community service budget. Consequently, this means money drawn away from after-school-education including many other services offered at the library. I implore you to reconsider these said budget cuts. Additionally, I encourage you to adopt budget cuts per The City of Anaheim in looking into giving Anaheim PD more money for security surveillance. Anaheim PD doesn't need more money. Inversely, They need no money from tax payers. Thank you. Best, Andrew Mosher 4 Public Comment From:Desiree Flaws on behalf of City Attorney Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:30 AM To:Public Comment Subject:FW: We Need a Budget That Represents US   From: Yautenzi Castro   Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 9:38 AM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman  <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen  Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; City Attorney  <cityattorneysoffice@anaheim.net>; City Manager <Citymanager@anaheim.net>; City Clerk <cityclerk@anaheim.net>  Subject: We Need a Budget That Represents US  Hello,      My name is Yautenzi Castro. I am a resident of Anaheim and I am emailing to demand the restructuring of our city  budget, so as to prioritize more social services for our community, and to drastically minimize spending on Police. It is  unconscionable that 1/3 to 1/2 of the city’s budget is going to the police department.      This does not align with the values that I have as your constituent and I demand that you and other city officials work  together to draft and approve a budget that diverts funds from the police department and reallocates them directly to  benefit those in need.      Defunding the police and restructuring the budget is an absolute necessity now more than ever. Police perpetuate a  pattern of excessive violence and force, especially directed towards Black People and their communities. The police  refuse to hold their own accountable and this is unacceptable.      We are in the middle of a global pandemic that has killed 100,000 Americans and more than 40 million people have filed  for unemployment. Healthcare workers are without proper equipment and essential workers are not being fairly  compensated or protected for the great work they do. We don’t need more police, we need more social safety nets.  Funds intended for police would be better off being sorted to initiatives that      Enrich our public schools and students  Provide more affordable housing and mental health care initiatives Protect and bolster our parks Support small  businesses struggling due to COVID‐19 Provide cheaper and cleaner modes of public transportation      Our nation is grieving the deaths of Black Americans that were murdered at the hands of police officers who have yet to  be held accountable. While the police department has more funding than it knows what to do with, we have  communities who desperately need funding and every day they don't receive it their quality of life worsens. Thousands  have died who did not need to. You have the ability to change this, so do it.      Sincerely,  Yautenzi Castro    5 Public Comment From:DDT36 Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:31 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Community service budget Dear city of Anaheim I have become aware that the community service budget will decrease by 20% and as someone who uses and believes in the this community I won’t stand for lack of faith for this community now more than ever we need to our communities more and more for us to have to resources to come together as one and support each other I hope you can see things that way as well and increase the community service budget. 6 Public Comment From:Kayte de la Fuente Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:33 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Kayte de la Fuente and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, Ca. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Kayte de la Fuente 7 Public Comment From:Adrienne Mendoza Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:47 AM To:Public Comment Subject:For Council's Consideration (06/09/2020 Meeting) To Anaheim City Council:    The purpose of the letter is to discourage city employee layoffs. The economic downturn COVID‐19 caused is  undeniable; however, as the city re‐opens, many, if not more, public services will be necessary to ensure that the city is  properly served.      It is to the residents and those who patronage this city that we owe allegiance to protect health and welfare, and to  ensure economic growth.  Layoffs would undoubtedly defeat those purposes.  Each city job is integral to either promote  health and safety, and/or facilitate business which are reasons why residents choose to live and stay here, and why non‐ residents of the city choose to come and spend their hard earned time and money in our city.      As the social and economic climates shift in this country, major cities, such as ours, will need to prepare themselves for  the onslaught of services the public will need to in order to maintain safety and the upward growth of the city.  Many  residents, victims of crimes, voters, families, and business owners may not be adequately served for every position lost  in a layoff.        The pandemic caused a substantial impact; however, layoffs would only perpetuate the negative effects within the city  longer than the pandemic itself.  I implore Council to use other measures in an effort to avoid layoffs.    Thank you for your consideration and for the hard work (and decisions) you make for this city.      Sincerely,    Adrienne L. Mendoza Deputy City Attorney Anaheim City Attorney’s Office- Prosecution Section 1275 N. Berkeley Ave., Room 400 Fullerton, CA 92832   CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed, and may be confidential or privileged by law. If you are not the intended recipient or you receive this email in error, any review, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. Please notify the Anaheim City Attorney’s Office of the error immediately at 714-765-5169 and delete this communication and any attached documents from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.   8 Public Comment From:thelawren Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:57 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim Budget Hi there, The city of Anaheim is greatly overfunding police with this budget and needs to seriously reprioritize their ways! Funding education, housing, and city resources that actually serve and protect people of all races & socioeconomic backgrounds needs to be the new mandate, and will have a dramatic affect on crime. Continuing to perpetrate a cops vs. citizens model disproportionately targeting our black and brown brothers is not what we need in 2020. Listen to the voices protesting around the world. Change is coming. Time to invest in that change in your own community. Thank you, Lauren McElroy 9 Public Comment From:brian ramisch Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:00 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim Budget Hello, The city of Anaheim is greatly overfunding police with this budget and needs to seriously reprioritize their ways! Funding education, housing, and city resources that actually serve and protect people of all races & socioeconomic backgrounds needs to be the new mandate, and will have a dramatic affect on crime. Continuing to perpetrate a cops vs. citizens model disproportionately targeting our black and brown brothers is not what we need in 2020. Listen to the voices protesting around the world. Change is coming. Time to invest in that change in your own community. Thank you, Brian Ramisch 10 Public Comment From:Dennise Rivera Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:00 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Dennise Rivera, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, 11 Dennise R. 12 Public Comment From:Elena Morales Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:01 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Elena Morales, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, Ca. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Elena Morales 13 Sent from my iPhone 14 Public Comment From:Christopher Kent Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:05 AM To:Public Comment Subject:More Community Development...Defund the Police Born and Raised in Anaheim, my wife too. I also worked and for the Anaheim Y for 8 years, and volunteered with their camps programs for 15 years. I worked predominantly with the teen age group. I bet many Police Officers would be surprised at what a little love and support and belief in their abilities would do to a marginalized teenager (now add in racial profiling). More police, and funding for them, isn't helping. Look at what's happening now. And giving them more funding is telling your community that you don't believe in them, or want them to succeed, because you're putting your money into an entity that is waiting for them to fail because you believe they will. Communities with more parks, more enrichment opportunities for youth, more learning programs for parents, more resources to learn and participate and be a part of something is what makes good humans. MORE money needs to be allocated for those programs and opportunities and infrastructure...not more police. #DefundThePolice - Chris Kent Anaheim Resident 15 Public Comment From:Brian Foxx Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:07 AM To:Public Comment Subject:public comments As a long term City employee and 22 year City resident, I am writing to encourage you not to lay off any city  employees.  The impact on both the employees and the citizens of Anaheim would be disastrous.  As a 20 plus year  employee, I would hate to stymie potential growth by putting employees out of work.  Many of Anaheim’s employees  are residents of the City and contribute in more than just employment.  First, the employees, whether or not they live in  Anaheim, spend money in Anaheim and support ancillary businesses.  Second, these employees focus on serving the  needs of the community. Now that things have finally started opening up, citizens are using our services more  often.  The need for public safety always exists, but as the economy opens, parks are being utilized, libraries will come  back to life, and people will need to have access to conduct business.  Eliminating employees will effect this potential  growth.  Cutting jobs and laying off employees would serve to reduce services and, further, the ripple effect of the loss  of money for those families impact everyone.  The pandemic has shown us how important community and a sense of  normalcy is.  Anaheim is at a crossroads.  They can be in the forefront of helping stimulate the economy and its citizens  at the same time.    I would urge you to find a solution that does not involve the loss of jobs for employees.  Several possible solutions could  include a temporary reduction in salary, furlough days, sabbatical leaves or retirement incentives.  I encourage you to  explore all these  and other options before laying off valuable city resources.        Brian R. Foxx  (714)765-1638     CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed, and may be  confidential or privileged by law.  If you are not the intended recipient or you receive this email in error, any review, use,  dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited.  Please notify the Anaheim City Attorney’s Office of the  error immediately at 714‐765‐5169 and delete this communication and any attached documents from your  system.  Thank you for your cooperation.    16 Public Comment From:Cynthia Hicks Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:35 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No layoffs of City employees I urge you to NOT include staff layoffs in any plan you propose to balance the 2020‐21 budget.    We have been here serving our public even though our facilities are closed due to COVID19 and our predominately part‐ time workforce in the Library Division will suffer greatly if their income is reduced or removed.     Since the recession of 2009 we have done incrementally more with less: less staff, less books and other materials, and  no capital improvements while increasing our programs and services. We are essential and will be even more so as  Anaheim residents seek jobs, need support for education and our WiFi will be even more necessary while distance  learning continues for many students.  Please look at all the ways (in the City Librarians weekly updates to the City  Manager and our stakeholders) that we have continued to support and uplift our community.     Sincerely?  Cynthia Hicks    Sent from my iPhone  17 Public Comment From:Amber Langston Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:24 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Community Service Budget Dear Service Representative, I am concerned to hear about the community service budget cuts happening in your city. I would love to see some of the money being allocated to security surveillance for the police force moved to fund community service and after school education. I would love for Anaheim to get publicly behind the BLM movement and act as a leader for this nation by decreasing the funding of your police force and instead allocating those funds to community services, schools, health services, housing, and shelters for those struggling with homelessness. Thank you for your time and consideration, -- Amber Langston 18 Public Comment From:Jenna Santa Maria Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:37 AM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Jenna Santa Maria, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim Hills. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. 19 Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Jenna Santa Maria 20 Public Comment From:Meg González Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:44 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund Anaheim PD Hello, I am a resident of Anaheim and am disappointed to hear City Council’s plans regarding cutting community service  funds while we are already lacking and funding Anaheim PD even more. I am disappointed because you feel that it’s  more important to fund a violent and racist organization instead of funding community service programs that can keep  people; especially our youth and marginalized folks engaged in our community to help them thrive. I’m disgusted at your  disregard for your people and your constant perpetuation of violence. We need to fund Arts & Community Services and  encourage folks to engage and be excited, instead you’re keeping us distant from each other and making our city cold.   I hope you take this into consideration and think about the future of our city and how good it could be if you encourage  community instead of police violence.     ‐Meg González       Sent from my iPhone  21 Public Comment From:Brenda Chavez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:46 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Invest in Our Community In these times of need, though when is it not times of need for institutionally marginalized people?, I demand that the people of Anaheim be protected. I DO NOT MEAN ADDING FUNDS TO THE ANAHEIM POLICE DEPARTMENT! I mean, FUND AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAMS, FUND COMMUNITY CENTERS, FUND OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, FUND THE SCHOOLS! AND YOU HAVE TO DO IT EQUITABLY!!! Y'all want to keep giving money to the Police Department, an institution that disproportionately criminalizes Black, Indigenous, and People of Color, but you're trying to cut down on the community service budget. I don't care that COVID-19 is happening. Y'all want to cut it down, and then in a couple of years again and again. NO! This is our taxpayer money, and I want to see it given back to us. I have lived in my house for almost 18 years, and the street has never been fixed, but if you go to the predominantly white neighborhood, they get their streets redone every couple of years. My taxpayer money is benefitting a white neighborhood more than my POC community, and I am done with it. Also, your gentrification projects are trying to push us out. Y'all love bringing in the money, and then turn your back on the people that built up this community for you. For you gentrifiers, shame on you. I'm looking at the people who go into the Packing House because it looks bougie and hipster. Y'all keep investing in your whiteness and the city condones it. For those of you moving into our neighborhoods (into those new apartments), but you don't send your children to our schools, shame on you. For the City Council Members that support policies and legislation that hurts our community, shame on you. I want equity policies and legislation coming from you. You can start my allocating OUR taxpayer money in more socially beneficial programs, not the Police Department. 22 Public Comment From:Misty Thompson Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:49 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Comments: City Council Meeting - 6/09/2020 (City Budget impact) To: City Council Members, City Interim Manager, & Mayor:     I am writing to comment specifically on the City Budget & the shortfall as it impacts City of Anaheim employees  (Furloughs, layoffs, pay reductions).       ‐ Can someone address the need for employees to fill in financial shortfalls, when the City Council has made  decisions recently regarding reallocating $6.5 million dollars in funds from the Anaheim Convention Center  reserve to Visit Anaheim for the purpose of Marketing (a non‐city entity that has been getting funding from the  TOT taxes)?  ……..especially when those reserve funds could have been used to keep & maintain the City of  Anaheim staff levels …..it is not the fault of the City nor of the City of Anaheim Employees that Visit Anaheim did  not maintain a reserve of their own for emergency purposes to maintain their own staffing levels during an  economic downturn.  I sympathize with Visit Anaheim, but do not feel that the sympathy should extend to  impacting City of Anaheim staffing or salary/pay rate levels.  Is marketing a $6.5 million necessity in our current  market?       ‐ Another item for discussion is the City Council & Mayors decision to remove the City Manager from office at a  cost to the City…..while I don’t know the specifics of the reasoning behind him being asked to step down, I did  hear that this may have cost the City $500K+ in resources due to him leaving before the end of his term.  Again – another reason why it seems inappropriate to ask City of Anaheim employees to pick up the shortfall when the  City apparently has money to spend on items like this during an economic downturn.     ‐  Is a 5% reduction in base salary enough of a hit for the Executive team at their level?  A $200K impact does not  seem like a very impactful reduction at their salary levels.  I’m assuming City of Anaheim employees will not be  asked to take more of a hit than 5% to salary/pay rate impact?     Thank you for your time & consideration.      23 Public Comment From:Brynn C Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:02 PM To:Public Comment Subject:City Budget Dear City if Anaheim, My name is Brynn Campos and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing to ask you to reconsider the proposed budget for the fiscal year of 2020/2021. I care deeply about making our community safer, and I believe that allocating 42% of the city’s general funds to the Anaheim Police Department will continue and increase harm to our citizens. From 2003 to 2016, 33 people were killed by on-duty Anaheim police officers. 61% of those people who were killed by the police department were Latino, and 12% were Black, representing 73% of the deaths due to APD actions. Additionally, most of these deaths occurred in Districts two, three, four, and five. Census data shows these four districts having a high concentration of Latinos and is generally low-income. On the other hand, District Six has only ever experienced one death due to APD during the period of 2003-2016. It is evident that the Anaheim Police Department targets low-income, minority neighborhoods, and I am disappointed to see this kind of systemic discrimination in my city. Systemic racism will continue to plague the city if here is no substantial change. Stop allocating the majority of the city’s proposed general fund to the police department, year after year there have been increases to this budget item & it continues to dominate the budget allocation despite reductions due to covid19. About 42% is still proposed to be allocated to police, the money should go to providing the necessities and ensuring the quality of life, as defined by the proposed city budget for fiscal year 2020/2021. Defund the police. Throughout Southern California we are calling for more police accountability and you have shown that you would rather dominate the streets with force than provide space to discuss the matter. Use your power to edit and revise the city’s proposed budget, quit funding draconian overreach by our militarized police force and provide the citizens of Anaheim with as many resources as possible to endure the global pandemic. The city should help its citizenry instead of harassing it. Thank you, Brynn Campos. -- Brynn Campos 24 Public Comment From:Sumayyah Jewell Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:08 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund Anaheim PD and Support Communities Dear Anaheim City Council, I urge you to please restructure the budget, in order to orient funds away from the Anaheim Police Department. Do not put community services at risk, especially during a public health crisis. Police surveillance and military grade weapons will not protect communities, and it is the constituents' money that you are disproportionately putting into the hands of the police. Don't invest in stingrays, begin the process of demilitarizing the police. Don't continue to endanger your own community members. Instead, invest in libraries, they are an essential service that help people of all ages. They protect the public and provide a safe haven in ways that the police rarely do. Turn your attention to public health, Anaheim residents need access to care during this global health pandemic. Provide funds to education and supporting the school system. If you cut funding from public services in order to continue to inflate the police budget, you are promoting the idea that you desire to live in a police controlled state and city. That is unacceptable. Your constituents are watching and we will vote you out if you make a choice that further harms Anaheim. Thank you, Sumayyah Jewell 25 Public Comment From:Andrea Pascual Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:25 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Andrea Pascual, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Andrea Pascual 27 Public Comment From:Ernesto Gutierrez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:47 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Budget Hello, my name is Ernesto Gutierrez. I’ve been an Anaheim resident for 21 years, and I love this city with all my heart.  Please reconsider allowing some of the police budget to be used for other services in the city such as better parks, more  mental health resources, and/or other forms of community management. More policing will only make people more  distrustful of our city and of the officials that run it. Thank you for your time.    Best,  Ernesto Gutierrez  28 Public Comment From:Naomi Gruenthal Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:51 PM To:Public Comment Subject:budget cuts Hello Council Members,  These have been extraordinary times. We have been tirelessly working to provide all the services to the citizens of  Anaheim. We want to continue to do the best we can. Since the great depression, the city staff has not increased. We  have been doing more with less colleagues. We are stretched pretty thin. Layoffs will make it almost impossible to meet  your agenda. Please do not lay off employees at this time. Please consider other options maybe closing City hall a couple  of days a month (citywide furlough), continue visiting city hall by appointment only. Thank you for your consideration  and thoughtfulness during these challenging times.    Thank you,     Naomi Gruenthal  Associate Project Planner  Community Services Department  City of Anaheim  200 S. Anaheim Boulevard  Suite 433  Anaheim, CA 92805  T. 714.765.4465  F. 714.765.4454  E. ngruenthal@anaheim.net  "Please consider the environment before printing this email."    29 Public Comment From:April Porteneuve Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:55 PM To:Public Comment Subject:SAVE COMMUNITY SERVICE FUNDING - DEFUND ANAHEIM POLICE Cutting the community service budget is unconscionable. The police department is funded almost twice as much  fire/rescue. Reallocate funds to invest in our community. Fix your priorities!    ‐April Porteneuve     Sent from my iPhone  30 Public Comment From:mariahl Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:55 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Mariah Smith, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in San Diego, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to:  Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds  Require De-escalation  Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting  Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles  Implement Use of Force Continuum  Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Mariah Smith 32 Public Comment From:smeza keegan Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:55 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Do not cut 20% off the community service budget Hello, I am writing to you all today to request that you revisit your community budget spending and decrease police funding. Cities need to be investing in community education resources and not increasing police. This will hold a sustainable and prosperous Anaheim community in the short and long term. Please do not cut 20% of funding to an already vulnerable population. Kind regards, Smeza K. 1 Public Comment From:Emily Wasilewski Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:16 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Budget To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Emily Wasilewski and I am a resident if Long Beach, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Emily Wasilewski 2 Public Comment From:Esmeralda Cuevas Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:00 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim City Council To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Esmeralda and I am a resident of Anaheim, Ca. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Esmeralda Cuevas Sent from my iPhone 3 Public Comment From:Eric Robledo Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:06 AM To:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Eric Robledo and I am a resident of placentia Ca. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Eric Robledo -- Eric Robledo 4 Public Comment From:Karina Rangel Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:06 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim City Council To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Karina Rangel and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Karina Rangel 5 Public Comment From:theboywhocried flowers Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:07 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Please read To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Anthony Maslo and I am a resident of Alamitos beach, Long Beach. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Hopefully heard, Anthony Maslo 6 Public Comment From:hannah walker Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:11 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim Budget To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Hannah Walker and I am a resident of Orange, California who teaches in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Hannah Walker 7 Public Comment From:Ena Bond Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:13 AM To:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Ena Bond and I am a resident of Fullerton. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ena Bond 8 Public Comment From:Sevi Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:14 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Public comment Dear Anaheim City Council, My name is Dominique Sevi and I am a resident of Huntington Beach. It has become more than clear that a large shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members!!!! We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Dominique Sevi 9 Public Comment From:Coco Cuevas Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:15 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Re: Resolution 19 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Socorro Cuevas and I am an Anaheim resident.I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Socorro Cuevas 1 Public Comment From:Jacob Maag Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:18 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Priorities (defund the police) To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jacob Maag and I am a resident of Fullerton. I spend a fair amount of time in Anaheim and am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jacob Maag 1 Public Comment From:Kaytie Rose Thomas Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:18 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Community Concerns To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Kaytie Rose Thomas and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Kaytie Rose Thomas 1 Public Comment From:Sevi Xcetera Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:23 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Public comment - Anaheim budget Hello, I just heard about the plan for “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests. This is disgusting and awful. Please do not approve this plan. I also just learned about "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. You only spent $1 million to community development last year! But over $150 million on law enforcement. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016!! This is unacceptable. Stop increasing police budget and invest money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. Sevi Xcetera 1 Public Comment From:Hannah Rosen Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:20 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Police Budget Concerns To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Hannah Rosen and I am a resident of Costa Mesa. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We demand the council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which assumes residents are a danger. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Hannah Rosen Sent from my iPhone 2 Public Comment From:Adam Petersen Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:58 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Adam Petersen. I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Adam Petersen Get Outlook for Android 3 Public Comment From:Dennis Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:57 PM To:Public Comment Subject:RE: Resolutions 5, 19, 30 My name is Dennis Figueroa and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA, district 3. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Radically yours, Dennis Figueroa Sent from my iPhone 4 Public Comment From:ember knight Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:54 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Ember Knight and I am a resident of 13th District Los Angeles. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Ember Knight -- Ember Knight 5 Public Comment From:sloppy jane Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:53 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Haley Hyden-Soffer and I am a resident of New York, NY. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Haley Hyden-Soffer 6 Public Comment From:Marisol Altamirano < Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:50 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 publiccomment@anaheim.net To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Marisol Altamirano and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Marisol Altamirano 7 Public Comment From:Irma Macias Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:50 PM To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Counsel: My name is Irma and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Irma 8 Public Comment From:Katie Martinez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:50 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Katie Martinez and I am a resident of District 3 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Katie Martinez 9 Public Comment From:Johanna Leu Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:49 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Johanna Leu and I am a resident of Orange City. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Johanna Leu -- Johanna Leu University of California, Los Angeles, 2018 Psychology, B.A./Applied Developmental Psychology Minor 10 Public Comment From:Angelica Ponce Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:49 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council My name is Angelica and I am a resident of District 3, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Angelica 11 Public Comment From:Gracie Guerrero Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:48 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Gracey Guerrero and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Gracey Guerrero 12 Public Comment From:Diana Chavez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:45 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Diana Chavez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Diana Chavez Sent from my iPhone 13 Public Comment From:Gloria Bates Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:41 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Gloria Bates and I am a resident of Anaheim, born and raised. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. In sincerity, Gloria Bates Sent from my iPhone 14 Public Comment From:Cosette Deza Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:36 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Cosette Deza and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Cosette Deza 15 Public Comment From:Noe Pena Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:35 PM To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Noe D. Pena and I am a resident of District 3 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Noe D. Pena 16 Public Comment From:Tina Huang Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:33 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Tina Huang and I am a resident of Costa Mesa, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well- funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Tina Huang 17 Public Comment From:Adriana Hernandez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:33 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Adriana and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Adriana 18 Public Comment From:Ammar ALKHODR Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:33 PM To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Ammar Alkhodr and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ammar Alkhodr Sent from my iPhone 19 Public Comment From:Joanna Allen Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:32 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council:    My name is Joanna Allen and I am a resident of your neighboring city, Garden Grove, CA. I am writing in deep concern  for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of  policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately  affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end.      The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of  the most well‐funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019‐2020 budget  allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.      Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003‐2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33  people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest‐related  deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for  police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU.      WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on  surveillance technology of anti‐police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted.  We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We  DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency  regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protesters. Instead, invest that money in creating  programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic.      We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community  refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.      Joanna Allen  20 Public Comment From:paulina hernandez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:28 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund the Police To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Paulina Hernandez and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Paulina Hernandez 21 Public Comment From:Henry Tran Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:28 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim City Council To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Henry Tran and I am a resident of Magnolia District/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Henry Tran Sent from my iPhone 22 Public Comment From:Ann Marie Sanchez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:27 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Ann Marie Sanchez and I am a resident of Anaheim District 3. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. COME ON ANAHEIM YOU KNOW BETTER - Ann Marie Sanchez 23 Public Comment From:AW Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:27 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Abraham Delgado and I am a resident of downtown Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. - Abraham 24 Public Comment From:Eunice Lee Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:19 PM To:Public Comment Subject:To the Anaheim City Council My name is Eunice Lee and I am a resident of LA district in Granada Hills. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Eunice 25 Public Comment From:Andrea Pascual Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:17 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Andrea Pascual and I am a resident of District 1 of the City of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. We have faith that the Anaheim City Council will support the voices of city members, employees, and the overall outcry for national recognition of systemic racism. Andrea Pascual 26 Public Comment From:Jesus Cortez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:16 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jesus Cortez and I am a resident of West Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Do the right thing, Jesus Cortez 27 Public Comment From:Karla Ortiz Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:14 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Karla and I am an Anaheim resident. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. 28 Public Comment From:bek Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:13 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Rebekah Dumitrescu and I am a resident of District 5 of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Rebekah Dumitrescu 29 Public Comment From:Amy Gutierrez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:10 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Amy Gutierrez and I am a resident of District 4, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Amy Gutierrez 30 Public Comment From:Colleen Donovan Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:09 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO ON Resolution 5,19 and 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Colleen Donovan and I am a resident of Oakland,CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Colleen Donovan 31 Public Comment From:Cynthia Reynoso Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:09 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Cynthia Reynoso and I am a resident of District 3 in Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Cynthia Reynoso 32 Public Comment From:Josselyn Palma Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:08 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Josselyn Palma and I am a resident of La Habra. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Josselyn Palma 33 Public Comment From:jeremy pamplona Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:07 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jeremy Pamplona and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jeremy Pamplona 34 Public Comment From:Alyssa Robertson Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:03 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Alyssa Robertson and I am a resident of Fullerton, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Alyssa Robertson 35 Public Comment From:Christianah Lovato Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:00 PM To:Public Comment Cc:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Christianah and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Christianah Lovato 36 Public Comment From:Karen Nguyen Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:59 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Karen Nguyen and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Karen Nguyen 37 Public Comment From:Jessica Yi Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:57 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jessica, and I am a resident of Fullerton, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best, Jessica Yi 38 Public Comment From:maria salgado Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:56 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Maria Diaz Valentin and I am a resident of District 4 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Maria Diaz Valentin    39 Public Comment From:Marilu Flores Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:55 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Res. 5,19,30 To the Anaheim City Council My name is Marilu Flores and I am a resident of Anaheim,CA I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best Regards, Marilu Flores 40 Public Comment From:Mitzy Amparan Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:51 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution on 5, 19, 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Mitzy Amparan, and I am a resident of District 4, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Mitzy Amparan 41 Public Comment From:jonathan garcia Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:52 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jonathan Garcia and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jonathan Garcia 42 Public Comment From:Brock Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:51 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim City Council To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Brock Chaffin and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Brock Chaffin 43 Public Comment From:Jason Fernando Tovar Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:51 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Jason and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. All the best, Jason 44 Public Comment From:xally salgado Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:50 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Xally Salgado and I am a resident of District 4/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.  Xally Salgado 45 Public Comment From:Sarah Caparino Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:47 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Sarah Caparino and I am a resident of La Mirada and I work in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sarah Caparino 46 Public Comment From:Brian Cruz Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:46 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Brian Cruz and I am a resident of Anaheim, California I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Enough is enough Brian Cruz 47 Public Comment From:Caroline Solis Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:45 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Caroline Solis and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Caroline Solis 48 Public Comment From:Ariana Castiglia Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:43 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 he Anaheim City Council: My name is Ariana Castiglia and I am a resident of Fullerton CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ariana Castiglia 49 Public Comment From:Davdsv Gddfgdf Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:40 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Michelle Valdivia and I am a resident of District 2. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Michelle Valdivia 50 Public Comment From:izzy ruiz Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:40 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Isabelle and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Isabelle Rendon 51 Public Comment From:Esther Franco Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:37 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Esther Franco and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. ,Esther Franco Sent from my iPhone 52 Public Comment From:Fatima Charara Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:36 AM To:Public Comment Subject:We demand an end to police violence & surveillance To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Fatima and I am a resident of Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Fatima Charara 53 Public Comment From:Lauren Curtius > Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:35 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, and 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Lauren Nicole Curtius and I am a resident of Council District 2. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Lauren Nicole Curtius 54 Public Comment From:Andy Marin Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:34 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Re: Resolution 19, Resolution 5 and Resolution 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Andres Marin and I am a resident of District 3. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Andres Marin 55 Public Comment From: Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:32 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Public Comment: Funding To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Stephanie Pratt and I am a resident of the West District in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Concerned Citizen, Stephanie Pratt 56 Public Comment From:Jackie Gonzalez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:31 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jaclyn Gonzalez and I am a resident of the 3rd District in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We demand the council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which assumes residents are a danger. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jaclyn Gonzalez -- Jaclyn Gonzalez C: Pronouns: She/Her/Hers 57 Public Comment From:Monica Ames Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:30 AM To:Public Comment Subject:BE THE CHANGE To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Monica Lorraine Ames-Torres and I am a resident of Placentia/Fullerton/Anaheim CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. MONICA LORRAINE AMES-TORRES BLM PTTP WE WILL STAY SILENT NO MORE. WE VOTE. 58 Public Comment From:Jamie Perelman Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:25 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim council public comment To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jamie and I am a resident of East Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. 59 Public Comment From:Jeff Salisbury Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:25 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim Police Budget To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jeff Salisbury and I am a resident of CA 45th district. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jeff Salisbury 60 Public Comment From:Jennifer Yuen Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:23 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim Council-Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jennifer and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Jennifer 61 Public Comment From:noemi pantoja Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:00 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No to Resolutions 19, 5, 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Noemi Pantoja and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Noemi 62 Public Comment From:Mariam Mirza Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:21 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund Anaheim PD the Anaheim City Council: My name is Mariam and I am a resident of district 3. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Mariam Mirza 63 Public Comment From:Ryan Serafin Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:19 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim council-public comment To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Ryan Serafin and I am a resident of Anaheim Hills. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best regards, Ryan Serafin 64 Public Comment From:Zion Urias Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:16 AM To:Public Comment Subject:To The Anaheim City Council To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Zion Urias and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Zion Urias. 65 Public Comment From:Xiomara Avila Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:15 AM To:Public Comment Subject:To the Anaheim City Council My name is Xiomara Avila and I am a resident of Corona. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Xiomara Avila Sent from my iPhone 66 Public Comment From:MGfattie Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:19 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim Council - Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Marlene Garcia and I am a resident of West Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Marlene Garcia 67 Public Comment From:Jennifer Arellano > Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:13 AM To:Public Comment Subject:To the Anaheim CityCouncil To the Anaheim City Council:   My name is Jennifer Arellano and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end.  The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.   Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU.  WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic.   We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.        Jennifer Arellano   LVN  68 Public Comment From:christina corona Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:12 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Police Budget To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Christina Corona and I am a resident of District 4. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Christina Corona 69 Public Comment From:Jennifer Arellano Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:11 AM To:Public Comment Subject:To the Anaheim CityCouncil To the Anaheim City Council:   My name is Jennifer Arellano and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end.  The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.   Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU.  WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic.   We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.        Jennifer Arellano   LVN  70 Public Comment From:Ruth Farias Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:10 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Resolution 19 and Resolution 5 Anaheim City Council: My name is Ruth Farias and I am a resident of District 2. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ruth Farias 71 Public Comment From:Gennifer.Arellano Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:09 AM To:Public Comment Subject:To the Anaheim City Council To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jennifer Arellano and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.     Jennifer Arellano   LVN  72 Public Comment From:John Sinambal Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:06 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim Council-Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council:  My name is John and I am a resident of District 3 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater  Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health  must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents  and that must come to an end.  The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of  the most well‐funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019‐2020 budget  allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.  Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003‐2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33  people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest‐related  deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for  police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU.  WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on  surveillance technology of anti‐police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted.  We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We  DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency  regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating  programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic.  We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community  refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.    Thank you,  John Sinambal     Sent from my iPhone  73 Public Comment From:sarachaffin Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:05 AM To:Public Comment Subject:To The Anaheim City Council To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Sara Chaffin and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sara 74 Public Comment From:Taylor Holbrook Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:04 AM To:Public Comment Subject:2020-2021 Police Budget To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Taylor Holbrook, and I am a resident of Fullerton, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Taylor Holbrook, M.A., M.F.A. Taylor Holbrook 75 Public Comment From:Crystal Solis Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:04 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim Council Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Cristal Solis and I am a resident of East Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Cristal Solis Sent from my iPhone 76 Public Comment From:Linda Alvarez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:04 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Change To the Anaheim City Council:  My name is Linda and I am a resident of Anaheim I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim  community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must  take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and  that must come to an end.  The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of  the most well‐funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019‐2020 budget  allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.  Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003‐2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33  people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest‐related  deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for  police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU.  WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on  surveillance technology of anti‐police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted.  We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We  DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency  regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating  programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic.  We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community  refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.  Linda Alvarez  77 Public Comment From:Crystal Alvarez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:02 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Change is needed To the Anaheim City Council:  My name is Crystal Leslie Alvarez and I am a resident of Anaheim . I am writing in deep concern for the health of the  greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and  community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black  and Brown residents and that must come to an end.  The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of  the most well‐funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019‐2020 budget  allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.  Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003‐2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33  people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest‐related  deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for  police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU.  WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on  surveillance technology of anti‐police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted.  We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We  DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency  regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating  programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic.  We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community  refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.  Crystal Leslie Alvarez   78 Public Comment From:Kimberly Salvador Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:00 AM To:Public Comment Subject:To the Anaheim City Council My name is Kimberly Salvador and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community Kimberly Salvador 79 Public Comment From:Breanna Brown Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:00 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Do Not Approve To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Breanna Crowe and I am a resident of Fullerton, CA. I grew up in Anaheim and my family still resides there. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Breanna Crowe 80 Public Comment From:Rocio Reynoso Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:59 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Police violence in this city To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Rocio and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Rocio Reynoso 81 Public Comment From:Alkaid Ramirez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:58 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Public comment for June 9th agenda To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Alkaid Ramirez and I am a resident of Downtown Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Alkaid Ramirez Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone 82 Public Comment From:Katia Covarrubias Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:55 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim City Council - Resolution 19 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Katia Ojendiz and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Katia Ojendiz 83 Public Comment From:Jason Lipeles Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:55 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Police Violence To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jason Lipeles and I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jason Lipeles 84 Public Comment From:Emily Godinez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:54 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Funding. To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Emily Godinez and I am a resident of Fullerton. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Emily Godinez Sent from my iPhone 85 Public Comment From:Jenny Rosales Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:54 AM To:Public Comment Subject:For City Council & Officials To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jennifer Rosales and I am a resident of Anaheim (Harbor/Euclid). I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jennifer Rosales 86 Public Comment From:Stephanie Gosse Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:51 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund Anaheim PD To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Stephanie and I am a resident of the City of Orange. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Stephanie Gosse 87 Public Comment From:Natural Beauty Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:49 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund the police and invest in your city! To the Anaheim City Council: My name is April Pineda and I am a resident of Anaheim California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. April Pineda 88 Public Comment From:Cierra Whitehead < Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:47 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Resolution 19 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Cierra and I am a former resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Cierr 89 Public Comment From:Rihab Beituni Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:23 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Resolution 19 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Rihab Beituni and I am a resident of Anaheim,CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We demand the council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which assumes residents are a danger. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Rihab Beituni 90 Public Comment From:Egbert Arias Tranquilino Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:40 AM To:Public Comment Subject:NO MORE MONEY TO POLICE To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Egbert and I am a resident of Anaheim's third district. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Egbert Summary: DO NOT APPROVE $800,000+ DOLLARS TO THAT POLICE INVEST IN COMMUNITY SERVICES AND CRIME WILL GO DOWN!!!!!! REDUCE OVERALL POLICE BUDGET BY 85% AMD INVEST IN ANAHEIM HEALTHCARE DURING THIS GLOBAL HEALTH CRISIS 91 Public Comment From:Amanda Rosen Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:40 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim Council Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Amanda and I am a resident of Orange County & used to be employed based in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve ?Resolution 19? that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Amanda 92 Public Comment From:Michael Gonzales Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:38 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim PD budget To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Michael Gonzales and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We demand that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which assumes residents are a danger. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community Michael Gonzales 93 Public Comment From:Elizabeth Quiroz Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:38 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim City Council My name is Elizabeth and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Elizabeth Sent from my iPhone 94 Public Comment From:ctinoco Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:35 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Budget To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Christian Tinoco and I am a resident of La Habra. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world.Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Christian Tinoco 95 Public Comment From:Melissa Reiter Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:33 AM To:Public Comment Subject:READ To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Melissa Reiter and I am a resident of Long Beach, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Melissa Reiter 96 Public Comment From:Anthony Gutierrez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:30 AM To:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Anthony Gutierrez and I am a resident of Anaheim, California . I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which assumes residents are a danger. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Anthony Gutierrez 97 Public Comment From:Luisa Lopez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:29 AM To:Public Comment Subject:public comment To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Luisa Lopez and I am a resident of Bush street in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We demand that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which assumes residents are a danger. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. LUISA LOPEZ -- Luisa Lopez Alejandre (She/her/ella) Improving Dreams, Equity, Access, & Success @ SAC Co-Chair 98 Public Comment From:Jessica Gonzales Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:21 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund the Anaheim Police To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jessica Gonzales and I was raised in Anaheim on Walnut and Cerrritos. I watched and listened as community members lost their homes when california adventure expanded - and I payed attention when police shootings were rampant in a neighborhood with 3 schools nearby, close to Ball junior high. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in the city's concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We demand the council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic - helping the houseless, funding the library, improving public transportation, the list goes on and I can provide suggestions. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jessica Gonzales 1 Theresa Bass From:Reid Petersen Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 2:35 PM To:Council Subject:&quot;Cannabis As a long time resident of Anaheim (I have lived With my family in this great city since the late 1980s), I am surprised  And even shocked that the city Is considering allowing the manufacturing, sale and distribution of marijuana and  marijuana products. Is it true that we are inviting up to 20 retail locations, 20 indoor cultivation centers, 20  manufacturing facilities, and 20 distribution centers?    As a high school teacher and as a parent who has raised 5 children in the Anaheim School District, I have seen the  Terrible effects of this drug on young minds.     Anaheim is known throughout the world as a family oriented city. Angels baseball. Ducks Hockey. Disneyland. And other  places where parents feel it is safe to take their children, where there is a wholesome and healthy atmosphere.     Please do not allow these Cannabis facilities to Enter our city and  destroy The wonderful reputation that we have.     Thank you for taking the time to read my opinion.     Reid Petersen   Anaheim CA 92806        Sent from my iPhone  1 Theresa Bass From:Kenneth Chinn Sent:Thursday, June 4, 2020 1:48 PM To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Stephen Faessel; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil; Jose Moreno; Jordan Brandman; Denise Barnes; Council Subject:An Open Letter on Cannabis to Council Member Lucille Kring from a Concerned Anaheim Resident AN OPEN LETTER ON CANNABIS TO COUNCIL MEMBER LUCILLE KRING FROM A CONCERNED ANAHEIM RESIDENT  Dear Council Member Kring,  Your sponsorship and advocacy for marijuana dispensaries in Anaheim is a profound disappointment.  Let me ask you  some questions that would help me better understand why you sponsored, and are so strongly supportive of, this  ordinance.  1.  You are the council member that represents Disneyland and the Disney Resort District.  Why did you carve  out an exception for Disneyland and the Resort District?  In the entirely one‐sided Orange County Register article  on your proposed cannabis ordinance there was included a dispensary owner in LA quoted as a purported  expert on the subject.  In this article the “expert” said that he sells 30% of his marijuana to tourists.  Why then  aren’t you advocating for placing some of the dispensaries on Harbor Blvd around Disneyland and the resort  hotels?  If you’re truly after the tax money, then that would seem to be the logical place for them.  If you truly  think this is best for Anaheim and its residents, why are you fearful of offering it in the resort district?  2. At the May 12th council meeting in the comment section I observed a copy of a letter from you to someone  in West Anaheim containing an assurance that there would be no legal dispensaries under your ordinance in  West Anaheim.  That was not true and was directly contradicted by the city staff.  The staff stated in that same  meeting that there are industrial areas in every council district that could qualify for the location of marijuana  dispensaries under the proposed ordinance.  Why did you tell West Anaheim residents that there would be no  legal dispensaries in West Anaheim when your ordinance allows for them?    3. In follow up to question #2, let me ask how you expect to keep the illegal dispensaries out of West  Anaheim?  As we’ve heard repeatedly and loudly from West Anaheim residents, this is a chronic problem in their  area of the city.  How does opening legal recreational marijuana dispensaries in the far northern industrial area  of West Anaheim drive out the illegal dispensaries in their neighborhoods?  Unlike your specifically carved out  resort district, there is no similar exclusion for West Anaheim.  You advocated in the May 12th council meeting  for keeping taxes low for the legal dispensaries so that they could be more competitive with illegal  dispensaries.  Using your words in the council meeting, you want to find the “sweet spot” for taxation to help  the legal marijuana dispensaries to thrive.     4. In keeping taxes low for legal dispensaries, how is this going to significantly increase tax revenues for the  city?  Why would any resident of Anaheim believe that any of this tax revenue would be used for anything other  than closely monitoring this industry?  How is this going to fund any improvements in Anaheim or school  programs trying to keep kids off drugs, especially when the city is sending the exact opposite message by legally  permitting its sale in our city limits?    5. Why would residents of West Anaheim looking for recreational marijuana drive to the northern boundary of  the city to purchase their pot when they can still find it in the illegal dispensaries that continue to proliferate in  West Anaheim?  What assurances do we have that the illegal dispensaries would be driven out of West Anaheim  2 by competition from the legal dispensaries?  Won’t the illegal dispensaries still offer far cheaper  products?  Won’t residents looking for recreational marijuana refuse to drive 10 minutes away to purchase  marijuana in the industrial area just as many of them presently refuse to drive 10 minutes away to Santa Ana or  LA County for their purchases?    6. How would the sale of marijuana at legal dispensaries protect our youth?  Introducing legal dispensaries in  Anaheim sends the opposite message our schools strive to teach about the dangers of illicit drug use.  It is simply  one more example of adult hypocrisy.  If anything, it will encourage our youth to experiment with marijuana  obtained from neighborhood dealers in their back alleys.      7. If you are successful in your efforts to leave recreational marijuana dispensaries as your legacy as a council  member in Anaheim, what assurance do we have that subsequent city councils can ever drive this industry out  when the city wakes up to the monster you’ve created?  Will the legalized dispensaries be forever entitled to  remain if the law changes?  How do we ever put the lid back on this industry if you and your supporters in the  cannabis industry are successful in overturning our present prohibition?  Will you ask the city attorney to answer  this question in the June 9th council meeting? (how successful has he been at putting toothpaste back in the  tube?)    8. There is some indication that there may be an effort by the city council to duck this issue and instead have  the city council put the question of whether or not Anaheim should allow the sale of recreational cannabis and  related industries to the voters in the November election.   As I remember, you mentioned this possibility  yourself in the May 12th council meeting.  If this happens, how are your constituents Disneyland and the  surrounding resort district going to be protected?  How are our residential neighborhoods and schools going to  be protected?  [This raises the fundamental question of why in the world, if there is so much that needs  protection from this industry, would we want it in Anaheim at all.]  I have heard that the Chamber of Commerce  has some involvement in bringing this to you and is a supporter of your effort to permit the sale of recreational  cannabis, the indoor commercial growing of cannabis, and the manufacturing and distributing of cannabis  products.  Is this true?  If so, how is any local citizen opposition going to be able to raise sufficient funds to  oppose the combined resources of the Chamber of Commerce and the powerful and wealthy cannabis industry  on a ballot measure?  They would flood our mailboxes to overflowing with campaign literature.  Our strongest  resources to combat this are the residents of this city.  Our best hope is to go door to door throughout this city  knocking on our neighbor’s doors to marshal opposition to the ballot measure – right in the middle of a  pandemic.  How is that safe in a pandemic?  Are you cynical enough to use the pandemic to help achieve your  goals?    9. Why are you doing this when our city and state are trying to cope with a pandemic?  Shouldn’t this be fully  debated when your constituents are not distracted by a major health problem and the doors to city hall are  locked?  This is a nightmare of your creation.  Please stop this now.  Ken Chinn    Anaheim, CA.  1 Theresa Bass From:Adam Mintz Sent:Thursday, May 14, 2020 9:00 AM To:Council Subject:Cannabis Dear Anaheim City Council, I am writing to you today to offer some suggestions, and any assistance I can provide you and your staff regarding your cannabis ordinance and taxation. Half of my life was spent growing up in Orange County, and I still have family in Huntington Beach, Brea, and your neighboring city of Fullerton, home to my 90 year old Bubbe. I'll be brief: The success of your cannabis program, as it relates to all non-retail operations, is low taxation and affordable application fees, and that's what our short history has already shown. Local cannabis retail and delivery taxation should really never be above 5%, as that is what will get legal buyers looking elsewhere, whether that's another city, or the black market. In regards to taxation on all other items, time and time again we have cities become attractive overnight due to change in local cannabis taxation. Long Beach and Costa Mesa became destinations for companies once they lowered their taxation to 1% of gross sales. Desert Hot Springs got rid of their manufacturing tax, Palm Springs dropped their distribution tax to 1%, Oakland slashed their whopping 10% tax in half, and the list goes on and on. Benicia, CA has a great local tax, but their application alone is over $50k, so who is willing to risk losing $50k on a business that may or may not get approval? This is not because people are looking to maximize profit, it's because they are looking to conduct business under realistically sustainable conditions, which are few and far between in California at this juncture. Lastly, if the city prefers a method where it knows what it will be making each year, which I assume assists in budgeting and forecasting, then there is one more tax model. That is taxation by square footage, which although is a static tax rate, is one that can make the life of city tax collectors easier, and attract far more operators. If you were to tax $5/psf on the first 20,000sf of a cultivation facility, with a declining scale as square footage went up, both city and operator know what to expect to pay in taxes for a year. Then you could add a yearly renewal fee which, again, would be another number that can be known to both the city and operator. The exact same model can be used for manufacturing, but at a higher rate, as manufacturers require far less space. Square footage taxation models, when reasonable, are far more attractive, as operators do not like getting taxed 2 more than the next person just for being more successful in their grow, all things being equal. I believe that in order to remain competitive in the region, the City of Anaheim should work alongside the City of Fullerton to discuss retail taxation. If one city has 1%-2% more in taxation, and someone lives close to Fullerton, that's where they will shop, which is why balance works best. Also, if your zoning is too tight, you will have a great deal of real estate speculators locking up properties in order to flip them, or rent them to an applicant at a higher rate, which just adds more barriers to entry. I know, as that is what I'm doing right now, however, I focus on working with operators, not against them. Thank you for your time. -- Adam Mintz | Director of Industry Relations | ROR Capital Investments LLC | Adam@RORInvestments.com | rorinvestments.com This communication (including any attachments) is intended for the use of the intended recipient(s) only and may contain information that is confidential, privileged or legally protected. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email message and delete all copies of the original communication. 1 Theresa Bass From:Brian Baker Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 2:07 PM To:Council Subject:"Cannabis" To whom it may concern: I'm writing in opposition to the proposed legislation allowing cannabis retail, cultivation, manufacturing and distribution within the city of Anaheim. Speaking as a home owner and a family man, I can say this this is NOT something I want around my home and my family. This is not something I want to have eroding our community and polluting our environment. I don't want the image of Anaheim to be tarnished and sullied by the negative impact that industry brings with it. There other ways to generate revenue, this one we can do with out. I don't just live and play in Anaheim, I work here also. I own two businesses in the city of Anaheim (a corporation and a home business) Please believe me when I say that the cost to benefit analysis of this proposed legislation doesn't pan out. This is a non starter and should be something that Anaheim passes on. Thank You for your time. Respectfully Submitted, -Brian Baker 1 Theresa Bass From:Maureen Christensen Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 12:23 PM To:Council Subject:Cannabis - Oppose Dear Mayor and City Council, I oppose the proposed ordinance to bring Cannabis to the City of Anaheim. I am a long time resident and have seen what drugs (even legal ones) and alcohol have done to our community. Please do not let the lure of tax dollars change us even more into Santa Ana. I am a local realtor and am tired of being called "Anacrime". Please protect our citizens. Maureen Christensen 1 Theresa Bass From:Tek Sent:Saturday, May 16, 2020 6:13 PM To:Council Subject:Cannabis I as a business owner in the city of Anaheim would strongly agree with allowing Cannabis Licenses to operate with in the  city of Anaheim. Cannabis already exists with in the city behind closed doors weather we like it or not.  Why not legalize  it with limits on licenses and collect Tax/Fees revenue. It’s legal almost everywhere else. Our citizens have to go to cities  near by to be able to get legal products. Surrounding city’s are taking revenue away from our city. Also I strongly would  rather see people being able to get legal and tested cannabis versus illegal and  untested cannabis. Thank you     Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this electronic e‐mail and any accompanying attachment(s) is  intended only for the use of the intended recipient and may be confidential. If any reader of this communication is not  the intended recipient, unauthorized use, disclosure or copying is strictly prohibited, and may be unlawful. If you have  received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e‐mail, and delete the original  message and all copies from your system. Thank you.  1 Theresa Bass From:D Stone Sent:Friday, May 22, 2020 3:09 AM To:Council Subject:Cannabis Business Permits   Having “shopped” cannabis friendly cities in Southern California I can say all are prime examples of Bumbling  Bureaucracies. They hold themselves out as cannabis friendly but it’s not true. I spoke to one city clerk about actual  permits/licenses issued in their City. They claim 15 licenses were issued in 11 months but not one cannabis business  existed in the city. The reason is the license fees were exorbitant and the City Ordinance draconian. 3 of the 11 had  resigned prior to the renewal date.  If Anaheim followed the California Department of Agriculture and Foods licensing plan charged an annual fee and 10%  tax on gross revenues Anaheim would be a richer community. But Anaheim must use a heavier hand when it comes to  unlicensed Cannabis business within City limits.  I hope this helps.       Sent from my flip phone  1 Theresa Bass From:Maria Avellan Sent:Thursday, May 14, 2020 8:25 PM To:Council Subject:Cannabis Dispensaries Council Members                                                                                      I’m strongly opposed to permitting Marijuana Dispensaries in Anaheim        Respectfully                                                                                                                                            Maria Avellan                                Anaheim,CA 92808     From:Rosario Vigil To:Council Subject:Cannabis ordibance Date:Friday, June 5, 2020 12:26:19 PM I am against this ordinance...we as Anaheim residents believe that we don't need this money taxis..Anaheim already have enough avenues to get money plus allowing this cannabis business we will have more crime...in our city.... Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android From:Christina To:Council Subject:Cannabis Date:Thursday, May 14, 2020 12:58:17 PM Many cities throughout the state have capitalized on the opportunity to provide job opportunities and tax revenue to their cities through cannabis based businesses. Typically Cannabis based businesses are business people. They show the merit of their business concept, their experience and ability to have a successful business when they submit a permit. When the City reviews the permit, they will know which cannabis business will add to the wealth of the community by adding jobs and revenue to the city. Our State has formulated legislation to ensure that safety is considered above revenue and I am certain that Anaheim will maintain that standard. Because of this, I recommend that you approve a measure to permit legal Cannabis sales in the City of Anaheim. -- Christina M. Hernandez From:Message Center To:Council Subject:Cannabis Date:Monday, May 18, 2020 9:18:41 AM Hello, As a homeowner in Anaheim Hills, I think legalizing cannabis will be good for our economy. Legalized cannabis generates tax revenue. With C19 bringing economic progress to halt we need to think about alternatives. What’s holding us back? Thank you, Shane A. Edwards From:Jerry Ames To:Council Subject:Cannabis Date:Monday, May 18, 2020 11:11:35 AM If we are to legalize recreational use of cannabis then we should legalize, regulate, and tax prostitution. It makes just as much sense. Jerry From:Craig Wasserman To:Council Subject:Cannabis Date:Monday, May 18, 2020 11:46:44 AM Dear City Council I live in Anaheim and have been an Attorney practicing Cannabis law for over 25 years. I give you the following as I would like to see the City in which I have lived for 33 years make the right choices when Taxing and Regulating cannabis. The following will help CLOSE all illegal shops and allow the legal businesses to flourish and provide safe access for Cannabis, instead of the shady , sleezy & unsafe shops that still exist in this City. This can only be accomplished by a sensible & reasonable policy on cannabis. 4. As you are aware, most cities in the State have started off at with an average of 6% tax on gross revenues, on top of the and the State Cultivation Tax and the Excise tax (15%) that is paid by the Distributor and one by the (15%) Consumer, then you have the regular City and State Sales and Use tax, which can effectively tax the product at 40% or higher. This is driving people back to the illicit market and makes it very difficult for legal cannabis businesses to stay in business. Most cities that started with a high tax, are now cutting back the Taxes to 1%. 5. I highly recommend the Tax be on the Net profit, not the Gross. Why treat this Business,, "which has been deemed essential" any differently than any other agricultural product or goods? Taxing a business on their Gross profit will not allow profitability, especially with Tax Code 280(e) adversely effecting their bottom line. You are setting up many businesses to fail by taxing on the Gross. 6. Even though I do not believe there should be a cap on any of these businesses and allow a free market to decide, there is no reason to cap the number of Non- Retail businesses, since they are limited to Industrial areas. The City is only limiting the number of Jobs and Revenue's that come from the Cannabis industry, by limiting the number of non-retail businesses. 7. You should seriously consider putting in a provision for Consumption Lounges, especially since we are such a huge tourist destination, so that tourists have a safe place to use the Cannabis they purchase in our City. One last caveat regarding keeping taxes low on Cannabis businesses: “Wouldn't you rather have a little bit of revenue of a huge amount or a lot of a little? If anyone from the City Council wishes to discuss any of my points above, please feel free to reach out to my office. Law offices of Craig S. Wasserman, Inc. Pot Brothers At Law 12362 Beach Blvd., Ste. 15 Stanton, CA 90680 (714) 799-0543 eFAX (714) 799-5504 ******************* PLEASE NOTE ******************* This message, along with any attachments, may be confidential or legally privileged. It is intended only for the named person(s), who is/are the only authorized recipients. If this message has reached you in error, kindly destroy it without review and notify the sender immediately. Thank you for your help. ********************************************************** From:Dining and Stools Unlimited To:Council Subject:Cannabis Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2020 10:06:52 AM From: Dining & stools Unlimted 1500 N. State College Bl. Anaheim 92806 As a business owner that falls into the industrial map provided, I vehemently oppose the legalization of cannabis shops in Anaheim. We have been in this location for over 40 years and have seen the area change drastically. We had a huge homeless problem which has now been improved. But an illegal pot shop opened across the street from us at Amighini Antique & Custom Doors. He was renting a space to an illegal pot shop on his property that drew unsavory characters to the neighborhood. Since parking was limited, customers would park in our lot and cross the street. There was even a shooting on the corner at one point. Is this what you want for this city? It took months to get them out but it was successful. To bring this scourge back would be a detriment for our business and our customers. And the Motel 6 across from us already has questionable people staying there. We've seen the police & ambulances in their parking lot many times. Prostitution and drug use is rampant there and would only get worse. We also have a warehouse behind us on Via Burton where our customers pick up their goods. They should not have to feel wary due to the influx of pot users that may park behind our store. The people who were going to the pot shop looked like the typical drug user, not a customer who would visit our store. I suggest that the laws to oust a business like this be strengthened and made to move more quickly for their closure. I realize the city would receive more money in taxes but is money or the livelihood of small businesses like ours more important to city officials? We have been closed for 2 months due to the pandemic and now we will have this to fight off - not exactly what I would expect from Anaheim. I urge you to reconsider what this would do to us and our retail neighbors. Thank you. Tom & Yolanda Talbot Owners From:Travis Call To:Council Subject:Cannabis Date:Sunday, May 24, 2020 12:24:11 AM Dear Council Members, I am a life long Anaheim resident and cannabis consumer of 18 years. I'd simply like to say, it is the responsibility of this fine city to allow for well-funded, regulated and responsible cannabis businesses to operate within city limits. As you have already realized, no matter how hard you try to close illicit shops, more just pop up despite your efforts. As all of the capital in the cannabis industry has flowed over to the legal side of things, the people left over are not the element you want running cannabis businesses. They're renegades with no concern other than making a quick buck. Some I suspect may even be run by criminal enterprises. I will say as someone who's patronized these shops many times, they are unsafe. They are full of building and health code violations. California has strict guidelines regarding pesticides and mold, of which these shops pay no mind. They're selling unregulated, untaxed cannabis products. In this scenario, we all lose. Cannabis has been used for centuries and no law has ever been able to stop it. The best course of action is a well thought out plan to allow cannabis businesses in parts of the city. You've welcomed breweries and distilleries with open arms. Its time to start allowing law abiding retailers to capture business from the illicit shops to weaken and close them down for good. I know some residents may disagree, but the people of California voted in this law for a reason. Prohibition is what's driven the very criminal activity that we expel so many resources to fight. It's time to try a different approach. Sincerely, Travis Call From:Ka"ea Outhier To:Council Subject:Cannabis Date:Thursday, May 28, 2020 5:26:24 PM Hi, I love Anaheim. Please ban cannibis sales except for medical use as prescribed by a Dr. Great for cancer patients and pain management but not helpful for recreational use. Thank you! Kahaleea Outhier Lifetime Anaheim resident From:Bob Denkers To:Council Subject:Cannabis Date:Friday, June 5, 2020 11:42:10 AM Dear Members of the Anaheim City Council, I want you to know I am a long time resident of Anaheim and strongly oppose the sell of cannabis in Anaheim, Please vote to block the sell or cultivation of cannabis in the City of Anaheim Thank you Sincerely, Bob Denkers From:Bryan Low To:Council Subject:Cannabis Date:Friday, June 5, 2020 12:12:52 PM To Anaheim City Council members, I do not support the sale, cultivation, manufacturing, or distribution of cannabis in the City of Anaheim. I moved away from Los Angeles to raise my family in a city that shared my values. There are relatively few strip clubs, adult stores, liquor stores, bars, smoke shops and no marajuana stores that tend to bring in people that do not share my values. I've seen places in Los Angeles improve and decay simply based on the types of businesses allowed. I've lived in the colony for over 10 years now and I've seen tremendous improvements in an area my family in LA and south county told me not to move. They would remind me of the Ana-crime and Ana-slime nicknames and tell me to stay away from anywhere close to Ball in Anaheim. I've loved living in Anaheim and the city has done a great job developing a new narrative for the city that does not play into our past reputation. The cannabis business will have a negative effect. I've already seen it in other cities. Please help us maintain our property values, dignity, and values. Help us maintain a safe city free from irresponsible people that tend to smoke. Help us keep it away from our children. You can help by opposing this ordinance. Thank you, Bryan Low Concerned resident From:Georgia Denkers To:Council Subject:Cannabis Date:Friday, June 5, 2020 1:13:02 PM Dear Mayor and City Council, Please do not allow the ordinance to pass. I think it would be a detriment to our city and lead to more crime. I already live next door to a family that grows their own and smokes it in their backyard subjecting my family to the secondhand smoke. I would hate for our whole city to smell like Las Vegas. Georgia Denkers Sent from my iPhone From:Georgia Denkers To:Council Subject:Cannabis Date:Friday, June 5, 2020 1:16:58 PM My elderly neighbor(85), Shirley Roberts, has asked that I voice her opposition to the ordinance that would allow marijuana to be grown, manufactured and sold in Anaheim as she has no computer and no email address. She does however vote. Sent from my iPhone From:Paul S To:Council Subject:Cannabis Date:Friday, June 5, 2020 1:27:59 PM I am opposed to the sale of recreational cannabis in Anaheim. From:Ryan Christensen To:Council Subject:Cannabis Date:Friday, June 5, 2020 1:37:15 PM I want to voice my opposition to cannabis being sold, cultivated, warehoused, etc in the City of Anaheim. It's not something that is needed or necessary in our city. Ryan N. Christensen From:Mike Lyster To:Council Subject:FW: Cannabis Date:Monday, May 18, 2020 8:03:12 AM From: Edward Subia Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2020 6:21 PM To: Mike Lyster <MLyster@anaheim.net> Subject: Re: Cannabis On May 17, 2020, at 6:19 PM, Edward Subia wrote: Mayor Harry Sidhu and City Council Members, We are strongly objecting to allowing Cannabis within Anaheim for recreational use and “party time” functions. Out-of-Control vehicle drivers high on Cannabis, people “ using poor judgment” and Cannabis being a gateway substance to stronger addictive drugs. Our society does not need any more dangerous activities which impacts the public good. However, we do approve of “Medical Cannabis” only if medically prescribed by a certified physician. We will be watching - District 6 Board Member. Sincerely, Melinda D Subia From:Jakki Hernandez To:Council Subject:I am for cannabis! Date:Friday, June 5, 2020 10:10:43 AM Hello Anaheim Council Members, My name is Jakki Hernandez. I am a 39 year old married woman who resides in Anaheim district 2. I am a medical cannabis patient who consumes the plant due to multiple autoimmune conditions that affect my nervous system causing chronic pain. Coming from the perspective of a patient, I am pleading with you to allow legal cannabis shops in our city. The sad truth is whether you allow it or not, they are here. As a patient I know first hand how hard it is to obtain medicine that is trusted and consistent to treat my chronic pain. I was fortunate to have found a plant that allowed me to get off of every opiate the doctors prescribed me for a better part of a decade. It also removed a lot of the other prescriptions those opiates caused me to need to help with my digestive tract issues from years of prescribed opiate use. I was born with a condition called Neurofibromatosis. This condition is where tumors grow on and around your nervous system. As many with autoimmune disorder, once you have one you are prone to more. After a fall, I broke my foot and later developed another pain condition called Complex Regional Pain Syndrome that also affects the nervous system and is often described as the most painful chronic pain condition to have. Today, I have more tumors on my body than I can count, I have had 8 surgeries to remove 100s of tumors growing from my head to my feet. Before my first surgery, I was hospitalized for 2 months because the pain had grown so intense, and the tumor was growing internally and externally affecting the way I walked and even sat. As I was hospitalized and pumped full of morphine it occured to me, why are they giving me synthetic heroin (morphine) when they could easily give me a natural plant, cannabis? Fast forward to when they released me from the hospital with a medication list of painkillers, stool softeners and methadone along with instructions that they were too scared to remove any tumors because they were connected to important nerves. I knew this diagnosis was far to bleak for a 22 year old to hear. They were hoping I would find relief through their cocktail of medications, but of course it did not help. It actually affected me way more than any joint ever did. Needless to say, this led me back to the emergency room to get catheterized since all my muscles were so overly doped up. I couldn't go to the bathroom on my own. After a brief candid discussion with my doctor led me to the realization I had been severely over medicated and these medicines were not even helping relieve the pain. I cried to myself, "there has to be a better way." At that moment I told my loved ones, even if I scream do not give me these pills. The next few days led me to a terrible 6 day withdrawal that made me promise myself I would never take another pill again. I was hallucinating, vomiting, shivering, sweating, and even had to stay in a bath of hot water for most of the day to deal with the debilitating pain my body experienced. Over 15 years later, I can now say I am completely off of the drugs the doctors prescribed me. As a consumer/ patient of cannabis for over 15 years I can with 100 percent certainty say there is no withdrawal when omitting the medicine from my life, and I have not developed an addiction. I have gone without, but why would I when this plant is what gives me the ability to be, "pain - less" enough to be a functional member of society. I am able to consume an edible or a cannabis tincture multiple times a day just as I would use a Vicodin or a Norco given by a doctor, to help me with my internal tumor pain and apply cannabis topicals to help with the pain on top of my skin. Cannabis is now the only type of medication I consume. To think, my very own doctors told me that nothing could help me. Actually, the last thing I heard from a pain management doctor was, "I would have to live with a morphine pump in my spine for the rest of my life, in order to find relief and function." Morphine would be like my insulin if I were a diabetic. This should never be someone's way of life if a plant can give a person better relief with no harmful side effects. I am so glad, I did not listen and I did my own research. Plants over pills is now a slogan I use daily. This is why I am an advocate for cannabis legalization. I am close to this industry and recently left the cannabis retail space in Long Beach. I have spent the last 15 years helping other people like myself live a life with less discomfort and little side effects. Not every person has my story, and that is why it is important to have educated people working in these state regulated cannabis shops. The licensed stores not only bring safe and consistent medicine to those that need it most. They also improve the city they are placed in, by following the guidelines in place and bringing security to a neighborhood that normally doesn't have it. I can personally attest to our licensed cannabis shop improving the city; from our security protecting the neighborhood to our local city cleanups I noticed first hand providing safe access not only is a necessity for patients like myself but it can also build up a neighborhood. We checked i.d and only let those 21 years of age or older purchase products, had to enter all items exchanged with vendors into a system tracked by the state and everything had to be tested to enter our store. These are not exclusive to my store, they are the rules all legal shops follow in order to protect the consumer also which the consumer pays heavily for through taxes. This is a major benefit for cities since the taxes they pay can go back to rebuilding roads, schools and also funds anti drug programs. Illicit shops are not obvious to the layman that they are not legal. This means all types of people will walk in and obtain the products behind the counter. By continuing to permit the non licensed cannabis shops in Anaheim your residents and tourists are affected by many consequences of the illicit market. 1. The products sold in unregulated shops are not lab tested. 2. Safety is a large concern, these shops do not have security guards. 3. Often contain harmful chemicals, mold or are sold past the expiration date 4. The products are sold to anyone, with no consideration of any age or health condition. 5. Allow consumption on premise 6. These shops at times place taxes on the consumer, and since the shop is not regulated or licensed 100% of those profits goes directly to the underground drug market in Anaheim. This also confuses your residents, since it appears the shop is more legitimate when they see taxes on the receipt. 7. Our citizens and visitors are duped into shopping at these stores believing they are regulated by the state resulting in the city of Anaheim, it is not common knowledge that the only current city allowing licensed cannabis is Santa Ana. 8. The Anaheim residents do not know they are shopping in a black market store or that these shops are selling counterfeit products in packages that otherwise, are sold in the regulated cannabis market. Not providing competition for these illicit shops allows them to continue to manipulate and harm the Anaheim residents and its visitors. Providing options for the patients and consumers to shop local and buy legal will not only bring in revenue and jobs from these essential workplaces but will provide safe access to regulated products for anyone that visits Anaheim. I am speaking for the patients when I say, this is a public health issue as they are the ones who know they have compromised immune systems but don't know the products they are purchasing may contain harmful chemicals that could exacerbate their issues or much worse cause severe illness like the most recent vape illness, Evali that plagued our country. This unfortunate illness comes from the illicit markets vape products. Sadly, some of these products even used the packaging from legal brands to compel the person to buy. Only, the products sold at illicit stores don't have to follow state guidelines to protect their shoppers. Also patients don't always have the means or ability to drive 45 minutes to a county that can serve them. Please think about the patients, it is so difficult to be able to obtain safe and effective plant medicine. As a former Cannabis Retail Manager, I have seen and spoken to every demographic that would enter my shop. The consensus is, many do not know the difference between a legal and illegal shop. Until that is they have an experience at one. The service is educated and well communicated. The products are all tested and consistent. The brands even come with references for actual medical professionals allowing us to connect actual patients with science based answers to their questions. We can bring this service to our city, we deserve it. Our elderly and immunocompromised citizens deserve safe access without having to drive 40 miles away. Lets have Anaheim be the city that stands up to the other market by showing the public the difference. Clean tested cannabis products available for our city. We can kick out the black market storefronts by providing legal competition. Please pass this ballot measure so the residents of Anaheim can choose for themselves in November whether or not commercial cannabis should be in their town. Thank you for your time and consideration Jakki Hernandez OcNorml Orange County Commercial Cannabis Licensing Task Force Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such person) you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, you should destroy this message (and attachments) and kindly notify the sender by reply mail. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to official business of this firm shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. 1 Public Comment From:Toan Ngo Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:47 AM To:Public Comment; Council Subject:I support cannabis in anaheim   I remember caretaking since 2015  pacific coast relief stopped last year to follow the law.  Need a license to continue  safe access!             Publiccomment@anaheim.net  Council@anaheim.net    ‐ Toan Ngo  Pacific Coast Relief Founder  1 Public Comment From:eyesforgood Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:57 PM Subject:Public Comments for the next meeting to be read To whom it may concern We are very annoyed that a Board Member continues to use the dais for his political bashings and rantings. The law prohibits using public resources for political purposes, why is the Chair of the TCA Board not shutting down this inappropriate political dialogue? We have heard that the TCA supported two candidates in the last San Clemente City Council election so the TCA would have influence over the city’s policymaking. The TCA has NO BUSINESS meddling in local elections, as it goes against our great democracy and is against the law. Just so you know Rancho Santa Margarita has a population of roughly 48,000 people yet, the TCA Director Tony Beall slams and smashes our elected highly qualified and effective elected officials that represent over 500,000 people in Orange County. It is astonishing that the TCA attorney and the other board members allow this bully to spew misinformation and his own hateful political agenda on our public dime. This needs to stop. A complaint will be filed with the FPPC and we hope that the TCA cleans up this illegal and highly inappropriate behavior. Eyes for Good Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. 1 Public Comment From:Lorie Sandoval Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:19 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Moving forward & BLM My question to the city council is this- In the aftermath of George Floyd & protesting in our city, what does the council plan to do about complaints regarding police violence? Our city has come together demanding racial equality and justice for all. How do you plan to address this issue? 2 Public Comment From:Lauren Torres Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:24 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Public Comment on Behalf of Dist. 1 Resident Hello,     I am submitting the following comment on behalf of a resident that called the City Council office:     Comment from: Karen Burkert – Dist. 1 Resident –    “City of Anaheim needs to extend the rental assistance program for the duration of the pandemic. I am a Disneyland  employee. We are being told that the park may not reopen until January 1st, or even after that date. I have lived in the  same apartment for 20 years. I do not want to be evicted. There is no way I can pay my rent without this program. I am  worried about what will happen to me. I also believe that Anaheim should legalize cannabis dispensaries. The tax  revenue from those sales can be used for this rental assistance program. I believe that District 1 would strongly benefit  from neighborhood improvements that this tax revenue can pay for. “     Submitted on Karen’s behalf by:     Lauren Torres Senior Secretary  Office of the Mayor and City Council  ltorres@anaheim.net   714-765-4393      3 Public Comment From:Mark Daniels < Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:45 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Peaceful Protest The Events of the Past Few Weeks, gives us a chance to, stop and reflect on one own self, and our City's past history, of the officers of Anaheim police department, who has acted as 'Judge, Jury and executioner', in the killing of several unarmed civilians, and the business as usual approach, by the police department and even more so the city council, unwillingness to ask questions, pass council's did go as far as appointing a quasi civilian police review board, to give recommendations to the city council (or so that's how it's billed) Just recent the judgement against the department, and a pay out of millions of dollars to the family of Vincent Valenzuela and several more incidents that have recently taken place, you should be asking yourself, are we as a City and We as Elected Council Members asking to 'right' questions,or for some, are you asking any questions at all? Also the 'undo influence' of the Anaheim Police Union, on the Elected Members of the Council, I think would Hinder the Elected City Council Members from seeking change, in other words (the voters aren't there) to have true reform. It should be within your discretion, to remove any members of the police department, especially the repeat offenders, and any future misconduct, involving civlians injuries or deaths. Mark Richard Daniels -Anaheim 4 Public Comment From:Derek Bracho < Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:14 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Stand against racism Dear Council Members, I am a latino resident and business owner in Anaheim and I am proud to see the protests we are having and proud to see the peaceful support. The problem is we are part of a larger county, and there are grave injustices happening all around us. From the KKK in Huntington Beach that surrounded me at the protests and threatened my life with a motorcycle to the OC Sheriff with an Oath keepers/III% patch on to intimidate peaceful protesters. WE as a city need to stand up as an example to the rest of this county and condemn these actions. WE as a city need to condemn the OC Sheriff's department for saying "Any symbol can have multiple meanings and is open to interpretation". Let US be an example for the rest of Orange County, let us be the change that is needed. Thank you for reading and I hope you make the right decision and stand on the right side of history. -- 1 Public Comment From:Scarlette Almero < Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:50 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Change for City of Anaheim Mayor & City Council Members, As a long time resident & homeowner in Anaheim ..my HOPE & RESPECTFUL RECOMMENDATION for Anaheim... Moving Forward.. Implement some long term SOLUTIONS to END ALL Social INJUSTICE and INEQUALITY that may be occurring in Anaheim...Some institutions of the City that may need to be REVIEWED: .. I understand there may be a police Commission However as the Governing board of Anaheim I Recommend can YOU review THE POLICE FORCE...DO OFFICERS need retraining.. Outlawing some maneuvers that may cause injury/ death...Also Ensure ALL Officers have a mindset of community... a mindset to bring those accused of a crime in to face their punishment thru the judicial system..Officers are not Judge-Jury-Executioner...At the same time Officers / and those accused of crime must ALL be safe...I understand this will be Challenging...but thru.. DIFFERENT MINDSETS...MORE LOCAL POLICING..Bringing neighborhood leaders TOGETHER to brainstorm on Solutions that will work long term..or other suggested positive ideals... CHANGE begins with ideas then put into positive actions I know there is a school board ..However as a young person is educated ..this will affect their whole life...Are Our schools safe ..and a place where ALL students FEEL SAFE&can learn?? The Police Department & School system are only two Institutes I mention here....WE are a big city But working toward POSITIVE SOLUTIONS THRU POSITIVE ACTIONS is not IMPOSSIBLE...IT WILL BE CHALLENGING..but with YOUR patience..leadership..hard work and staying accountable to We Your constituents...HOPEFULLY WE CAN ALL WORK TOGETHER UNITED to make Anaheim a wonderful place to live & work & play.....MY HOPE FOR WORLD PEACE & PEACEFUL DIGNITY FOR ALL STARTS in my home first..and 2nd in my local community( Anaheim)...if We citizens are called to ACTION ..by YOU the city Council to preform actions that will make a BETTER FUTURE FOR ALL ..then many of us would be happy to be of service Thanks for reading& considering some new ideals for a better future for ALL Scarlette Almero 2 Public Comment From:Lissa Smith Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:45 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items Dear Mayor, City Council and Staff, I appreciate how difficult it must be to hold City Council meetings virtually with the need to accommodate the public in matters of deliberation. I have reviewed the current agenda for today's meeting and was curious as to why there does not seem to be mention of the City's response and efforts toward justice and an update on the City's response to the recent protests and marches calling for justice and the dismantling of systematic racism in our communities. I appreciate that you have included a moment of silence for George Floyd, but I hope you will have more to say. Is there a time and place we can look forward to the City's response and plan? Sincerely, Rev. Lissa Smith Anaheim Resident - Anaheim, CA 92807 -- Lissa Smith Pastor Canyon Hills Presbyterian Church 1 Public Comment From:Stinky Makara Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:51 PM To:Public Comment Subject:DEFUND APD To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Gabriel and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019- 2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -GABRIEL 2 Public Comment From:Emily Vazquez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:09 PM To:Public Comment Subject:We demand To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Emily Vazquez and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Emily Vázquez 1 Public Comment From:jaielen Perez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:01 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name Jaielen Perez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jaielen Perez 2 Public Comment From:Guadalupe Contreras Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:37 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Guadalupe Contreras and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest- related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Guadalupe Contreras -- Best, Guadalupe Contreras 3 Public Comment From:Denise Pineda Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:25 PM To:Public Comment Subject:DEFUND ANAHEIM POLICE To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Ashley Pineda and I am a constituent of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely but not silently, Ashley Pineda 4 Public Comment From:Yanira Castillo Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:21 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Yanira and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Yanira Castillo 5 Public Comment From:aileen gutierrez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:20 PM To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is [Aileen Gutierrez] and I am a resident of [Orange county/Anaheim]. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. [Aileen Gutierrez] 6 Public Comment From:Elizabeth Valadez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:20 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30   To the Anaheim City Council:    My name is Elizabeth Valadez and I am a resident of Santa Ana. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the  greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and  community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black  and Brown residents and that must come to an end.    The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of  the most well‐funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019‐2020 budget  allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.    Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003‐2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33  people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest‐related  deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for  police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU.    WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on  surveillance technology of anti‐police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted.  We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We  DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency  regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating  programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic.    We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community  refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.    Elizabeth Valadez    Sent from my iPhone  7 Public Comment From:Hannah Coursey Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:16 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Hannah Coursey and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Hannah Coursey 8 Public Comment From:Briana Nguyen Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:16 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Briana Nguyen and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Briana Nguyen 9 Public Comment From:Sydnie Stocks Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:14 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Anaheim City Council: My name is Sydnie and I am a resident of Anaheim, 92807. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Regards, Sydnie Stocks 10 Public Comment From:Emily Ramon Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:12 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Emily Ramon and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Emily Ramon 11 Public Comment From:Diana Torres Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:12 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19,& 30 My name is Diana Torres and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Diana Torres 12 Public Comment From:Katie Daniels Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:09 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Dr. Kathryn Daniels, and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing to urge you to disinvest in police and invest in the community. Restructuring community safety away from policing is the future. Anaheim has the choice to be a leader in this issue. Sadly, if Anaheim chooses to not restructure how it funds community safety at this time, the city will be LESS safe and more lives will be lost to police violence. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest- related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. 13 WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Stop wasting money on police when they DO NOT make our community safer. Sincerely, Dr. Kathryn Daniels -- Sent from Gmail Mobile 14 Public Comment From:Sherine Zaragoza Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:07 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Sherine Zaragoza and I am a resident of Anaheim in District 3. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sherine Zaragoza 15 Public Comment From:Amber Olmos Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:01 PM To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Amber Olmos and I am a resident of Los Angeles, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely. Amber Olmos -- In community, Amber Olmos 16 Vox Collegiate of Los Angeles | Special Education Coordinator Los Angeles, CA 90044 | www.voxcollegiate.org UCLA Class of 2019 | Chicanx Studies Major, Education Studies Minor Pronouns: She/Her, They/Them 17 Public Comment From:Kaitlyn Sandoval Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:59 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 My name is Kaitlyn Sandoval and I am a resident of Anaheim, Ca. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Regards, Kaitlyn Sandoval 18 Public Comment From:Karina Mora Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:51 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Karina, and I am a resident of District 1, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Karina Mora 19 Public Comment From:Cindy Martinez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:43 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Cindy Martinez and I am a resident of Anaheim’s District 3. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become abundantly clear that we must radically shift our meaning of policing and community health; this change must start at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. A concerned citizen, Cindy Martinez Sent from iPhone 20 Public Comment From:Rawan Adam Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:41 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Rawan Adam and I am a resident of Orange County in Garden Grove. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Rawan Adam 21 Public Comment From:Leslie Ortega Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:41 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Leslie and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. 22 Public Comment From:Jehieli Hernandez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:39 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolutions 5,19 & 30 My name is Jehieli Hernandez and I am a resident in the city of Santa Ana (District 46). I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. Be an example for other cities to follow, so that we can build a better tomorrow, together. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protesters. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jehieli Hernandez 23 Public Comment From:Jose Garcia Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:38 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is José Garcia and I am a resident ofAnaheim I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jose Garcia. 24 Public Comment From:gustavo jaimes Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:36 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Gus Jaimes and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Gus Jaimes Sent from my iPhone 25 Public Comment From:Angie Belen Monreal Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:35 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council, My name is Angie Monreal and I am a resident of Anaheim CA. I am also a UCLA alumni and a Columbia University graduate student. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Angie Monreal -- Angie B. Monreal M.S.W. Candidate Columbia University | School of Social Work Pronouns: She, Her, Hers Cell: 26 Public Comment From:Alyse Sardinas Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:32 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Alyse Sardinas, and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Alyse Sardinas 27 Public Comment From:Catherine Tran Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:31 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Catherine Tran and I am a resident of District 4. As a resident of more than 28 years, I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council NOT approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We DEMAND that the council NOT approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council NOT approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community, especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Catherine Tran 28 Public Comment From:Alondra Mojica Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:31 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Alondra Mojica and I am a resident of District 65, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Alondra M Sent from my iPhone 29 Public Comment From:Anahi Sanchez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:25 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Anahi Sanchez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Anahi Sanchez 30 Public Comment From:Elise Burlace Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:25 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council, My name is Elise Burlace and I am a resident of Buena Park, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Elise Burlace Sent from my iPhone 31 Public Comment From:caavila Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:25 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: I am a resident of Anaheim and I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Carina Avila 32 Public Comment From:sam kim Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:22 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Samantha and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Samantha Kim 33 Public Comment From:Olivia Alvarez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:21 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 My name is Olivia Alvarez and I am a resident of District 5, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the  greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and  community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black  and Brown residents and that must come to an end.  The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of  the most well‐funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019‐2020 budget  allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.  Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003‐2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33  people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest‐related  deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for  police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU.  WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on  surveillance technology of anti‐police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted.  We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We  DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency  regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating  programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic.  We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community  refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.    Olivia Alvarez  34 Public Comment From:Harbor Store Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:20 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 o the Anaheim City Council: My name is Eugenia Pelagio and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Eugenia Pelagio 35 Public Comment From:Amber Garcia Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:19 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Amber Garcia and I am a resident of Orange, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Amber Garcia -- Amber Garcia 36 Public Comment From:Arthur Vargas Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:15 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 My name is Arthur Vargas and I am a resident of District 5, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Arthur Vargas 37 Public Comment From:Lesli Hernandez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:15 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Lesli Hernandez and I am a resident of Anaheim I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Lesli Hernandez 38 Public Comment From:Sandra Dzul Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:14 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Sandra Dzul and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. 39 Public Comment From:Yasmeen Jarrar Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:14 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Yasmeen Jarrar and I am a resident of the 46th congressional district in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Yasmeen 40 Public Comment From:camille munganga Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:07 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Camille and I am a resident of Westside Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Camille 41 Public Comment From:judithduarte Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:57 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 I am a resident of Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone 42 Public Comment From:james a Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:04 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is James Acosta and I am a resident of District 1 Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. James Acosta Sent from Outlook Mobile 43 Public Comment From:vanessa manaster Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:02 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Vanessa Manaster and I am a resident of Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Vanessa Manaster Sent from my iPhone 1 Public Comment From:Hannah Shaffer Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:58 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Hannah Shaffer and I am a resident of Riverside, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Hannah Shaffer 2 Public Comment From:Luis Alonso Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:57 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Luis Alonso and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. - Luis Alonso 3 Public Comment From:Maria Torres Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:53 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Maria Fernanda Torres, and I am a resident of West/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Maria Fernanda Torres 4 Public Comment From:Paulina Raygoza Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:52 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Paulina and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Paulina Sent from my iPhone 5 Public Comment From:Lyanne Valencia Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:52 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council     My name is Lyanne Valencia and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater  Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health  must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents  and that must come to an end.    The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of  the most well‐funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019‐2020 budget  allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.     Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003‐2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33  people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest‐related  deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for  police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU.    WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on  surveillance technology of anti‐police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted.  We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We  DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency  regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating  programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic.     We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community  refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.    Lyanne Valencia     Sent from my iPhone  6 Public Comment From:Adilene gaspar Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:42 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19, and 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Adilene Gaspar and I am a resident of District 5 of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Adilene Gaspar 7 Public Comment From:Jen Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:39 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jennifer Guthrie and I am a resident of District 1 Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jennifer Guthrie 1 Public Comment From:Doris Mendoza Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:48 PM To:Public Comment Subject:End Police Brutality Attachments:cid8277C258-9511-4FB5-9B1F-73AC4C400A0B.pdf   The Anaheim City Council: [Police Brutality: No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Doris Mendoza and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Doris Mendoza 1 Public Comment From:Karina Ramirez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:59 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Karina and I am a resident of District 1/Anaheim]. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Karina 2 Public Comment From:Katilyn Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:48 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19, & 30 Dear Anaheim City Council, My name is Katilyn and my family and I have been residents of Anaheim for over 25 years. I am writing to request that the council not approve "Resolution 19", "Resolution 5", and "Resolution 30". I believe Resolution 19 violates my privacy and the rights of Anaheim residents. I don't support spending $700,000 on more surveillance technology. I've read up on this topic and it doesn't seem clear to me how exactly stingray devices are being implemented today. If stingrays are currently being used without a specific warrant and instead being used over wide sweeping areas, I demand their use immediately end. The police department already has a budget of $153.8 million. What are they doing with all that money? Why do they need more? Should we be auditing their budget and see how they can spend their money more wisely? I believe APD shouldn't get any additional money. They already have a lot more than other departments and the rest of Anaheim's taxpayer's money should go into more worthwhile projects. Let's focus on how we can improve Anaheim as a city and how we can positively impact every resident's lives. Spending more and more on the police department isn't how we accomplish that vision. Please bear in mind the current environment we are in today. Let Anaheim become a pioneer and a beacon for how a different future looks like. Are we not home to the Happiest Place on Earth? Let us build upon that. Best Regards, Katilyn G. 3 Public Comment From:David Alvarado Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:47 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is David Alvarado and I am a resident of Orange County and effected with matters of Anaheim City. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. David Alvarado Sent from my iPhone 4 Public Comment From:Fernando Pineda Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:41 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Fernando Pineda and I am a resident of the central district in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Fernando Pineda 5 Public Comment From:Steffanie Rodriguez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:40 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Steffanie and I am a resident of Anaheim California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Steffanie Rodriguez 6 Public Comment From:T'Sara Jones-McTiller Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:37 AM To:Public Comment Subject:DEFUND THE POLICE To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is T’Sara and I am a resident of Anaheim 4th district. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. T’Sara Sent from my iPhone 7 Public Comment From:Giselle Medina Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:26 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Giselle Medina and I am a resident of District 4/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Giselle Medina 8 Public Comment From:Amanda Lourenco Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:21 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim Police violence against our Black people To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Amanda Lourenco and I am a resident of Long Beach, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Amanda L. Lourenco 9 Public Comment From:Monserrat Ortiz Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:14 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Monserrat Ortiz, and I am a resident of Orange County, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Monserrat Ortiz. 10 Public Comment From:Stacy Espinoza Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:12 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Stacy Espinoza and I am a resident of District 5 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. I also strongly urge you to research the Stacy Espinoza Anaheim, Ca 11 Public Comment From:Wendy Ortiz Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:06 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Wendy Ortiz and I am a resident of the downtown Anaheim area. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Wendy Ortiz 12 Public Comment From: Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:06 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Joseph Becerra and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community Joseph Becerra Sent from my iPhone 13 Public Comment From:Marycarmen Montanez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:00 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Marycarmen and I am a resident of Anaheim District 1. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Marycarmen -- Sincerely, Marycarmen Montanez Claremont McKenna College Class of 2022 14 Public Comment From:Hannah Angulo Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:00 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Hannah Angulo and I am a resident of West Covina, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Hannah Angulo 15 Public Comment From:Raul Vivas Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:55 AM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on resolution 5,19 &30 My name is Ruby and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. 16 Public Comment From:Melissa Zelaya Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:54 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30. It effects all of us To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Melissa Zelaya and I am a resident of Orange County and effected with matters of Anaheim City. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Melissa Zelaya 17 Public Comment From:Edgar Pineda Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:45 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Resolution 5, 19, 30 Anaheim defund police 18 Public Comment From:Ruth Linnert Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:40 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Ruth Linnert and I am a resident of your neighboring city, Santa Ana. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Ruth Linnert 19 Public Comment From:Estef Fernandez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:39 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund Anaheim Police To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Paola Fernandez and I am a resident of Orange County, La Habra. My family and friends live in Anaheim, so im often there. I was born there. My reasons including many other reasons to why I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Paola Fernandez 20 Public Comment From:Frankie Garcia Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:38 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Frankie and I am a resident of Chino, District 3. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Frankie Garcia -- Sent from Carl Gauss 21 Public Comment From:jakobrrz Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:38 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jakob Ramirez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best Regards, Jakob Ramirez. Sent from my iPhone 22 Public Comment From:Mai Le Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:34 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Mai and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best, Mai Le 23 Public Comment From:Christina Chala Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:29 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Christina Chala and I am a former resident of Orange County, and most of my family still lives there. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, ~ Christina Chala 24 Public Comment From:Derek Bracho Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:14 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Derek Bracho and I am a resident of the 3rd district of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -- Derek Bracho 25 Public Comment From:Servie Blair Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:59 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Servie Culverwell and I am a resident of DISTRICT 5 Anaheim I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Servie Culverwell 26 Public Comment From: Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:57 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim city council My name is Brittney and I am a resident of District 1 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Brittney J 27 Public Comment From:Hector Lopez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:45 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Hector Lopez and I am a resident of District 4, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Hector Lopez 28 Public Comment From:Ala Arafa Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:30 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Dr. Ala Arafa-Price and I am a resident of Buena Park. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Dr. Arafa-Price and family 29 Public Comment From:Kunseo Yook < Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:01 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, and 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Kunseo Yook and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Kunseo Yook 30 31 Public Comment From:Jazz Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:47 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jazmyn Wilson and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jazmyn Wilson 32 Public Comment From:Katy Shayne Stroud Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:13 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Katy Rogers and I am a resident of Dallas, Texas. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Katy Rogers 33 Public Comment From:Kimi Engelbrecht Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:11 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Kimi Engelbrecht and I have previously been a resident of Anaheim, CA and am employed by Disneyland. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Kimi Engelbrecht 34 Public Comment From:Jessica De Leon Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:48 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jessica De Leon and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jessica De Leon 35 Public Comment From: Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:48 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 and 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Tommy and I am a resident of the 46th district of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Tommy Sent from my iPhone 36 Public Comment From:Marilynn Montano Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:26 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Marilynn Montaño and I am a Santa Ana resident. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Marilynn Montaño -- -Marilynn Montaño 37 Public Comment From:Janet Ilashi Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:58 AM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Janet Ilashi and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Janet Ilashi 38 Public Comment From:makena low Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:49 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Public Comment: NO for Resolution 5,19 & 30 To whomever it may concern, My name is Makena and I am a resident of Huntington Beach, CA. Today I’m writing to address a genuine concern I have for the well-being of the Anaheim community. I hope that you agree that the health of citizens is of the utmost importance for Anaheim’s City Council. Unfortunately, we are not doing a great job in looking after our neighborhood people of color. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Yet, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. If we truly care about our community, then these numbers just don’t add up to me. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Are police protecting the people or slaughtering them? Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. As we know, police can use this footage to track protestors and perform revenge arrests, even if the protest happened years earlier. This surveillance goes against our ability to speak freely and stifles democracy. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members, especially Black folx. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best, Makena from Huntington Beach #BlackLivesMatter -- Makena Low Marina High School, Class of 2016 39 Public Comment From:jennifer melendez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:41 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim is in the Top Ten Cities for Instances of Police Brutality in the Country. This. Is. Embarrassing. To the Anaheim City Council: No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Jennifer Melendez and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jennifer Melendez 40 Public Comment From:maria palomares Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:36 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Maria Palomares and I am a resident of Anaheim in District 5. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you for your time, Maria Palomares 41 Public Comment From:Raquel De La Cruz Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:34 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: Hopefully you are doing well. My name is Raquel De La Cruz and I am a resident of District 5, in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Raquel De La Cruz 42 Public Comment From:Godofredo De La Cuz < Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:32 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Godofredo De La Cruz and I am a resident of District 5, in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Godofredo De La Cruz 43 Public Comment From:Stephanie Krystal Palomares Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:31 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Stephanie Palomares and I am a resident of District 5 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Stephanie Palomares 44 Public Comment From:Cristobal De La Cruz Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:28 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Cristobal De La Cruz and I am a resident of District 5, in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Cristobal De La Cruz 45 Public Comment From:Trinity Bati Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:23 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Trinity Bati and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Trinity Bati 46 Public Comment From:Cole Masuno Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:12 AM To:Public Comment Subject:ACCOUNTABILITY Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Cole Masuno and I am a resident of Seal Beach California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Cole Masuno 47 Public Comment From:Eduardo Godoy Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:06 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Eduardo Godoy and I am a resident of California’s 46th congressional district / Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone 48 Public Comment From:Laura Luevano Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:59 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Laura Luevano Menez and I am a resident of Anaheim, District 2. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Laura Luevano Menez 49 Public Comment From:Hadee Makda Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:55 AM To:Public Comment; Harry Sidhu (Mayor) Cc:Jose Moreno; Trevor O'Neil Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Hadee Makda, and I am a resident of Anaheim District 6. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim was the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protesters. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best, Hadee Makda. 50 Public Comment From:Megan Lauren Tang Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:52 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Megan Tang and I am a resident of Lake Forest, Orange County, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Megan Tang Sent from my iPhone 51 Public Comment From:Nahely Arevalo Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:41 AM To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Nahely Arevalo and I am a resident of Anaheim’s District 3. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Nahely Arevalo Sent from my iPad 52 Public Comment From:Idania Sanchez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:38 AM To:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Idania Sanchez and I am a resident of Santa Ana . I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Idania Sanchez Sent from my iPhone 53 Public Comment From:Angelica Munoz Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:37 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Angelica Munoz and I am a resident of District 46, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you for reading, Angelica Munoz 54 Public Comment From:Brian Oldham Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:31 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on 5, 19, and 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Brian Oldham and I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Brian Oldham 55 Public Comment From:Justine Guzman Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:30 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Re$olution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Justine Guzman and I am a resident of District 3, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Regards, Justine Guzman 56 Public Comment From:Zina Gorashi Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:18 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Zina Gorashi and I am a resident of District 1/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Zina Gorashi 57 Public Comment From:steven preciado Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:16 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Steven Preciado and I am a resident of district 3 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Steven Preciado 58 Public Comment From:lara mansfield Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:12 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Public Comment for 6/9/2020 Meeting I Fully Support Resolutions 5, 19, and 30. I urge for the Anaheim City Council to approve this. We also need more police patrolling in East Anaheim. Particularly in Anaheim Hills. Thank you, Lana 59 Public Comment From:Mr. McGoo Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:06 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is [Patrick] and I am a resident of [garden Grove but work in Anaheim]. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. [YOUR NAME] 60 Public Comment From:Ara Tumibay Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:56 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Ara Tumibay and I am a resident of Orange, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ara Tumibay 61 Public Comment From:Theresa Pham Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:39 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Theresa and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. 62 Public Comment From:Addy Gutierrez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:34 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Addy Gutierrez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best, Addy Gutierrez Sent from my iPhone 63 Public Comment From:We Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:34 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Erick Ramirez and I am a resident of District 5, Anaheim CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Erick 64 Public Comment From:Miriam Yemane Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:24 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Miriam Yemane and I am a resident of Whittier, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Miriam Yemane 65 Public Comment From:Illian Madrid Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:21 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Illian Madrid and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Illian Madrid Sent from my iPhone 66 Public Comment From:Juan Alvarez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:19 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Juan Alvarez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Juan Alvarez 67 Public Comment From:Karla Morales Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:14 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To Whom It May Concern: My name is Karla Morales and I am a resident of Anaheim/District 46. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Karla Morales 68 Public Comment From:Taalia Negash Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:09 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Defunding To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Taalia Negash and I am a resident of Buena Park. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Taalia Negash Sent from my iPhone 69 Public Comment From:Kirsty Gambill Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:08 AM To:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Kirsty Gambill and I am a resident of Dana Point. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Kirsty Gambill 70 Public Comment From:Ashanti Gutierrez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:08 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5.16 & 30 My name is Daniela and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Daniela A. Gutierrez 71 Public Comment From:xochilt i Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:01 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Xochilt Ibanez and I am a resident of Anaheim m. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Xochilt I. Sent from my iPhone 72 Public Comment From:Marinna Gastelum Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:58 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Marinna Gastelum and I am a resident of Anaheim . I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Marinna Gastelum 73 Public Comment From:Nancy Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:56 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Nancy Trujillo and I am a resident of Council District 3/ Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Nancy Trujillo 74 Public Comment From:Kasee Hurt Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:54 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Kasee Hurt and I am a resident of Phoenix. AZ. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Kasee Hurt 75 Public Comment From:Erwing Castillo Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:50 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Erwing Castillo and I am a resident of Anaheim, District 2. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Erwing Castillo 76 Public Comment From:Julia Sotelo Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:50 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Julia Sotelo and I am a resident of West District 1 /Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Julia Sotelo 77 Public Comment From:Estephany H < Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:46 PM To:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] I am a resident of Anaheim and my name is Estephany. I am typing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely a concerned citizen 78 Public Comment From:Brianne Ellsworth Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:43 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Brianne Ellsworth and I am a resident of West District, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Shameful! Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. I DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on cellular communication interception technology. I also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. I DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. We have a right to protest, without the presence of an unnecessary militarized police. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Brianne Ellsworth 79 Public Comment From:Ashley Moreno Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:41 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Ashley M. and I am a resident of West Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best, Ashley M. 80 Public Comment From:Brian Quintana Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:40 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Carlos Quintana and I am as a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Carlos Quintana 81 Public Comment From:Joseph Jackson V Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:39 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Joseph Jackson and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Joseph Jackson 82 Public Comment From:Ashley Juarez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:39 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Ashley Juarez and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Your Constituent 83 Public Comment From:vivien watson Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:37 PM To:Public Comment Subject:City Budget To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Vivien Watson and I am a resident of Los Angeles County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Vivien Watson 84 Public Comment From:Yamile Morales < Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:36 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Yamile Morales and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Yamile Morales 85 Public Comment From:Charity Thomas Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:36 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Charity Virgoe Thomas and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected all people but especially Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Charity Virgoe Thomas Sent from my iPhone 86 Public Comment From:Jose Covarrubias Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:33 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jose Covarrubias and I am a resident of district 2, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jose Covarrubias 87 Public Comment From:Arely Avila Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:31 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19,30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Arely Fernanda Luna, and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Arely Fernanda Luna. 88 Public Comment From:Melissa Mendoza Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:30 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Melissa Mendoza and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Melissa Mendoza 89 Public Comment From:Kimberly Cisneros Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:29 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 My name is Kimberly Cisneros and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the  greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and  community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black  and Brown residents and that must come to an end.  The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well‐funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019‐2020 budget  allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.  Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003‐2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33  people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest‐related  deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for  police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU.  WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on  surveillance technology of anti‐police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted.  We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We  DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency  regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating  programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic.  We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community  refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.  Kimberly Cisneros   90 Public Comment From:elizabeth Moon Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:27 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5, 19 & 30 Edit with the Docs app Make tweaks, leave comments, and share with others to edit at the same time. NO THANKS USE THE APP Anaheim Council-Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Elizabeth and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community 91 Public Comment From:Andrea Diaz Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:22 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Andrea Escobar and I am a resident of Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Andrea Escobar 92 Public Comment From:Aurelia Castellanos Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:18 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Aurelia C. and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Aurelia C. 93 Public Comment From:Virginia Lin Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:17 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Virginia and I am a resident of Anaheim, I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best regards, Virginia 94 Public Comment From:Nathan Low Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:14 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Nathan Low and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Nathan Low 95 Public Comment From:Fio Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:14 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Fiorella M. Casella and I am a resident of Stanton. I am writing to voice my concern for the future of Anaheim. Policing practices in the United States have become a serious problem and this city is part of it. According to a 2017 study done by the ACLU, the Anaheim Police Department is considered the 9th most violent in the U.S. and since 2014 the rate of arrest -related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD. Yet, the city of Anaheim continues to support this troubled organization, irresponsibly investing on a broken system that harasses Black and Brown communities. The Anaheim City Council needs to recognize that this high investment is no longer bringing a positive return and it must end. In my years working in affordable housing in Anaheim I have seen first-hand what is happening in these Black and Brown communities and what they need isn’t more police. Children in your city are living with the harsh realities of housing instability and food insecurity. Teens have limited choices in a future because they need to help mom and dad with bills and parents have to hope to god that they don’t have an emergency because emergencies can’t be included when you live paycheck to paycheck...yet the city of Anaheim still thinks that it is better to spend $800,000 of taxpayer money on the Anaheim Police Department? Supporting the growth of the community and the development of its residents should be the Anaheim’s first priority – not continuing to spend on an organization that has already received $153.8 million during the last fiscal year while these residents received less than one percent. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30"proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. 96 We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Fiorella M. Casella 97 Public Comment From:Kelly Low Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:11 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Kelly Low and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protests. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -- Best regards, Kelly Low Email: 98 Public Comment From:Ashley Gonzalez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:10 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 and 30 My name is Ashley and I am a resident of Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ashley 99 Public Comment From:alexa taylor Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:09 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Alexa Taylor and I am a resident of Westminster, Ca. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Alexa 100 Public Comment From:Kearsten Kain Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:13 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5,19,30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is kearsten and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Kearsten kain Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone 101 Public Comment From:Natalie Colvin Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:00 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Natalie Colvin, I am an Orange County resident and attorney writing in deep concern for the use of police in the greater Anaheim community, in which I am employed. It has become clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents (as it has across the nation) and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system, and lacks the depth of social services provided in many other countries. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community—particularly during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the issue of policing, including the use of technology, to further terrorize our community. Natalie Colvin 102 Public Comment From:Mia Moore Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:57 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Mia Moore and I am a resident of Anaheim, California I am writing in deep concern for the health of my greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Mia Moore -- Mia Moore University of California, Berkeley | 2020 B.S. Business Administration B.A. English Literature ᐧ 103 Public Comment From:Teresa Womack Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:57 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Teresa and I am a resident of Santa Ana, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Teresa 104 Public Comment From:therachness Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:50 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Rachel Velez and I am a resident of Riverside County, who frequents Anaheim quite often. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Rachel Velez 105 Public Comment From:Andrea Landa Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:48 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolutuon 5, 19 and 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Andrea Landa and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community Andrea Landa Sent from my iPhone 106 Public Comment From:Andres Hernandez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:48 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Andres and I am a local resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Andres Hernandez 107 Public Comment From:Savannah Khiev Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:46 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 My name is Savannah and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Savannah Khiev 108 Public Comment From:Elizabeth Diaz Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:45 PM To:Public Comment Subject:SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Elizabeth and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Elizabeth Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone 109 Public Comment From:Rachel Montanye Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:40 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19, and 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Rachel Montanye and I am a resident of District 5 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Rachel Montanye -- Rachel Montanye University of California, Irvine Bachelor of Arts, Political Science 110 Public Comment From:James Lopez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:38 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is James Alan Lopez, and I am a resident of Anaheim's Colony Historic District. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well- funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -- James Alan Lopez 111 Public Comment From:Erick Mendoza Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:38 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Erick Mendoza and I am a resident of the 46th congressional district/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Erick Mendoza 112 Public Comment From:Osmar Arias Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:33 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Osmar Arias and I am a resident of District 3. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Osmar Arias 113 Public Comment From:alexia jacinto Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:33 PM To:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Alexia Jacinto and I am a resident of Eastvale, CA, I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. 114 Public Comment From:Christopher Ozuna Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:30 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council:  My name is Christopher Ozuna and I am a resident of Anaheim, Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the  health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing  and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected  Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end.  The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of  the most well‐funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019‐2020 budget  allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.   Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003‐2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33  people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest‐related  deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for  police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU.  WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on  surveillance technology of anti‐police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted.  We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We  DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency  regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating  programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic.   We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community  refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.    Christopher Ozuna    115 Public Comment From:carmen montanez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:28 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council:     [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30]    My name is Marycarmen and I am a resident of Anaheim, District 1. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end.    The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.     Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU.    WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic.     We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.    Marycarmen      116 Public Comment From:Lizeth Munoz Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:26 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Lizeth Munoz Villa and I am a resident of District 2/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Lizeth Munoz Villa 117 Public Comment From:Carlos Carbajal Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:25 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 publiccomment@anaheim.net To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Carlos Carbajal and I am a resident of Anaheim, Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Carlos Carbajal 118 Public Comment From:Kenia Alvarez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:25 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Kenia Alvarez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Kenia Alvarez 119 Public Comment From:Julissa Encinas Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:23 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on resolution 5,19, and 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Julissa Encinss and I am a resident Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincelrly, Julissa Encinas 120 Public Comment From:Samantha Porras Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:22 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Samantha Porras and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Samantha Porras Sent from my iPhone 121 Public Comment From:Julia Franco Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:16 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Julia Franco and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Julia Franco 122 Public Comment From:Yadhira Gutierrez < Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:14 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Yadhira Gutierrez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Yadhira Gutierrez Sent from my iPhone 123 Public Comment From:Yazlyn Mota Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:13 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Yazlyn Mota, and I am a resident of Council District 4 of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Yazlyn Mota 124 Public Comment From:Nicole Alday Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:10 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Nicole Alday and I am a resident of Anaheim I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Nicole Alday 125 Public Comment From:sam . Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:00 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Samantha Arredondo and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. So I ask who are you truly protecting? Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Samantha Arredondo 126 Public Comment From:Brenda Hernandez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:00 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Brenda Hernandez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Brenda Hernandez 127 Public Comment From:Andrea Munoz Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:50 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Andrea Munoz and I am a resident in your District 2/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Andrea Munoz 128 Public Comment From:Brianna Meli Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:49 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Brianna Meli and I am a resident of district 2 in Anaheim, Ca. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Respectfully, Brianna Meli 129 Public Comment From:Karolina Contreras Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:47 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on resolutions 5, 19 & 30 Edit with the Docs app Make tweaks, leave comments, and share with others to edit at the same time. NO THANKS USE THE AP My name is Karolina and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Karolina 130 Public Comment From:Lizbeth Espinoza Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:46 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Lizbeth Espinoza and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Lizbeth Espinoza 131 Public Comment From:Brianda Barcenas Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:42 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Brianda Barcenas and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Brianda Barcenas 132 Public Comment From:Amber Ramirez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:41 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5, 19 and 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Amber Ramirez, and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Amber Ramirez 133 Public Comment From:biancambenitez123 Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:40 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City My name is Bianca Benitez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Bianca Benitez Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S8+, an AT&T 5G Evolution capable smartphone 134 Public Comment From:Rigo Hernandez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:38 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5, 19, & 30 My name is Rigo Hernandez and I am a resident of Anaheim California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Rigo Hernandez 135 Public Comment From:Caitlin Mallari Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:36 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Caitlin Mallari and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Caitlin Mallari 136 Public Comment From:Jeanette Ayala Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:35 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19,&30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jeanette Ayala and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Jeanette 137 Public Comment From:Gladys Munoz Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:31 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Gladys Munoz and I am a resident of District 2/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Hope you take this into account, Gladys 138 Public Comment From:Ana Benitez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:30 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Ana Benitez and I am a resident of District 2 in Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ana Benitez 139 Public Comment From:Nora Hernandez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:28 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Nora Hernandez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. - Nora Hernandez 140 Public Comment From:Xx__Annette__ xX Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:27 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Annette Tenorio and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. - Annette Tenorio 141 Public Comment From:Angelica Medlin Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:19 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, and 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Angelica Medlin and I am a resident of Westmont/Founders in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protesters. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Angelica Medlin Virus-free. 142 Public Comment From:Alyssa Nelson Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:16 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Alyssa Nelson and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Alyssa Nelson 143 Public Comment From:Miguel Aguayo Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:15 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Miguel Aguayo and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Miguel Aguayo 144 Public Comment From:Nick D Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:12 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Nicholas De Santos and I am a resident of CALIFORNIA CENTRAL District NINTH CIRCUIT/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Nicholas De Santos 145 Public Comment From:Jocelin Trujillo Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:09 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jocelin Trujillo and I am a resident of District 3 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jocelin Trujillo 146 Public Comment From:Ashile Chavez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:08 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 Hello, My name is Ashile Chavez and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30” proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Ashile Chavez 147 Public Comment From:Alma Iris Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:06 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5,19,30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Alma Valle and I am a resident of Anaheim I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Alma valle 148 Public Comment From:emily trejo Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:05 PM To:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Emily Trejo and I am a resident of District 3, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Emily Trejo 149 Public Comment From:Ruben Lopez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:03 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Police Funding Hello, I have recently become aware of Resolutions 5, 19, and 30 that will give $800,000 of taxpayer money to needlessly empower a group already overzealous, overfunded, and outrageous; the police. As a citizen of Anaheim, I am vehemently against this and would rather those funds go to Anaheim social services and public outreach for underprivileged children, who are much more important than the police. Do not waste this money on the police and their actions, please. Thank you, Ruben Lopez 150 Public Comment From:Jazmine Guangorena Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:01 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jazmine Guangorena and I am a resident of Buena Park, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jazmine Guangorena 151 Public Comment From:Gabriela Burgos Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:00 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Gabriela Burgos and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Gabriela Burgos 152 Public Comment From:Natalie Pantoja Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:00 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Res. 5, 19, and 30 My name is Natalie, and I am a resident of District 5 in Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Natalie Pantoja 1 Public Comment From:Daisy Chavez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:46 AM To:Public Comment; Stephen Faessel Subject:City Council Meeting Public Comment - No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Dear Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem and City Council Members My name is Daisy and I am a 16-year resident of Anaheim District 5. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. As a person of color who has witnessed and experienced the impacts of police violence on my community, I strongly believe we must divest from continued funding to the city's police department and to instead divest these funds to much- needed resources in our community. Over the years, we have seen an increase in the number of people who are killed by police officers in officer-involved shootings. We have resorted to police being the de-facto solution when responding to crises happening in our community when we must work towards building community-based response systems, which do not resort to violence that lead to the unfortunate situations we have seen over the years. It's truly disheartening to know that Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. This is the police department that serves MY CITY, MY COMMUNITY. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. As a resident of this city, I demand that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. I also demand that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. I demand that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. I am calling on my elected officials to take a stand and stop criminalizing members of my community, who are often targeted disproportionately for the color of our skin. As a concerned member of the district, I refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize the community I live in. If you are truly being a representative of the city that we live in, a city that is filled with diverse populations and people of color, then I ask that you oppose the resolutions that only seek to further criminalize and target the most vulnerable members of my community. Kindest Regards, Daisy Chavez 1 Public Comment From:Carmen Cedillo Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:09 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Attachments:Public comment.docx Public comment  To the Anaheim City Council: I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE demand that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also demand that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We demand that the city council not approve "Resolution 30. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. Thank you. 1 Public Comment From:Jorge Guadarrama < Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:18 PM To:Public Comment Attachments:Copy of Anaheim Council-Public Comment.docx   publiccomment@anaheim.net To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Jorge Guadarrama and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. JORGE GUADARRAMA 1 Public Comment From:olivia dowdle Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:28 AM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Olivia Dowdle and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Olivia Dowdle -- Olivia Dowdle   Mellon Mays Fellow   University of California, Los Angeles  Class of 2021 | B.A. American Literature and Culture  2 Public Comment From:Eva Gomez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:26 AM To:Denise Barnes; Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Eva Gomez and I am a resident of District 1, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Eva Gomez 3 Public Comment From:Jenn Rodriguez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:24 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jennifer Walker and I am a resident of Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jennifer Walker 4 Public Comment From:Carie Rael Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:23 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Carie Rael and I am a former resident of Anaheim. I grew up in Anaheim and I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Carie Rael 5 Public Comment From:Nella Patanindagat Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:21 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Nellamarie Patanindagat and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Nellamarie Patanindagat 6 Public Comment From:Mayra Puentes Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:16 AM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is MAYRA PUENTES and I am a resident of ANAHEIM. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. MAYRA PUENTES 7 Public Comment From:Jonathan Camacho Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:14 AM To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT: No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT: No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Jonathan Camacho and I am a resident of your city. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jonathan Camacho 8 Public Comment From:Khasnaa Juan Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:09 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Khasnaa Juma and I am a resident of 46th district /Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Khasnaa Juma Sent from my iPhone 9 Public Comment From:Bailey Porras Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:08 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, and 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Bailey Porras and I am a resident of District 1 in the city of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Bailey Porras 10 Public Comment From:Bailee Lamb Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:00 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council, My name is Bailee and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Bailee 11 Public Comment From:Dan Tran < Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:55 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Dan and I am a resident of District 2. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -- DAN T. 12 Public Comment From:Maria Estrada Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:54 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Maria Estrada and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Maria Estrada 13 Public Comment From:Rhema Villegas Kelsen Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:51 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Rhema Kelsen and I am a resident of District 3 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best, Rhema 14 Public Comment From:mari noveron Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:50 AM To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is [Mariana Noveron] and I am a resident of [Anaheim]. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. [Mariana Noveron] 15 Public Comment From:Lee Castillo Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:47 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 9, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Aliyah Castillo and I am a resident of Orange County, Placentia. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 19" that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Aliyah Castillo 16 Public Comment From:Jennifer Ledesma Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:45 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jennifer Ledesma and my family are residents of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jennifer Ledesma Jennifer Ledesma she/her/hers (what's this?) 17 Public Comment From:Jesus Trujillo Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:42 AM To:Public Comment Subject:ANAHEIM PD To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Jesus Trujillo and I am a resident of Anaheim District 5. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jesus Trujillo 18 Public Comment From:Abril Zamora Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:35 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim Council-Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Abril Zamora and I am a resident of Huntington Beach. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Abril Zamora 19 Public Comment From:brenda roman Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:34 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Brenda Roman and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Brenda Roman Sent from my iPhone 20 Public Comment From:Sara M. Lyons Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:33 AM To:Public Comment Subject:On Resolutions 5, 19, and 30 Anaheim City Council members: My name is Sara Lyons and I have lived in Anaheim with my husband for nearly seven years. We live in the Colony district and are proud to be part of a diverse and inclusive neighborhood community. However, I fear that our community is not receiving the support it needs from our city. The City Council MUST NOT approve Resolution 19, which would spend $700,000 of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests. Any future projects related to surveillance must be halted. The City Council MUST NOT approve Resolution 5, which would use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. The City Council MUST NOT approve Resolution 30, proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest which unfairly criminalizes peaceful protestors. Anaheim PD has the 9th most violent police department in the entire United States. They certainly don't need close to a million more dollars from our city. We need to remove funding from the police department and redistribute it among the community. This money needs to be invested in creating programs that benefit our community. Libraries, public schools, public arts initiatives - consider the long-lasting positive impact that investing in programs like this could have on our community, rather than the deep systematic hurt that is engendered by continuing to invest in a violent police force. Anaheim has an opportunity to be an example for the rest of Orange County and the country. Please don't fail us. We are calling on our officials to stop criminalizing our community members. Thank you, Sara Lyons Anaheim resident - Colony North district 21 Public Comment From:Uriel Martinez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:29 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Uriel Martinez and I am a resident of Anaheim in Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Uriel Martinez 22 Public Comment From:Alyssa Gallegos Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:27 AM To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Alyssa Gallegos and I am a resident of Chino, Fullerton, and Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Alyssa Gallegos 23 Public Comment From:Julieta Mardones Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:26 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Julieta Mardones and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Julieta Mardones Sent from my iPhone 24 Public Comment From:Brenda Hernandez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:22 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Brenda Hernandez and I am a resident of District 3/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Brenda Hernandez 25 Public Comment From:jesse velasco Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:21 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Jesse Velasco and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jesse Velasco Sent from my iPhone 26 Public Comment From:Brandon Liptak Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:17 AM To:Public Comment Subject:SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Brandon Liptak and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Brandon Liptak 27 Public Comment From:Evelyn Salazar Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:17 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Evelyn Salazar and I am a resident of Tustin, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Evelyn Salazar 28 Public Comment From:Catherine Jeannette Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:15 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Catherine and I am a resident of the city of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Catherine Contreras 29 Public Comment From:Daisy Pimentel Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:15 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Daisy Pimentel and I am a resident of the East district in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Daisy Pimentel Sent from my iPhone 30 Public Comment From:Miranda Torrez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:14 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Miranda and I am a resident of Orange. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Miranda Torrez Sent from my iPhone 31 Public Comment From:Andrea Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:11 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Andrea Jimenez and I am a resident of District 3, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Andrea Jimenez 32 Public Comment From:Murphy, Nat Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:11 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Natalee Murphy and I am a resident of Toronto, Ontario, Canada. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.   Regards,    Nat Murphy Service Desk Analyst | Analyste, Centre de services Information Technology | Technologie de l'information MT Services Limited Partnership Administrative services provider for McCarthy Tétrault LLP Suite 5300 TD Bank Tower Toronto ON M5K 1E6 Please, think of the environment before printing this message. Click here to visit our dedicated COVID-19 Hub, delivering daily updates, industry insights and legal perspectives to help business leaders navigate the global impact of COVID-19. 33   This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure. No waiver whatsoever is intended by sending this e-mail which is intended only for the named recipient(s). Unauthorized use, dissemination or copying is prohibited. If you receive this email in error, please notify the sender and destroy all copies of this e-mail. Our privacy policy is available at {www.mccarthy.ca}. Click here to unsubscribe from commercial electronic messages. Please note that you will continue to receive non- commercial electronic messages, such as account statements, invoices, client communications, and other similar factual electronic communications. Suite 5300, TD Bank Tower, Box 48, 66 Wellington Street West, Toronto, ON M5K 1E6 34 Public Comment From:Adriana Razon Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:09 AM To:Public Comment Subject:SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Adriana and I am a resident of the Anaheim district. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Adriana Razon 35 Public Comment From:Azm0n Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:05 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No Resolution , 5, 19 & 30 My name is Yazmin and I am a resident from Santa Ana. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Yazmin 36 Public Comment From:Kiki M Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:03 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Korrine Terriquez and I am a resident of council district 2; Anaheim, Ca. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Korrine Terriquez 37 Public Comment From:James Aranda Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:02 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on 5, 19, 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is James Aranda and I am a resident of Anaheim Shores, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. James Aranda 38 Public Comment From:Karen Torres Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:02 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Karen Torres and I am a resident of city. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Karen Torres 39 Public Comment From:Kathia Nogueda Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:02 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 My name is Kathia Nogueda and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Kathia Nogueda 40 Public Comment From:Audrey Berry Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:55 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Hello my name is Audrey Berry and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health and safety of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Audrey Berry 41 Public Comment From:Francisco Chavez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:55 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 publiccomment@anaheim.net To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Francisco Chavez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We can as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Francisco Chavez 42 Public Comment From:Katrina Herbosa <> Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:53 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Katrina Herbosa and I am a resident of Irvine, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Katrina Herbosa 43 Public Comment From:Adriana Reynoso Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:53 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Adriana Reynoso and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Adriana Reynoso 44 Public Comment From:Elaine Duong Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:52 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council, My name is Elaine Duong and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Elaine Duong 45 Public Comment From:Mymelody Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:44 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 publiccomment@anaheim.net To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Erika Duran and I am a resident of Anaheim I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Erika Duran 46 Public Comment From:Clara Ramirez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:42 AM To:Public Comment Subject:SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Clara Ramirez and I am a resident of Fullerton. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Clara Ramirez 47 Public Comment From:D Cau Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:36 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Attn: No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Davina Caudillo and I am a resident of Orange County, Ca. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Davina Caudillo 48 Public Comment From:e b Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:30 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Elise and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Elise 49 Public Comment From:Faye Aguilar Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:30 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Faye Aguilar and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Faye C. Aguilar 50 Public Comment From:Magdalena Holquin Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:29 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Magdalena Holquin and I am a resident of District 2 in Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Magdalena Holquin 51 Public Comment From:Natasha Bogdanski Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:30 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Natasha Bogdanski and I am a resident of Anaheim, District 5. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Natasha Bogdanski 52 Public Comment From:Emily Monnig Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:22 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Emily and I am a resident of the city of Orange. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Emily Monnig 53 Public Comment From:Arianna Rios Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:21 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Arianna Rios and I am a resident of the city of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003- 2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30” proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors instead, invest that money in 54 creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Arianna Rios 55 Public Comment From:H.R. Belling Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:09 AM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Heather Belling and I am a 3rd generation Anaheimer. My grandfather farmed here in the 1940s, my father attended Anaheim High, as did my daughter, while I am a graduate of Cornelia Connelly School. Our Anaheim roots run deep, and I am writing out of my deep concern for the health of our greater Anaheim community. It has become abundantly clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The U.S. does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Please do the right thing and protect Anaheimers and help strengthen our community! 56 Public Comment From:megan torculas Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:02 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Megan Torculas and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Megan Torculas Sent from my iPhone 57 Public Comment From:Aaron Aguilar Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:01 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council, My name is Aaron Aguilar and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become clearer than ever that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. I among others are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Aaron Aguilar 1 Public Comment From:Clay Pyke Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:12 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolutions 5,19, and 30 My name is Clayton Pyke, and I am an Orange County resident. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Clayton Pyke 2 Public Comment From:Kaitlin Lueke Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:12 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Kaitlin Lueke and I am a resident of neighboring Westminster, Ca and have many friends who live in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further overpolice our communities. Thank you for the consideration, and remember that you serve the people of your community. Do the right thing. Kaitlin Lueke 3 Public Comment From:Isabel Sunglao Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:12 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Isabel Sunglao and I am a resident of La Palma. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. I appreciate your time in reading this and taking it into consideration. Isabel Sunglao 4 Public Comment From:sam d Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:11 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19,& 30 Anaheim Council-Public To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Samantha Dufelmeier and I am a resident of 28th district, Los Angeles. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community of anaheim refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. [YOUR NAME] 5 Public Comment From:olivia dowdle Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:11 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Olivia Dowdle and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Olivia Dowdle -- Olivia Dowdle   Mellon Mays Fellow   University of California, Los Angeles  Class of 2021 | B.A. American Literature and Culture  6 Public Comment From:Ivan Orduña Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:09 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Ivan Orduña and I am a resident of Central Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ivan Orduña 7 Public Comment From:julian sanchez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:09 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council, My name is Julian Sanchez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Julian Sanchez Sent from my iPhone 8 Public Comment From:Josh Eccles Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:09 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Josh E and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Josh, A concerned citizen 9 Public Comment From:Roxana Alvarez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:09 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Roxana and I am a resident of Santa Ana. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Roxana Alvarez 10 Public Comment From:Daniel Perez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:08 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Safety and community concern To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Daniel Eduardo Perez, and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Daniel E. Perez 11 Public Comment From:Patty Gonzalez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:07 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Patricia Gonzalez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. Redirecting We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Patricia Gonzalez 12 Public Comment From:Stacy Ebanks Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:07 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Stacy Ebanks and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Stacy Ebanks 13 Public Comment From: Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:06 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Bryan Mathews, and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Bryan M. 14 Public Comment From:joshua cortes Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:03 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Joshua Cortes and I am a resident of Anaheim and Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Joshua Cortes 15 Public Comment From:Katelyn Morgan Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:03 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Katelyn Morgan and I am a resident of Irvine, CA and I work in Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Katelyn Morgan 16 Public Comment From:Gavin Rose Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:53 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Gavin Rose and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Gavin Rose 17 Public Comment From:Brenda Gonzalez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:52 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Brenda Gonzalez and I am a resident of DISTRICT 4 / Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Brenda Gonzalez 18 Public Comment From:C Nickerson Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:52 AM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is C Nickerson and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. C Nickerson Anaheim, CA 19 Public Comment From:Anthony Ocampo Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:51 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Anthony Ocampo and I am a resident of Anaheim CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Anthony Ocampo 20 Public Comment From:Maritza Geronimo Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:50 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Maritza and I am a resident of Anaheim District 3. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -- Maritza Geronimo Nahua-Quechua Xicana Ph.D. Student Department of Geography University of California, Los Angeles 21 Public Comment From:John Rodriguez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:50 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is John Rodriguez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. John Rodriguez Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone 22 Public Comment From:Sabrina Pineda Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:49 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Sabrina Pineda and I am a resident of district 2 of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sabrina Pineda 23 Public Comment From:Ryan Lu Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:47 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Ryan and I am a resident of Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ryan 24 Public Comment From:Mary Holquin Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:46 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Mary Holquin and I am a resident of District 2, Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protesters. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. ReplyForward -- Mary Holquin 25 Public Comment From:Stephany Alvarado Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:42 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To Anaheim City and Council: My name is Stephany and I am a resident of Fullerton, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Stephany Diaz Sent from my iPhone 26 Public Comment From:Andy Torres Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:39 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Andy Torres and I am a resident of West Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Andy Torres 27 Public Comment From:Nhi Bui Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:38 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, and 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Ngoc Nhi Bui and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ngoc Nhi Bui 28 Public Comment From:Chowdhury, Nasir Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:37 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Nasir and I am a resident of Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Nasir Chowdhury 29 Public Comment From:Naomi De Silva < Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:35 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Naomi de Silva and I am a resident of Fullerton, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Naomi De Silva 30 Public Comment From:Sydney Cramer < Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:34 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council My name is Sydney Cramer and I am a resident of District 3 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sydney Cramer Sent from my iPhone 31 Public Comment From:Diana Becerra Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:34 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council, My name is Diana Becerra and I am a resident of District 2 in Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community Sincerely, Diana Becerra 32 Public Comment From:Negrete, Jose < Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:33 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim City Council: NO on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Jose Francisco Negrete and I am a resident of Anaheim for 40 years. I was educated and work in Anaheim. I call Anaheim home. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Further, if my voice is not heard yet. None of the citizens of Anaheim’s voice are being heard. Sincerely, Jose Francisco Negrete ________________________________ Anaheim Union High School District 33 E-mail Confidentiality Notice This e-mail communication and any attachments, including documents, files, or previous e-mail messages, constitute electronic communications within the scope of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2510 et seq. This e-mail communication may contain non-public, confidential or legally privileged information intended for the sole use of the designated recipient(s). The unauthorized and intentional interception, use, copy or disclosure of such information, or attempt to do so, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful under applicable laws. 18 U.S.C. § 2511. If you have received this e-mail communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by return e-mail and delete the original e-mail from your system. 34 Public Comment From:Kendall Whitney-Vazquez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:32 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Kendall Whitney-Vazquez and I am a resident of Rossmoor. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Kendall Whitney-Vazquez 35 Public Comment From:Genesis H Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:31 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City council My name is Genesis Hernandez and I am a resident of District 4 / Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Genesis Hernandez 1 Public Comment From:Rosanna H Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:24 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Rosanna Herrera and I am a resident of the 5th District in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Rosanna Herrera 2 Public Comment From:Jonathan Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:23 PM To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jonathan Soto and I am a resident of Anaheim in District 3. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jonathan Soto 3 Public Comment From:Ashley Kron Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:19 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: As an alumni of Chapman University, and a former resident of Orange County, I am very concerned with the budgetary spending being discussed by the Anaheim City Council. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ashley Kron she/her 4 Public Comment From:Elsa Solorio Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:19 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Elsa and I writing on behalf of my elderly aunt, Martha Gonzalez and she is a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Regards, Elsa solorio and Martha Gonzalez 5 Public Comment From:Natalie Johnson Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:19 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Natalie Johnson and I am a resident of Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Natalie Johnson 6 Public Comment From:Marianne Almero Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:17 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Town Hall 6/9 Mayor Sidhu and members of the City Council, In June of 2019, at around 10pm at night, my uncle made a dumb decision to break the windows and pop the tires of his ex-wife's car. The neighbors rightfully called the police on him, and when they arrived the officers immediately pointed their guns at him though he was unarmed. He followed the orders of the police, got on his knees, and put his hands in the air. The next action the officers took was an act committed out of pure sadism. They released a police dog onto my uncle, for absolutely no reason at all, and allowed the dog to latch onto and drag my uncle into the street for several minutes as he bled out and cried in agony, until he eventually lost consciousness. The dog had latched onto his left arm, and because they allowed the dog to attack him for so long, the dog almost ripped his entire arm off. An ambulance was called and he was taken to UCI medical center where his heart had stopped, and an emergency surgery miraculously brought him back to life. After a week in the hospital he was brought into custody where he was beat and abused by officers in the facility, he was denied his pain medication, and his arm and the care UCI medical had told the officers to provide was completely neglected. We went to visit him several times, and every day he looked more and more like he was on the verge of death. It wasn't until about a month before our family made the decision that if we didn't bail him out, he would die in there. My uncle is 60 years old, and was born and raised in Anaheim. It has been a year since this incident and his arm still has yet to heal. He has been going to therapy several times a month and still he is hardly able to open and move his hand. He started his own maintenance/handyman business back in the 70's, and has been very hands- on as head handyman since the company's establishment. He has loyal customers all over Anaheim and the OC area who depend on his labor and fair prices to get work done around their homes. He continues to work for these loyal customers with his one good arm because his financial situation leaves him with no other choice. Imagine re-doing ceilings, re-tiling floors, pulling up carpets, moving furniture, all with one arm. Yes, it was not right for him to vandalize a car, but does the punishment fit the crime? Anaheim is the 9th most violent police force in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them, like my uncle, were unarmed. Your officers are not at all responsible with their power, and it's time something be done about it! That is why we DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also demand the council not to approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. 7 We also ask that you support the 8 Can't Wait Initiative by implementing the following: 1.)Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds 2.)Require De-escalation 3.)Require Warning Before Shooting 4.)Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting 5.)Duty to Intervene 6.)Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles 7.)Implement Use of Force Continuum 8.)Require Comprehensive Reporting Lastly we are asking elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We refuse to remain silent on the use of technology and violence to further terrorize our community! If you truly care about your city, you will invest this money instead on creating programs that benefit and enrich the community! Thank you for listening, and I hope you think hard on the legacy your decisions will leave for the future of our community. Best, Marianne Almero 8 Public Comment From:Adam Sepulveda Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:17 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO ON RESOLUTUON 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Adam Sepulveda and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Adam Sepulveda 9 Public Comment From:Allison Bondus Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:16 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Allison Bondus and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Allison Bondus 10 Public Comment From:Martin Reynoso Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:40 AM To:Public Comment 11 Public Comment From:ross.whitney Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:37 AM To:Public Comment Subject:DEFUND THE POLICE MY name is WHITNEY ROSS and I am a resident of ANAHEIM. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. WHITNEY ROSS Sent via the Samsung Galaxy S8, an AT&T 5G Evolution capable smartphone 12 Public Comment From:Fernando Garcia Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:12 AM To:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Fernando Garcia and I am a resident of district 5. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community 13 Public Comment From:Carina Lee Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:55 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund Anaheim Police Hello, My name is Carina Lee and I am an alumna of the Anaheim Union High School District. I am demanding that the Anaheim City Council does NOT approve Resolution 5, 19, and 30 on the City Council Agenda. These resolutions are looking to spend $800,000 of taxpayer money on surveillance footage, the upgrading of police transportation, and the further policing of Black and Brown lives. This is an abomination. The City Council has an urgent responsibility to stand for racial justice by significantly defunding policing and redirecting those funds to invest in Black and Brown communities. The City Council must stop investing in targeting criminalization and surveillance, and fund what Black and Brown communities need to be safe and healthy: COVID-19 relief, housing, healthcare, treatment, healing, cooperative businesses, community care centers, community-led organizations and projects. These issues must become financial priorities so we can combat systemic injustices. The members of the Anaheim community will hold you accountable for swift and just action. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Carina 14 Public Comment From:Monse Lopez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:55 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Do not authorize To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Monserrat Lopez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Monserrat Lopez 1 Public Comment From:Viviana Gomez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:33 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Viviana and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Viviana Gomez 2 Public Comment From:Katie Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:34 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Katie Valle and I am a resident of Tustin, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Katie Valle 3 Public Comment From:Yadira de Dios Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:34 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Yadira de Dios and I am a resident of Orange County I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Yadira de Dios 4 Public Comment From:Gardenia 89 Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:32 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO ON 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30!! My name is Yamaina Rivera and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Yamaina Rivera 5 Public Comment From:Jazareth Jimenez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:55 AM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jazareth Jimenez and I am a resident of Anaheim, Ca. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Jazz 6 Public Comment From:Cameron Rohskothen Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:28 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Cameron Rohskothen and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Cameron Rohskothen 7 Public Comment From:Fatima Butler Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:28 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Fatima Butler and I am a resident of California’s 46th congressional district ANAHEIM. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. - Fatima Butler Sent from my iPhone 1 Public Comment From:Melissa Green Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:36 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Anaheim city council, My name is Melissa Green and I am a resident of San Juan Capistrano who works regularly in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you for your time Melissa Green 2 Public Comment From:Scoot Sexton Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:28 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Police Reform To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Detrione Sexton and I am a resident of Santa ana, California . I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Detrione Sexton 1 Public Comment From:Giovanna Pacheco Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:37 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolutions 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Giovanna Pacheco and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA and I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Giovanna Pacheco Sent from my iPhone 2 Public Comment From:Nafia Rahaman Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:37 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Nafia Rahaman and I am a resident of Anaheim, District 2. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Nafia Rahaman 3 Public Comment From:Citlaly Ocampo Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:38 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Citlaly Ocampo and I am a resident of Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Citlaly Ocampo 4 Public Comment From:Christine Dao Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:38 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council My name is Christine Dao and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Christine 5 Public Comment From:Estephany Gomez-Bautista Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:39 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Estephany Gomez Bautista and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Estephany Gomez Bautista Estephany Gomez Bautista She/Her/They/ Them Undergraduate Student |University of California, Los Angeles Political Science & Sociology, B.A. | Class of 2020 6 Public Comment From:Clarissa Torres Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:39 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Resolution 5, 19, 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Clarissa Torres and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The US does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated 153.8 million to law enforcement and only 1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the US. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in CA, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 19" that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Clarissa Torres 7 Public Comment From:Gianni Castellanos Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:40 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Gianni Castellanos and I am a resident of Huntington Beach. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protests. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Gianni Castellanos 8 Public Comment From:Jasivet Nazareth Chavez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:41 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO ON 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30!! My name is Jasivet Chavez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Jasivet Chavez Jasivet Chavez Southern California VP of Mentorship, MiMentor UCI Class of 2019 Create your own WiseStamp email signature 9 Public Comment From: Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:47 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Michael Rosas and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Michael Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone. 10 Public Comment From:Kevin Fernandez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:44 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Kevin Fernandez and I am a resident of District 5 in Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Kevin Fernandez 11 Public Comment From:Brianna lawrence Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:45 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Brianna Cazeau and I am a resident of District 46, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Brianna Cazeau 12 Public Comment From:Chris Garcia Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:46 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Christian Garcia and I am a resident of Anaheim District 6. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Chris Garcia 13 Public Comment From:Jesse Cervantes Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:47 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jesse Cervantes and I am a resident of District 5 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jesse Cervantes 14 Public Comment From:Pacheco, Ulises Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:47 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Ulises Pacheco and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best, Ulises Pacheco     1 Public Comment From: Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:52 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Liz and I am a resident of Anaheim, District 4. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Liz 2 Public Comment From:Nat S Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:52 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Natalie and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Natalie Sanchez 3 Public Comment From:Dawn Tran Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:51 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Dawn Tran and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Dawn Tran 4 Public Comment From:Jesse chavez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:51 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO ON RESOLUTION 5, 19, and 30 My name is Jesse Chavez and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jesse Chavez Sent from my iPhone 5 Public Comment From:Thais Pacheco Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:51 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Thais Pacheco and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thais Pacheco 6 Public Comment From:Taylor Medina Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:50 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund the Anaheim Police Department To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Taylor Medina and I am a resident of La Habra, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Taylor Medina Best, Taylor Medina 7 Public Comment From:Sydney Le Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:54 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Sydney and I am a resident of Irvine. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sydney L. 8 Public Comment From:Rachel Ruiz Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:56 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Rachel Ruiz and I am a resident of Buena Park. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protesters. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Rachel 1 Public Comment From:Joshua D. Mallipudi Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:07 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Public comments for June 9 City Council Meeting Attachments:City Council Letter 2020.pdf; IMG_20200607_0002_VBCletter.pdf Mayor and City Council,    Please find attached two letters in support of agenda item #24.     Thank you,    ________________________ Joshua D. Mallipudi Administrative Pastor Victory Baptist Church e-mail: phone:   Shelton Jim Colinco Anaheim, CA 92801 June 5, 2A2O Anaheim City Council 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 Dear Members of the City Council, As a new couple, my wife, Ellen and I moved to Anaheirn in 2OO1 shortly after the birth of our 1st child. Almost 20 years later, my family has grown to include 4 children and we still live in the same house that we had bought. Since 20A6, Victory Baptist Church has been our home church. lt plays an important part in my family's life. lt is a community of faith that is not only a source of blessing and support for rny family but it also serves as an avenue for us to senre others. As members of Victory, my wife and I are totally supportive of the building project that our church is undertaking. As a church, we are excited to embark on this new journey that, I know with God's leading, will rejuvenate the life of our congregation. We also look fonruard to having our new building be a gathering place for our neighbors. lt is going to be a resource to the community in West Anaheim. The high-quality preschoolthat is planned to operate in our campus will be made available to families in the neighborhood. Victory Baptist has a long history in the neighborhood and, as a church, we are committed to stay and to make it a better place to live. Sincerelv--*; i,;-;-J:1;*-C,["*^ Shelton Ym Colinco 1 Public Comment From:Kandice Hawes Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:22 PM To:Council; Public Comment Subject:Please support Cannabis in Anaheim for a better future Dear Honorable Council Members: I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California. There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. 2 Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Please feel free to reach out to me directly if you would like to discuss this further. Sincerely, Kandice Hawes Executive Director, Orange County NORML www.OrangeCountyNORML.org 1 Public Comment From:Martin Gilberstadt Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:39 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Cannabis To whom it may concern, I support the licensing of commercial cannabis activity in Anaheim. Anaheim is a wonderful city that has been plagued by black market operators for too long. As mentioned on your website, when one operator is closed down, they either reopen in a new location or another operator takes their place. Now is the time to start licensing legal cannabis businesses to help drive out black market operators and bring in additional tax revenue for the city. I am in complete agreement that the businesses should be kept away from the resort district. The city has plenty of industrial warehouse zones far from the resort district that can be labeled as a green zone for cannabis activity. Additionally, new cannabis businesses will help bring hundreds of jobs to the residents of Anaheim and bring additional economic activity to the area. Please support the licensing of commercial cannabis activity in Anaheim! -- Thanks, Martin Gilberstadt II 2 Public Comment From:James Demetra Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:31 PM To:Public Comment Cc:council@anahiem.net Subject:I support cannabis in Anaheim To whom it may concern,    Given the current trying economic climate, overwhelming unemployment rates, and already existing deficits, it would be  a massive mistake to vote against cannabis.  Cannabis is one of the few industries that has flourished under shelter at  home orders & looming unemployment scares.  The city of Anaheim would massively benefit not only from the revenue  created, but the jobs created as well.  After legalizing cannabis, the state of Colorado made so much in revenue it issued  its citizens money back on their taxes.  Cannabis can also be used as a non‐habit forming method of pain management.   With the opioid epidemic being what it is, there is very little downside to this option.  I am not an active cannabis user  but I very much am an advocate for the benefits this can provide economically and sociologically.  Do what’s best for  everyone, let the people make the choice.    Thanks!    ‐James  3 Public Comment From:Meilad Rafiei Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:26 PM To:Public Comment Subject:SUPPORTING CANNABIS IN ANAHEIM To Whom it may concern, I grew up in Anaheim, living in Anaheim Hills from 4th grade until I graduated from Canyon High School. After that my parents bought their first home in Anaheim, off Kramer and La Palma. Anaheim has long been known as the place to find unlicensed cannabis dispensaries, that were cheaper then neighboring cities like Santa Ana. This reputation needs to be corrected, as the city does not benefit at all from these type of businesses. Instead if they licensed and regulated cannabis in the city, these illicit business would go away, with all of the other vices they bring along with them, and the city would collect tax revenues. Amongst many other benefits, like all other cities who have licensed dispensaries, over all crime surrounding all of the new licensed shops would decrease. Cannabis is already being sold and produced in a harmful way throughout the city. Regulating it will not only make the illegal, harmful business go away, it will generate much needed revenue for the city. Meilad Rafiei President WeCann RE Broker #01788589 Mobile 2030 E 4th St, A-122 Santa Ana, CA 92705 www.WeCann.biz 4 Public Comment From:Stephanie Burglin Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:59 PM To:Public Comment; Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Cannabis Dispensaries in Anaheim Dear Anaheim City Council, I am writing to you today, as a lifelong resident, to implore you to vote no on the legalization of cannabis dispensaries in Anaheim. Reportedly, this proposal was introduced as a way to produce additional tax revenue. However, the potential tax revenue gain from this venture does not offset the cost to Anaheim. We would be negatively changing our neighborhoods, community, and quality of life. We would be effectively sacrificing our identity as the city that has the feel of a small town and the "big city amenities" of a larger metropolitan area. With this decision, we are at a crossroads in Anaheim's history. Our schools are seriously struggling. Their reported scores are very low. Why would we place cannabis dispensaries within 600 feet of them? Why would we subject the children attending those schools to that kind of environment? Additionally, our political climate will change. Those backing the cannabis industry will now have a "seat at the table" when discussing what is right for Anaheim. The aforementioned conversations should be reserved for Anaheim citizens and should be held at a time when residents can freely participate. You are not able to listen to or to hear your constituents right now, as we cannot reach you as we normally would be able to. Many are unaware that this important matter is even before the council. We are struggling with both an unresolved pandemic and civil unrest. There are bigger issues to address. Your constituents need to come first and we would greatly appreciate your leadership in navigating these uncertain times. As a resident, I am extremely concerned about what is going on in the city I love. I have seen it grow and change. Cannabis has very serious side effects and this decision has significant ramifications. We should not ignore these effects and legitimize the cannabis industry for financial gain. We should not sell out. I implore you to vote no on allowing the legalization of cannabis dispensaries in Anaheim. Thank you for your time and consideration, Stephanie Mercadante 5 Public Comment From:Brent Burke Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:18 PM To:Council; Public Comment Subject:Anaheim City Council - Comments for Cannabis Regulations Dear Honorable Council Members: I am a resident of the City of Anaheim. I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California.There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approved Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. 6 The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. -BRENT- 7 Public Comment From:Arielle O'Daniel Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:54 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Cannabis in Anaheim Dear Honorable Council Members: I am a resident of the City of Anaheim. I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California.There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the 8 City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Sincerely, -- Arielle O'Daniel 9 Public Comment From:Joseph Leibrandt Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:26 PM To:Public Comment; Council Subject:I Support Cannabis in Anaheim Dear Honorable Council Members: I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California. There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. 10 The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Please feel free to reach out to me directly if you would like to discuss this further. Regards, Joe Leibrandt (former chair, Libertarian Party of OC) 11 Public Comment From:Thanh To Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:53 PM To:Council; Public Comment Subject:I support cannabis in Anaheim Dear Honorable Council Members: I am a resident of the City of Anaheim. I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California.There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. 12 The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. 13 Public Comment From:blazea glory Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:51 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Please end the war on drugs Dear Honorable Council Members: I am a resident of the City of Anaheim. I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California.There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for 14 enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device 15 Public Comment From:johnc Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:51 PM To:Council; Public Comment Subject:I Support Cannabis in Anaheim Hello,    With legalization happening throughout the state and overseas this would be a prosperous business opportunity for the  city and state. Anaheim being a diverse community can benefit working on developing relationships locally and globally.    281 Media provides Cannabis news, reviews, information, event coverage for the Asian Community. If the opportunity  arises we would like to help bridge the business opportunity locally and overseas.     Thank you for the ongoing better development of the City of Anaheim.    Regards,  John    16 Public Comment From:Isabel Kirschner Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:30 PM To:Council; Public Comment Dear Honorable Council Members: I am a resident of the City of Anaheim. I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California.There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. 17 These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Isabel Kirschner -- 18 Public Comment From:Tom Riddle Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:27 PM To:Council; Public Comment Subject:Cannabis in Anaheim Dear Honorable Council Members: I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California.There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. 19 The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. -- Thomas J Riddle | Tom@TikunCA.com | Visit our Website: www.TikunOlam.com This email may contain confidential information, and is for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and delete the email and any attachments from your computer. Tikun Olam Adelanto LLC disclaims any responsibility or liability for personal information or Tikun Olam Adelanto LLC of the author expressed in the email. Although Tikun Olam Adelanto LLC takes reasonable precautions to ensure no viruses are present in email, it will not be liable for any loss or damage arising from the use of the email or attachments. 20 Public Comment From:Vincette Wilson Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:46 PM To:Public Comment; Council Subject:I Support Cannabis In Anaheim Allowing Cannabis Activities In Anaheim Public Comments: To Whom It May Concern, I'm a senior living in a senior community here in Orange County. I support allowing cannabis activities here. I hope you are, too. It is now considered a super-food and is here to stay as a natural medicine and it's many uses. It's worth more than alcohol and a safer choice. I'm sure your county makes taxes on alcohol and will welcome taxes from cannabis, too. Many thanks to the Anaheim Police Department and to the Anaheim Fire Department for their support. I hope they'll have your support, also. I have absolutely no self interest in your decision. Thank you, Ms. Vincette Wilson senior citizen 21 Public Comment From:Brett Macomber Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:46 PM To:Public Comment Subject:I support cannabis in Anaheim To whom it may concern,    I own and operate an ancillary cannabis business in Orange County. My company’s role is to offer and support  professional technology services such as Internet/business phone, firewalls, security cameras, and cyber security.  Willikins makes sure the cannabis community stays safe, compliant, and legal.    Please support cannabis in Anaheim. The professional IT community is here to help.     Thank you!    Brett Macomber | President Willikins Enterprises https://willikinsenterprises.com | 417-459-1928  All communications are private and confidential. If you received this email in error immediately notify sender and delete permanently.    22 Public Comment From:Brett Macomber Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:44 PM To:Public Comment Subject:I support cannabis in Anaheim To whom it may concern,    I own and operate an ancillary cannabis business in Orange County. My company’s role is to offer and support  professional technology services such as Internet/business phone, firewalls, security cameras, and cyber security.  Cannakins makes sure the cannabis community stays safe, compliant, and legal.    Please support cannabis in Anaheim. The professional IT community is here to help.     Thank you!    Brett Macomber | President Cannakins Consulting  https://cannakins.com | 417-459-1928 | Schedule a Meeting All communications are private and confidential. If you received this email in error immediately notify sender and delete permanently.   23 Public Comment From:Personal Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:43 PM To:Public Comment Cc:Council Subject:I 100% SUPPORT Cannabis in Anaheim, CA :) At this point in time I think the one thing we can all agree on is the good cannabis is doing for our society. It wasn't deemed "essential" for no reason, right? Thank you for your time!! Ruben M Becerra Virus-free. www.avast.com 1 Public Comment From:Dana Cisneros <dana@cisnerosfirm.com> Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:00 PM To:Theresa Bass Cc:Lucille Kring; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Denise Barnes; sfassel@anaheim.net; Trevor O'Neil; HarrySidhu@harrysidhu.com; Robert Fabela; Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Cynthia Ward; Public Comment; Council; City Manager Subject:Cannabis Activities in Anaheim - Comments in Support of Regulating Cannabis Operations Attachments:6.8.2020 letter to council regarding cannabis activities in Anaheim.pdf Importance:High Dear Hon. Mayor Sidhu and Council,    Attached please find my comments supporting regulation of commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim.        Sincerely, Dana Leigh Cisneros, Esq. The Cisneros Firm 1240 N. Lakeview Ave., Suite 125  Anaheim Hills, CA 92807  Phone: (714) 660-9045  Cell: ( eFax: (949) 258-9332 dana@cisnerosfirm.com   www.cisnerosfirm.com WARNING/CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. It may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt, or protected from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, disclosure, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies and attachments. The Cisneros Firm is a green company and uses every effort to engage and encourage paperless practices. Please use email whenever possible and consider the environment before printing this email. If you are not the intended recipient of this email please delete it. All confidentiality, rights and privileges are expressly preserved.    1240 N. Lakeview Ave.., Suite 125 Anaheim Hills, CA 92807 (714) 660-9045 (phone) (949) 258-9332 (fax) dana@cisnerosfirm.com June 8, 2020 Hon. Harry Sidhu, Mayor Denise Barnes, Councilmember Jordan Brandman, Councilmember Trevor O’Neil, Councilmember Steven Fasel, Councilmember Lucile Kring, Councilmember Dr. Jose Moreno, Councilmember Dear Hon. Mayor Sidhu and Councilmembers, Thank you for considering regulating commercial cannabis activities in the City of Anaheim. My firm specializes in licensing, compliance and related transactional and real estate matters for commercial cannabis businesses. I am a member of the Minority Cannabis Business Association, the Drug Policy Alliance, a former member of the Diversity Inclusion and Social Equity Committee for the California Cannabis Industry Association, a member of the California NORML and its Legal Committee and Orange County NORML. My firm represents dozens of commercial cannabis companies and ancillary businesses statewide. I have also authored several articles relating to lawful commercial cannabis activities and delivered just under twenty (20) presentations on various commercial cannabis legal issues, including retail taxation. I would be more than happy to provide the council with a detailed overview of how the licensing and taxation scheme for commercial cannabis businesses works in practice. I also plan to record my industry overview presentation and publish the same to my firm’s website CananbisCorpLaw.com in the next two weeks. As you know, Orange County has been extremely slow in regulating commercial cannabis activities, with only one city (Santa Ana) in the County allowing for retail operations. While Fullerton and Corona are nearly ready to regulate commercial cannabis activities, I truly believe that Anaheim would be the preferred location for most operators. RE: Commercial Cannabis Legalization Anaheim City Council June 8, 2020 Page 2 of 6 Please allow this letter to confirm my personal and professional support for Anaheim adopting an ordinance to regulate commercial cannabis activities. You are going to receive a lot of comments that cite to Prop 64, the fact that patients lost considerable access in 2018 as a result of widespread local prohibition, tax and other revenues and alcohol comparisons from the public. I would likely echo most comments made in favor or legalization in Anaheim, but will not address the obvious since I am sure you are already well aware of these issues and arguments. You will also likely hear from various labor associations, the UFCW and the Teamsters about the benefits of cannabis legalization and job creation. Again, I would likely echo their comments as well. I strongly support Anaheim permitting all types of commercial cannabis activities. While retail is the most competitive and sought after activity in the vertical, it is important to recognize the valuable, skilled jobs that manufacturers, cultivators, distributors and testing laboratories will bring to Anaheim. Additionally, I support a local hiring requirement for all commercial cannabis operators, whereby they would be required to hire a majority of their employees from the surrounding area where the business is located, or at the very least, from Anaheim . I understand that this may prove to be impracticable for some companies, such as manufacturers that require a ver y specific scientific skill set for success. However, imposing a reasonable percentage, such as 50% local employment, would ensure that jobs go to Anaheim residents first. I would also encourage you to work with the operators on programs focused on economic development for the City. I would also encourage you to adopt a social equity component for those most impacted by the failed War on Drugs. It is no secret that the War on Drugs was a thinly veiled attack on persons of color, whose arrest and incarceration rates dwarf minorities’ representative share of the population. Part of progressing as a city and as a society requires each of us to take an honest look at the past and make efforts to correct injustices where we find them. I would encourage you to review the resources available on the Minority Cannabis Business Association’s website. For what it is worth, I previously submitted a public records request for the ethnic makeup of individuals arrested in Anaheim for cannabis related crimes for the past fifteen (15) years. Unfortunately, because Latinx individuals are considered Caucasian, I was not able to perform the necessary analysis. At the direction of council, I am sure the police department and city staff would be better able to identify arre st and conviction rates for cannabis related crimes to determine whether there was a disproportionate impact on communities of color in Anaheim. Even if not, I would encourage you to be at the forefront of this important movement and provide for a social equity component in your Anaheim City Council June 8, 2020 Page 3 of 6 ordinance that would open opportunities for the individuals who built this industry to participate in legal activities. As for the 20-per-activity, other than testing, licensing caps presented in the draft ordinance, I would recommend increasing the cap on retail to 35 based on a one per ten thousand (1:10,000) residents formula, rather than a one per nearly eighteen thousand (1:18,000). As for activities other than retail, I would suggest limiting those activities only if you have an influx of applications for those activities. Otherwise, I believe you may be expending time and resources on reviewing and evaluating applications unnecessarily. For example, last year, unincorporated Riverside County authorized fifty (50) cultivation licenses, but only thirty (30) completed applications were submitted. There is no need to spend the time on a competitive evaluation process where the number of operators is reasonable. I oppose the notion that the City may issue three of twenty permits to a single operator or ownership group. Anaheim has always thrived because of its locally owned small businesses. I can promise you that none of them will be able to compete with the large operartors likely to present applications in Anaheim. By allowing up to three (3) licenses per ownership group, it is entirely possible that seven (7) operators will dominate and control all cannabis sales in Anahiem. Coupled with the fact that the permit transfer process is relatively easy per the proposed ordinance, allowing more than one license to be awarded to a single ownership group would make a merit based process meaningless. Should Anaheim chose to allow retail operators to hold more than one permit, the program should require the winning bueinsess to actually open their doors under the existing ownership structure and not allow for license sales pre-operations. In the event tha an operator is not able to continue through the development process to open its business, then then next qualified applicant on the list should ahgve the ability to move forward, rather than a third party foregoing the merit based selection process. To that end, I would recommend that license transfers be restricted until at least two (2) years after operations commence. I see that the City Manager has proposed an Cannabis Operating Agreement in the ordinance. It is unclear whether the City intends to adopt a development agreement type approach per the Government Code or if it is looking for something else. I would strongly encourage the City to use a development approach to legalization. It seems the City would like to place the measure on the ballot, but I suggest limiting that measure to taxation only and to be in the form of a maximum tax imposed structure. Cannabis goods are already subject to a 15% excise tax and state sales tax. Using a development agreement will ensure the City is able to direct the revenue to programs in Anaheim City Council June 8, 2020 Page 4 of 6 need of funding and simultaneously provides licensees with security for a term of years that will encourage significant investment in the City. Most of the cannabis businesses I work with include a volunteer component in addition to a financial contribution. Encouraging cannabis operators to interface with the public and support community programs and causes will help reduce the stigma and ensure that Anaheim residents know they are able to approach these once taboo businesses. I have attached a basic form development agreement that I have supplied other cities. For example, when pursuing a license on behalf of a client in LaHabra, the city attorney selected the development agreement I drafted to be used for all operators in its boarders. I have also supplied this agreement to Fullerton staff working on cannabis licensing. As you will see, there are provisions for community benefits, payments, amendments and future tax imposition. As far as zoning and land use issues, I would strongly suggest that you instruct staff to review active business licenses in the city of Anaheim and request that any business that thinks is should be considered a “sensitive use” identify itself during a certain time period. The law already requires, unless you adopt a different restriction, that cannabis businesses be located at least 600 feet from any school providing instruction to children in grades K-12 (not all at the same school), day care or youth center. I have seen instances where businesses are preliminarily approved, only to have a home based day care center or karate studio that is considered a youth center identified at the end of the process. I do believe that it would be most efficient and expeditious to permit operations as a matter of right in zones where similar activities take place: retail in commercial zones, manufacturing in manufacturing and industrial zones, cultivation in manufacturing and industrial zones, etc. As indicated above, Santa Ana is the only Orange County city to allow for retail operations. It is my understanding that many of these operators are struggling to be profitable, and I believe it is due to the fact that the establishments are buried in the industrial zones of the city. There is really only one dispensary that is clearly visible to the public – People’s OC, which can be seen from the 55 freeway. In order for these businesses to survive and thrive, they must be accessible and recognizable to the public. Operators in Long Beach and Los Angeles see anywhere from 400-1,200 customers each day. In Santa Ana, most stores are lucky to see 150 customers a day. We want our Anaheim businesses to thrive so please be reasonable in your zoning requirements. I see that the proposed zoning includes industrial areas and the Anaheim Canyon – Development Areas 1 and 2. I understand that the Council is sensitive to overburdening Anaheim City Council June 8, 2020 Page 5 of 6 certain areas of the City with specific land uses and that this was likely an accommodation for District 6, the district where I reside and work. I would encourage the council to consider whether the property owners in the Anaheim Canyon district would actually rent to cannabis businesses or if, after screening for sensitive uses , there are even parcels that fit the criteria in the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan area. Time and time again, I see cities end up in lawsuits because the cannabis business selected a property that, for one reason or another, ends up not meeting the requirements. Unfortunately, these operators usually find out there are issues only after they are well into the process, likely having paid rent or mortgage payments for a year or longer only to find out their business cannot operate in the location they selected. To protect against the threat of lawsuits, and to help operators identify viable properties, I suggest Anaheim (a) specifically identify the parcels that qualify for each commercial cannabis activity taking into account zoning, land use, General Plan and Specific Plan considerations as well as sensitive use buffers; and (b) provide for an initial property screening process for staff to check and confirm that the property is eligible for commercial cannabis operations before the application process unfolds. In drafting your ordinance, please reserve discretion to adjust the caps or zoning for cannabis businesses upon resolution or approval by council, especially if you are going to send the ordinance to the voters for approval. Please also include a carve out provision that allows for changes to be made to conform to the changing framework of California’s commercial cannabis laws. For example, until COVID 19, it was anticipated that by January 1, 2021, the three regulating agencies would be combined into one. Since the COVID 19 outbreak, agency representatives I have spoken with think this is more likely to occur in 2022, but the fact remains that your ordinance should remain flexible to confirm to state law. I am attaching the most recent download of NextDoor comments. You will see that I did my best to comment on legal issues that residents are not aware of, such as restrictions on on-site consumption by employees and diminishing crime rates surrounding licensed activities. What is clear, is that Anaheim should take steps to educate the public and ensure that our children are safe. I always say, kids steal alcohol from their parents, not the liquor store and the same will be true of cannabis dispensaries. Regulation is truly the only way to ensure that cannabis is not sold to our children. I would strongly encourage the council to work with community organizations such as Orange County NORML to engage in public outreach and education as well as youth diversion programs. I have noticed that many of the concerns from the community Anaheim City Council June 8, 2020 Page 6 of 6 relate to issues that are resolved through regulation, such as sales to minors, loitering, on site consumption etc. Public education and outreach should be at the cornerstone of Anaheim’s legalization policy. Given the current state of our city and the world, retail delivery has become extremely prevalent. As I am sure you know, an operator from any city in California is allowed to deliver cannabis goods to Anaheim and the city cannot restrict that activity. As such, it makes no sense for Anaheim to prohibit cannabis activities since they already legally occur within the City. Regulating retail operations will only serve to protect Anaheim residents and ensure the City receives revenue for businesses operating in its boarder s. Finally, I would like to remind you that under Prop 64 and the related regulations, a city is only eligible for state funded enforcement assistance if the city permits retail and cultivation activities within its borders. I would strongly encourage you to look at the increase in enforcement that followed Riverside County legalizing commercial cannabis activities. There are dozens of illegal operators in Anaheim selling tainted products that cannot past the rigorous testing required by the State of California. Legalizing commercial cannabis activities will ensure that Anaheim residents have safe access to clean cannabis goods while generating significant revenue for the City. Should you choose to put this issue on the ballot, I suggest that you only include the taxation component to reserve council’s ability to make future changes without voter approval. I would also suggest that you consider a 0% tax for medicinal sales if recreational cannabis sales are taxed. I am available to discuss these matters further at any time. Again, thank you all for your willingness to consider commercial cannabis legalization in Anaheim. Sincerely, Dana Leigh Cisneros, Esq. Anaheim Business Owner and Resident 1 Public Comment From:Tony Meltcher Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:43 PM To:Public Comment; Council Subject:Support Reasonable Commercial Cannabis Legalization Dear Honorable Council Members:    I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial  cannabis legalization in line with the will of the  voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State  of California.  There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated  commercial cannabis market.    As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate  in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities.  What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were  to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities.    Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level.  As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of  illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products.  However, upon further  investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the  unregulated market.  In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed  commercial cannabis operators.  One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories  released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings.      Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to  operate throughout the City.  As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these  unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that  shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole:  when one shuts down, another opens down the  street.  These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay  their fair share of taxes to the State or the City.  The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis,  which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim.    Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim.  While that may help some residents  access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified  dispensary staff.  Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not  generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders.    Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California.  These essential  businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community.  Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians  all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain.      Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents.  Studies have shown that where legal  commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down.   This is why the most police departments are  now in support of commercial cannabis regulation.  Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and  cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding.  Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate  the unregulated market.      The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses  zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim.  The City can also use the development agreement  2 process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City.  Cannabis businesses  can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local  community organizations that serve its residents.    Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color  and low socioeconomic status.  In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any  Ordinance you support.  Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our  leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes.  Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start.    Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis  regulatory ordinance.    Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue.  Please feel free to reach out to me directly if you  would like to discuss this further.      Sincerely,   Tony Meltcher     “If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together”   NOTE: The contents of this e‐mail message and its attachments are intended solely for the individuals addressee(s)  hereof. This e‐mail transmission is intended to be confidential and is subject to privileged protection. If you are not the  named addressee, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you are directed not to read, disclose,  reproduce, distribute, disseminate or otherwise use this transmission. Delivery of this message to any person other than  the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive privilege or confidentiality. If you have received this  transmission in error, please alert the sender by reply e‐mail and then immediately delete this message and its  attachments. Thank you for your cooperation.    1 Theresa Bass From:Brett Macomber Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:45 PM To:Council Subject:I support cannabis in Anaheim To whom it may concern,    I own and operate an ancillary cannabis business in Orange County. My company’s role is to offer and support  professional technology services such as Internet/business phone, firewalls, security cameras, and cyber security.  Cannakins makes sure the cannabis community stays safe, compliant, and legal.    Please support cannabis in Anaheim. The professional IT community is here to help.     Thank you!    Brett Macomber | President Cannakins Consulting  https://cannakins.com | 417-459-1928 | Schedule a Meeting All communications are private and confidential. If you received this email in error immediately notify sender and delete permanently.   1 Theresa Bass From:Kandice Hawes Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:22 PM To:Council; Public Comment Subject:Please support Cannabis in Anaheim for a better future Dear Honorable Council Members: I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California. There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. 2 Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Please feel free to reach out to me directly if you would like to discuss this further. Sincerely, Kandice Hawes Executive Director, Orange County NORML www.OrangeCountyNORML.org 1 Theresa Bass From:Corinne Simpson Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 5:37 PM To:Council Subject:Cannabis Dear City Council, I vigorously oppose legalization of the sale of recreational marijuana in Anaheim. Sincerely, Corinne Simpson Anaheim, CA. 91806 1 Theresa Bass From:BurkeBodily Sent:Saturday, June 6, 2020 12:39 PM To:Council Subject:Cannabis To the Anaheim City Council: Please do not add to our woes by legalizing cannabis at any level. Must we again give in to the vices, just as we have done with alcohol and tobacco, because we cannot control the current situation. Why must it always come down to the old proverb: “If you can’t defeat them, join them”. The more we give in, the greater the problems we will face. Of the many I know who use cannabis, for any reason, all have realized negative consequences in their lives. Those who regularly use are in denial of the effects cannabis has had on them, but those effects are readily apparent to those around them. I find it difficult to believe that there is such a thing as “recreational use”. It is addicting, and just like the addictions of alcohol and tobacco, will bring sorrow and affliction to all concerned. Any revenues realized by the legalization of cannabis will be offset by the costs of regulation. I see no positive reason why the City of Anaheim should bring this initiative to the ballot – please do not do so! Burke Bodily 1 Theresa Bass From:Rand Christensen Sent:Saturday, June 6, 2020 1:10 PM To:Council Subject:Cannabis I oppose the cannabis ordinance Council is considering June 9. (I do not oppose cannabis when prescribed by a physician.) I am against Council's consideration of this ordinance during a virtual Council meeting. The violation of an existing law should not be the rationale for changing it. Councilmembers receiving donations from the cannabis industry should reconsider their actions. "We believe that governments were instituted for the benefit of man; and that he holds men accountable for their acts in relation to them, both in making and administering them, for the good and safety of society." Doctrine and Covenants 134:1 Rand Christensen 1 Theresa Bass From:Rand Christensen Sent:Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:43 PM To:Council Subject:Cannabis Please replace the email I sent at 1:10 p.m. today with this version. Thank you. I oppose the cannabis ordinance Council is considering June 9. (I do not oppose cannabis when prescribed by a physician.) I am against Council's consideration of this ordinance during a virtual Council meeting. The violation of an existing law should not be the rationale for changing it. Councilmembers receiving donations from the cannabis industry should reconsider their actions. "We believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man; and that he holds men accountable for their acts in relation to them, both in making laws and administering them, for the good and safety of society." Doctrine and Covenants 134:1 Rand Christensen 1 Theresa Bass From:Amy Ogden Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:19 PM To:Council Subject:Cannabis I am writing to oppose the proposed allowance of cannabis dispensaries, growing etc in Anaheim. This area is struggling to maintain cleanliness in many parts of the city. As a long time resident who has raised children here and a working registered nurse, I see daily the effects of cannabis. It is not the benign substance that many would have us believe. It is not effect for long term pain control any more than a narcotic. The user needs more and more until they are impaired constantly but without any affect. This city does not need the influx of buyers that these business will bring. Please do not allow these in our city. Amy Ogden 1 Theresa Bass From:Kim Hansen Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:44 PM To:Council Subject:Cannabis To the Honorable Members of the Anaheim City Council, First, thank each one of you for the time and effort you give in making our city a great place to live and raise a family. By way of introduction, my name is Kim Hansen. I am an attorney and have lived in Anaheim forty years. My wife and I have raised our three children here. Our children have made frequent visits back here bringing our ten grandchildren with them. They love to come to the community where they grew up and bring their children with them to Disneyland and the Angel games. Anaheim has always been a wholesome city and I would like to keep it that way. I believe that if you pass an ordinance that allows for 20 retail marijuana stores, 20 manufacturing plants, 20 indoor indoor growing facilities and 20 dispensaries in Anaheim that the character and nature of our city will be changed for the worse. I would kindly ask that you consider my opinion, as you weigh many opinions, and to vote against this ordinance. Please think about some of the lawful things we do not promote or encourage. This ordinance may be lawful but what it authorizes should not be encouraged or promoted. If this passes the image and character of Anaheim will change for the worse and whatever tax benefits we may receive from this, it will over the long haul devalue the surrounding areas, and tax base of our city. Disneyland is the biggest example of this and it has fought hard to keep a clean wholesome image to promote and encourage a family-friendly destination for tourists to visit our city. For the above reasons I would please ask you to vote no on this ordinance. Thank you, Kim W. Hansen 1 Theresa Bass From:frank avila Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:46 PM To:Council Subject:Cannabis Dear City Council , I have lived in the City of Anaheim most of my life. I remember Grade school and some kids having stickers and telling us" just lick them it is like candy", other kids try it. I remember Junior High seeing one of the young men in school,be put on his knees by the police in front of the whole school for selling drugs. do not even get me started about High school, that was a free for all. My point is this, you think this is only for adults with no children in their house..That it will not reach kids in school even more than it is now. please look at the families side trying so hard in this world, in this City of Anaheim to raise strong young adults. please I understand everyone rights. My mother and Father that I loved very much and still do to this day, Have left this life early because of their owe choices , but also because laws were passed so long ago allowed drinking of alcohol and the use of cigarettes. Please do what is best for everyone in Anaheim, not just the few and please not for the money we are a strong City , and other Cities will look at us closely. on how we handle is issue. I have great pride in Anaheim since I was 8 yrs old. and have raised 7 kids. I am also thankful for your willingness to serve in your callings tor the people of Anaheim. Sincerely yours Frank Avila 1 Theresa Bass From:Phillip Wolfgramm Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:25 AM To:Council Subject:cannabis My name is Phillip Wolfgramm. My wife and I have 5 children. We live in West Anaheim - District 2. The reason we live in Anaheim, where we raised our 5 children is because of the safe family environment, the school opportunities for our children, and the people of this community. We have lived in West Anaheim for over 22 years. Our grown children and our grandchildren like to come back to visit precisely because the items we just mentioned. We vehemently oppose legalizing the sale, manufacture, or otherwise allowing cannabis to be peddled in Anaheim by changing the current city ordinance. Good governance does not cave to those who break city ordinances. Introducing the cannabis element to the city of Anaheim will lessen my family's safety. How can the city allow the cannabis business to legally establish itself in Anaheim that will bring with it increased crime due to the cash (large amounts of it) that criminals will try and rob? Cannabis businesses are not allowed to use the federal bank system because federal law still considers marijuana and cannabis a banned substance. Why would Anaheim allow this? Let's work on other important priorities such as public safety, police, pension/budgets, parks, instead of trying to legalize cannabis business in our city. 1 Theresa Bass From:Dianne Hardman Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 12:50 PM To:Council Subject:Cannabis Please vote “no” on cannabis  Dianne Hardman     Anaheim     Sent from my iPhone  1 Theresa Bass From:good_r Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:59 AM To:Council; 'lday@anahiem.net'; 'good_r@roadrunner.com' Subject:Cannabis--recreational use / sales June 7, 2020 I understand that the Anaheim City Council is considering a proposal to legalize recreational cannabis use and/or sales in the city. I am opposed to this proposal. Those who may tout it as a revenue source are ignoring the negative aspects. Today's cannabis strength is much higher than in the past so those who might say it is 'no worse than alcohol, which is legal' are obscuring the dangers of cannabis as a mind-altering / mind-numbing drug. There is also little guarantee that it can be limited to use by adults. Children do not need this kind of temptation. (I understand that its illegality does not ensure that it will not be used, but it might cause some people to refrain.) I encourage the city council to not pass any law or otherwise grant permission of any kind to expand the use of cannabis at this time. Thank you for your consideration. Robert Good Anaheim, CA 1 Theresa Bass From:Personal Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:43 PM To:Public Comment Cc:Council Subject:I 100% SUPPORT Cannabis in Anaheim, CA :) At this point in time I think the one thing we can all agree on is the good cannabis is doing for our society. It wasn't deemed "essential" for no reason, right? Thank you for your time!! Ruben M Becerra Virus-free. www.avast.com 1 Theresa Bass From:Vincette Wilson Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:46 PM To:Public Comment; Council Subject:I Support Cannabis In Anaheim Allowing Cannabis Activities In Anaheim Public Comments: To Whom It May Concern, I'm a senior living in a senior community here in Orange County. I support allowing cannabis activities here. I hope you are, too. It is now considered a super-food and is here to stay as a natural medicine and it's many uses. It's worth more than alcohol and a safer choice. I'm sure your county makes taxes on alcohol and will welcome taxes from cannabis, too. Many thanks to the Anaheim Police Department and to the Anaheim Fire Department for their support. I hope they'll have your support, also. I have absolutely no self interest in your decision. Thank you, Ms. Vincette Wilson senior citizen 1 Theresa Bass From:Brett Macomber Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:46 PM To:Council Subject:I support cannabis in Anaheim To whom it may concern,    I own and operate an ancillary cannabis business in Orange County. My company’s role is to offer and support  professional technology services such as Internet/business phone, firewalls, security cameras, and cyber security.  Willikins makes sure the cannabis community stays safe, compliant, and legal.    Please support cannabis in Anaheim. The professional IT community is here to help.     Thank you!      Brett Macomber | President Willikins Enterprises https://willikinsenterprises.com | 417-459-1928  All communications are private and confidential. If you received this email in error immediately notify sender and delete permanently.    1 Theresa Bass From:Mark Warner Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 1:50 PM To:Council Subject:Cannabis I am opposed to the City of Anaheim allowing any business to sell, grow, distribute, and any other activity that  uses Cannabis in any form. The medical use of Cannabis should be controlled the same way as controlled substances are  controlled by medical prescriptions.     Allowing businesses that sell Cannabis to the public just adds more "Bar type businesses" to the city. This brings with it  all the social ills that alcohol and bars have brought to the city. Bars and Cannabis shops will bring more crime and more  impaired drivers.     Please do not allow the public sales of Cannabis to the public within Anaheim.     Mark J. Warner  Anaheim, CA 92804  Phone:  1 Public Comment From:Ilya Ross Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:36 AM To:Public Comment; Council Subject:I SUPPORT CANNABIS IN ANAHEIM Attachments:Anaheim Public Comment (6.9.20).docx Hello, I am resending my comments to reflect an updated subject heading in this email to ensure proper receipt. Thank you, -- Ilya Ross Principal Law Offices of Ilya E. Ross *The Law Offices of Ilya E. Ross provide services legal services and counseling which are strictly limited to state legal activities pertaining to marijuana. All activities related to marijuana are illegal under the federal laws of the United States of America and nothing contained herein nor any of our services provided are intended to assist in any way with violation of any applicable law.* **Any information, including enclosures, transmitted via this correspondence are private, confidential and protected by attorney-client privilege. If you believe that you are not the intended recipient, please so indicate and immediately delete and dispose of this email. Do not print, copy, retransmit, disseminate or otherwise use this information.** Law Offices of Ilya E. Ross June 9, 2020 To Our Esteemed Councilmen, The Law Offices of Ilya E. Ross understand that the Anaheim Council will meet on Tuesday, June 9, 2020, to consider allowing cannabis activities (“Cannabis Licensing”) within the city of Anaheim (the “City”). We wish to provide the following comments pertaining specifically to the City’s zoning qualifications for cannabis businesses. In the interest of generating significant revenues for the City and supporting the growth of the cannabis industry locally, we strongly encourage and advocate that all properties within the industrial zones of the City be qualified for cannabis business licenses. Jurisdictions all throughout the State of California have been hit hard by the COVID-19 restrictions and the ensuing economic impact on local businesses and State revenues. In response to this unprecedented economic challenge, we commend the City for its adaptive solutions and are encouraged by the City’s consideration of Cannabis Licensing. Our experience representing cannabis operators in the State of California and nationally has provided us with a first-hand view of how cannabis can provide communities with economic stimulus and job growth. From our experience, a local regulatory regime promoting streamlining, efficiency and clarity is best poised to maximize the revenue potential and buttress a vibrant and active industry. As such, we are advocating for a simple and streamlined application process that is open to all applicants that can obtain or rent qualified property within the City. Specifically, we request the removal of the cap of twenty (20) businesses for each license type within the City, in order to promote growth and allow each successful applicant to vertically integrate their business within the City. In the interest of public policy and the goals accompanying the passage of Proposition 64, we also request that the City grant preference to any cannabis business that was issued a city business permit prior to 2018. Our firm is proud to work with entrepreneurs and farmers who wish to participate in the growth of the local cannabis industry and the accompanying benefit to the local economy. We thank the City for considering Cannabis Licensing and humbly request that our recommendations be taken into consideration by the Anaheim Council. Sincerely, Ilya E. Ross Principal 1 Public Comment From:Ilya Ross Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:56 AM To:Public Comment; Council Subject:Comments for Council Meeting to Consider Cannabis (6/9/20) Attachments:Anaheim Public Comment (6.9.20).docx To Whom it May Concern, Attached please find some comments for your consideration for today's meeting of the Anaheim Council. Please let me know of any questions and thank you for your time Best, -- Ilya Ross Principal Law Offices of Ilya E. Ross *The Law Offices of Ilya E. Ross provide legal services and counseling which are strictly limited to state legal activities pertaining to marijuana. All activities related to marijuana are illegal under the federal laws of the United States of America and nothing contained herein nor any of our services provided are intended to assist in any way with violation of any applicable law.* **Any information, including enclosures, transmitted via this correspondence are private, confidential and protected by attorney-client privilege. If you believe that you are not the intended recipient, please so indicate and immediately delete and dispose of this email. Do not print, copy, retransmit, disseminate or otherwise use this information.** Law Offices of Ilya E. Ross com June 9, 2020 To Our Esteemed Councilmen, The Law Offices of Ilya E. Ross understand that the Anaheim Council will meet on Tuesday, June 9, 2020, to consider allowing cannabis activities (“Cannabis Licensing”) within the city of Anaheim (the “City”). We wish to provide the following comments pertaining specifically to the City’s zoning qualifications for cannabis businesses. In the interest of generating significant revenues for the City and supporting the growth of the cannabis industry locally, we strongly encourage and advocate that all properties within the industrial zones of the City be qualified for cannabis business licenses. Jurisdictions all throughout the State of California have been hit hard by the COVID-19 restrictions and the ensuing economic impact on local businesses and State revenues. In response to this unprecedented economic challenge, we commend the City for its adaptive solutions and are encouraged by the City’s consideration of Cannabis Licensing. Our experience representing cannabis operators in the State of California and nationally has provided us with a first-hand view of how cannabis can provide communities with economic stimulus and job growth. From our experience, a local regulatory regime promoting streamlining, efficiency and clarity is best poised to maximize the revenue potential and buttress a vibrant and active industry. As such, we are advocating for a simple and streamlined application process that is open to all applicants that can obtain or rent qualified property within the City. Specifically, we request the removal of the cap of twenty (20) businesses for each license type within the City, in order to promote growth and allow each successful applicant to vertically integrate their business within the City. In the interest of public policy and the goals accompanying the passage of Proposition 64, we also request that the City grant preference to any cannabis business that was issued a city business permit prior to 2018. Our firm is proud to work with entrepreneurs and farmers who wish to participate in the growth of the local cannabis industry and the accompanying benefit to the local economy. We thank the City for considering Cannabis Licensing and humbly request that our recommendations be taken into consideration by the Anaheim Council. Sincerely, Ilya E. Ross Principal 1 Public Comment From:Kandice Hawes Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:03 PM To:Theresa Bass; Public Comment; Council; City Manager; Lucille Kring; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Denise Barnes; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; HarrySidhu@harrysidhu.com; fabela@anaheim.net; Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Cynthia Ward Subject:Public Comment from the Orange County NORML Cannabis Licensing Task Force Dear Honorable Council Members: This letter is submitted by the Orange County NORML Commercial Cannabis Licensing Task Force to urge you to enact reasonable and responsible policies to regulate the cultivation, production, distribution, testing and commercial sales of cannabis in the City of Anaheim. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35%, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. We have attached a copy of that report to this letter for you to review. If you turn to page 6 of the report, it is abundantly clear that the lawfully produced vaporizing cartridges do not contain the adulterants that caused illness last year and further are free from pesticides. Conversely, the products purchased from the unregulated market were overwhelmingly contaminated. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of 2 well trained, qualified dispensary staff. For example, there are now tinctures that do not need to be smoked that provide patients significant relief. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Please feel free to reach out to me directly if you would like to discuss this further. Sincerely, OC NORML Task Force Committee Chairs Dana Leigh Cisneros, Esq Jakki Hernandez Kandice Hawes 1 Public Comment From:Luiz Torres Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:17 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Support for 28 and 29 I support the cities effort to allow cannibis to be sold in Anaheim.    I also am against layoffs of city of Anaheim employees.   1 Public Comment From:Tina Chavez Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:42 PM To:Public Comment; Council Subject:I support cannabis in Anaheim Hello, I'm writing to urge the support of the cannabis industry in Anaheim. The economical advantages of supporting this reemerging industry are obviously a huge benefit, but also consider this a step to healing the planet and our relationships with each other. The laws that established cannabis prohibition are well documented as rooted in racism, and that the Marihuana Tax Act of 1937 was based on poorly attended hearings and reports based on questionable studies. Meanwhile history, science, and the budgets of current accessible cities, prove that prohibition has succeeded in only stunting medical and agricultural advancements, and thereby the growth of our nation. I'm asking you to take a step forward with the majority of today's citizens and welcome back the cannabis industry and remind you that prior to prohibition, our Greatest Generation relied on "Hemp for Victory" Tina Chavez Paralegal and Advocate 2 Public Comment From:Jessica Fox Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:16 PM To:Public Comment Cc:Council Subject:Cannabis Hello my name is Jessica Fox and I am from Norwalk, CA.     I work in the cannabis industry as a budtender in Long Beach and I am emailing in support of cannabis in Anaheim. As a  life long resident of Southern California and once previous resident of Orange County, I have seen drastic changes in  how cannabis can change and uplift a community and individuals lives.     Not only will this help bring change and aid to its people and those in seek of medicine but this will create economic  benefits to the city of Anaheim creating more jobs and opportunities for growth.     I support Cannabis in Anaheim. Helping the growth of legal cannabis will in return help Anaheim.     Jessica Fox  3 Public Comment From:Marc Conner Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:09 PM To:Council; Public Comment Subject:Support for Legal Cannabis in Anaheim Dear Honorable Council Members: I am a resident of the City of Anaheim. I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California.There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. 4 The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. M arc Connor | Territory M anager OLD PAL - CLASSIC SHAREABLE CANNABIS 5 Public Comment From:Max Ahmadi Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:33 AM To:Public Comment Subject:June 9 agenda item #28 In haste of approving the Cannabis business ordinance today please take notice that: Setting application requirement with SUBJECTIVE standards such as is proposed in NEXT STEP paragraph calls for establishment of "RANKING SYSTEM" calls for a system discriminating against certain people and favoring others based on arbitrary mind of officials. California Cannabis authorities have full occupancy of the area of "QUALIFICATION" of licensses The City should be in the business of LAND USE decisions not perceived successful businessmen. Such selection certainly will expose the city to lawsuits and liability Although the city may scrutinize the qualification and suitability of a person or company in section of their public works projects or employment selection. Level of success of cannabis business owner shall not be the city concern. Such selection process in the long term will create a monopoly by the so called " select group" to run small mom and pop business from the FREE MARKET in Anaheim. 6 Public Comment From:Alex Spornick Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:25 AM To:Public Comment Cc:Council Subject:Cannabis Hello! I wanted to write to support Cannabis in Anaheim. It is an essential business in other cities, and they are providing so much tax revenue! Also, truth be told, cannabis seems safer than alcohol. Thank you for reading this and take care! Alex Spornick 7 Public Comment From:Kandice Hawes Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:12 AM To:Theresa Bass; Public Comment; Council; City Manager; Lucille Kring; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Denise Barnes; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; HarrySidhu@harrysidhu.com; fabela@anaheim.net; Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Cynthia Ward Subject:I support Cannabis in Anaheim Hello Honorable Council, Thank you for taking the time to learn about the cannabis industry and thoroughly consider licensing cannabis businesses. I support adding cannabis retail dispensaries, distribution, manufacturing, testing and cultivation facilities in Anaheim. I ask that you vote in favor an ordinance to allow commercial cannabis uses and approve a tax measure for the November ballot. I moved to California twenty years ago to attend college and moved in with my grandfather in Anaheim, where I lived and worked for over 10 years. In 2003 I founded Orange County NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, while an Anaheim resident. The purpose of OC NORML is to educate the public and elected officials on the alternatives to our failed policies on cannabis. The City of Anaheim is practicing a failed policy on cannabis. Illegal dispensaries thrive in Anaheim, there is a market whether people like it or not, and that market needs to be regulated and customers protected by the City. There is a need for cannabis in your City and there will be either legal dispensaries that contribute and follow the rules, or illegal dispensaries that sell unsafe product and bring little benefit to the City. The California Bureau of Cannabis Control strictly regulates the cannabis industry. All the different uses have rules and regulations that they must follow or they lose the license they worked very hard to acquire. The cannabis industry is full of intelligent and compassionate businessmen who operate under best practices. In other cities such as Santa Ana, Pasadena, and San Bernardino, the cities required the cannabis businesses to contribute to local nonprofits and submit a community benefit plan. I saw applications where businesses were planning to contribute larger amounts to nonprofits and meet any demand the City makes. Cannabis businesses bring new life and investment money into areas that are in ill repair. These businesses since they have high levels of security that can actually make the area around the business safer by bringing guards and surveillance. In one case recently footage from a dispensary was used to solve an unrelated crime. One of the biggest benefits that cannabis businesses could bring is jobs. Each cannabis license that the City grants could contribute 10-20 new jobs paying a living wage. The City of Long Beach has a Cannabis Social Equity Program. According to the City website "The Cannabis Social Equity Program requires all adult-use cannabis businesses to hire Equity Employees for a minimum of 8 40% of the total annual work hours performed at the business." The equity program is for those that meet a combination of requirements such as a being a resident, low income, prior cannabis charge, and/or from an area previously disadvantaged by the war on drugs. I do support some of the amendments mentioned by the Council to the current version. These amendments include a farther setback from sensitive use areas. I know from running the cannabis campaign in Santa Ana that one reason voters preferred the City's version was a 1,000 foot buffer rather than a 600 foot buffer, which is state law. I also think that the City Manager has too much power in the current version. There is more flexibility and consideration when the Council has more power. Also, the threshold for a labor peace agreement at 2 is much lower than most other cities. It seems very clear to me, if the Council is conflicted then the matter should be passed on to the voters. There is no harm in letting the voters weigh in. If the Council cannot come to a consensus with compromising amendments to the current version then I would suggest running the tax measure first. Although I would like to see the ordinance and tax measure move forward on June 9th postponing the ordinance would also allow for more time to educate and receive feedback from the community. The city of Stanton placed a tax measure on their ballot before they had a ordinance, which passed by voters. I thank each of you for taking time to consider that benefits that cannabis could bring to your city. Kandice Hawes Executive Director, Orange County NORML 9 Public Comment From:David Acebedo Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:58 AM To:Council; Public Comment Subject:Cannabis Reform Now. Dear Honorable Council Members: My name is David Acebedo and I am a resident of the City of Anaheim. I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California. There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. This is extra near and dear to me as I am employed in the legal cannabis industry and see the huge lack of potential tax revenue the city is missing out on. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approved Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. The same way alcohol is recreationally legal, cannabis is also now and should be treated similar to. The city has a large amount of breweries and could benefit even more from just half that amount in cannabis licenses. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most 10 police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. -- With Gratitude, David Acebedo Madrone Account Manager 11 Public Comment From:Gem Montes Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:27 AM To:Public Comment Cc:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O'Neil Subject:Commercial Cannabis Agenda Item Greetings Mayor, Council, Staff and Community Members: My name is Gem Montes and I am a Planning Commissioner with the City of Colton, California, a Public Policy major at UCRiverside and the Executive Director of IE NORML. I never imagined that I would witness the recent events that have taken place wreaking havoc on our communities. To say that preserving what is left and rebuilding our communities is "challenging", is an understatement. That being said, as Public Servants it is our obligation to look at all possible options in support of those efforts. The loss of Tax and Fee revenue through these epoch times is devastating our budgets; requiring us to be creative to endure. The first cities to allow commercial cannabis businesses in their jurisdictions had severe financial issues and needed to find solutions to quickly sustain themselves. It worked. Although there were issues with their policy, there are always issues with new endeavors. Welcoming legal Commercial Cannabis businesses into Anaheim would open a new stream of revenue that is much needed. In order to optimize benefits, consider the following: 1) Process cannabis permits without a third-party consultant so permit fees go to the City 2) Allow for a Cannabis Compliance committee or consultant to educate and support local business, while allowing for local fines due to non-compliance and minimizing closures and license disruptions 3) Forego onerous and redundant regulations to expedite permits 4) Implement a Social Equity Program that will allow the City to apply for grant funding from the State while providing expanded opportunity to those disproportionately impacted by the War on Drugs If implemented, these bullet points could potentially create or restore employment positions while maximizing financial benefits I am happy to discuss this further for those who are interested in furthering the conversation. I wish you the best of health, happiness and peace today and beyond. -- Gem Montes 12 Public Comment From:Pam Chotiswatdi Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:20 AM To:Public Comment Cc:Council Subject:Cannabis Hello - My name is Pam Chotiswatdi, MPH. I support commercial cannabis licenses in Anaheim (and all cities). I am public health professional, specializing in community education. I transitioned careers just 4 years ago. My undergrad is in English Literature. I was on a nursing track as college student, working as a medical assistant. I switched majors to pursue teaching. Everytime I found a groove, I would hit a bureaucracy barrier. I dropped out of the teaching program and found a comfortable job as an editor for a local resource publications for families and pets. After 8 years, I decided I needed to do more for myself, my community, and society at large. I went back to school to pursue a master degree in Public Health. While I studied, I found numerous cannabis-related studied that were compounded by overt bias --- within the study. That is when I dug deep into cannabis -- politically, historically, and scientifically. You see, cannabis touches many societal issues --- medical access, systemic racism, housing, public health, enforcement, social equity, education, diversion, and fair business policy and practices to name a few. What I found changed the way I perceived my role in society. I became an advocate and activist - not just for cannabis and its patients, and human rights, but for all the issues that cannabis intersects. A legal cannabis industry brings a workforce - it is not everyday that our society develops a new industry. This does not happen. The underground industry needs a place to operate legally. The legal market is the number one defense against the illicit market. Keep in mind: The legal cannabis market needs more licenses to sustain and scale -- like any industry. It is the less lethal of recreational substances -- alcohol and tobacco and is taxes far higher than either -- that is not smart public health - public safety strategy. State Excise: liquor = $3.30 per gallon + sales tax beer and wine = 20¢ per gallon (yes, that is cents) + sales tax cannabis = 15% + sales tax + "cannabis" tax (both medical and recreational uses) pharmaceuticals = no excise tax - no sales tax Automatic deletion of cannabis-related charges that occured in the city of Anaheim Do the right thing. -- Gratefully, 13 Pam Chotiswatdi, MPH Admin | Community Education Director 14 Public Comment From:Jeremiah Garber Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:59 AM To:Theresa Bass; Public Comment; City Manager; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Denise Barnes; sfassel@anaheim.net; Trevor O'Neil; harrysidhu@harrysidhu.com; fabela@anaheim.net; Cynthia Ward Subject:Commercial Cannabis Legalization Dear Anaheim City Council: I am a resident of the city of Anaheim. I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California. There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approved Prop 64 by 51.35%, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – a – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the 15 assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Sincerely, Jerry Garber 16 Public Comment From:Luiz Torres Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:17 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Support for 28 and 29 I support the cities effort to allow cannibis to be sold in Anaheim.    I also am against layoffs of city of Anaheim employees.   17 Public Comment From:Kandice Hawes Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 11:03 PM To:Theresa Bass; Public Comment; Council; City Manager; Lucille Kring; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Denise Barnes; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O'Neil; HarrySidhu@harrysidhu.com; fabela@anaheim.net; Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Cynthia Ward Subject:Public Comment from the Orange County NORML Cannabis Licensing Task Force Dear Honorable Council Members: This letter is submitted by the Orange County NORML Commercial Cannabis Licensing Task Force to urge you to enact reasonable and responsible policies to regulate the cultivation, production, distribution, testing and commercial sales of cannabis in the City of Anaheim. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35%, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. We have attached a copy of that report to this letter for you to review. If you turn to page 6 of the report, it is abundantly clear that the lawfully produced vaporizing cartridges do not contain the adulterants that caused illness last year and further are free from pesticides. Conversely, the products purchased from the unregulated market were overwhelmingly contaminated. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of 18 well trained, qualified dispensary staff. For example, there are now tinctures that do not need to be smoked that provide patients significant relief. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Please feel free to reach out to me directly if you would like to discuss this further. Sincerely, OC NORML Task Force Committee Chairs Dana Leigh Cisneros, Esq Jakki Hernandez Kandice Hawes 1 Public Comment From:Matt Harrison Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:55 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Comments on Anaheim Agenda (Cannabis) Attachments:anaheimmemo.pdf; Cannabis Ordinance MH Redline 06.09.20.docx Dear Council: I write you regarding your proposed cannabis ordinance. For background, I am co-author of Proposition 64 (the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, 2016), and an attorney specializing in administrative, municipal and cannabis law. As part of my practice, I have reviewed every local cannabis ordinance passed to date in the state of California, and after reviewing the proposed Anaheim ordinance, would like to offer some suggestions and my assistance more generally. In its current form, the draft ordinance contains a number of fundamental deficiencies and areas for concern. Generally, the vast powers and authorities granted to the City Manager throughout the ordinance are unnecessary, inconsistent with the treatment of similar businesses in the City of Anaheim, and contrary to a sustainable local industry. In order to address these issues - as well as the legitimate concerns of many commenters - the ordinance should be amended and revised in order to provide substantive policy standards to guide reasonable regulations, consistent business standards, and public safety. In doing so, the City can articulate standards to ensure first-class business operations which are sustainable and beneficial to the local community. For your reference, I have attached a redlined version of the ordinance which includes some of these changes, and reiterate my availability for additional assistance. Also, the City does not need to make the licensing ordinance contingent upon voter approval of the cannabis tax ordinance. With any new licensed businesses already subject to Anaheim business taxes and (for retailers) sales taxes, such a requirement is an artificial limitation. I also join the specific comments of Dana Cisneros (especially regarding CEQA) Craig Wasserman (especially taxing net instead of gross profit), and others who criticized the license cap. Such artificial limitations only increase opportunities for corruption (or the appearance of corruption), and can be fatal to this fledgling, early stage legal industry. As you are aware, there are currently 663 retail liquor licenses in the City of Anaheim, 223 of which are off-sale (package) retail, equivalent to a cannabis retailer. And as the latest federal survey data indicate that alcohol consumed by approximately three times as many adults as cannabis, it is clear the cap is nowhere near sufficient to achieve equality of access. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Thank you! -- M. Sean Harrison, Esq. Prometheus Civic Law This message (including any attachment to this message) is confidential and may contain information that is privileged or otherwise legally protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please delete it without saving it and separately notify the sender. Thank you. Tuesday, June 9, 2020 Via Electronic Mail Anaheim City Council Anaheim, CA Re:Proposed Cannabis Ordinance in Anaheim Dear Council: I write you regarding your proposed cannabis ordinance. For background, I am co-author of Proposition 64 (the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, 2016), and an attorney specializing in administrative, municipal and cannabis law. As part of my practice, I have reviewed every local cannabis ordinance passed to date in the state of California, and after reviewing the proposed Anaheim ordinance, would like to offer some suggestions and my assistance more generally. In its current form, the draft ordinance contains a number of fundamental deficiencies and areas for concern. Generally, the vast powers and authorities granted to the City Manager throughout the ordinance are unnecessary, inconsistent with the 1 treatment of similar businesses in the City of Anaheim, and contrary to a sustainable local industry. In order to address these issues - as well as the legitimate concerns of many commenters - the ordinance should be amended and revised in order to provide substantive policy standards to guide reasonable regulations, consistent business standards, and public safety. In doing so, the City can articulate standards to ensure first-class business operations which are sustainable and beneficial to the local community. For your reference, I have attached a redlined version of the ordinance which includes some of these changes, and reiterate my availability for additional assistance. Also, the City does not need to make the licensing ordinance contingent upon voter approval of the cannabis tax ordinance. With any new licensed businesses 2 already subject to Anaheim business taxes and (for retailers) sales taxes, such a requirement is an artificial limitation. I also join the specific comments of Dana Cisneros (especially regarding CEQA) Craig Wasserman (especially taxing net instead of gross profit), and others who criticized the license cap. Such artificial limitations only increase opportunities for See, e.g. Ordinance [26147] .060.(d)1 Ordinance [26147], Section 22 Prometheus Civic Law, P.C. | Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 corruption (or the appearance of corruption), and can be fatal to this fledgling, early stage legal industry. As you are aware, there are currently 663 retail liquor licenses in the City of Anaheim, 223 of which are off-sale (package) retail, equivalent to a cannabis retailer. 3 4 And as the latest federal survey data indicate that alcohol consumed by approximately three times as many adults as cannabis, it is clear the cap is nowhere near sufficient to 5 achieve equality of access. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance. Thank you! Very truly yours, __ M. Sean Harrison, Esq Department of Alcoholic Beverages Control, License Report: Anaheim (Retail), retrieved June 3 9, 2020 Department of Alcoholic Beverages Control, License Report: Anaheim Active Off-Sale Retail4 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Survey on Drug Use and Health 5 (NSDUH) (2018); 139m adults admitting alcohol use; 43m admitting cannabis use Page 1 of 26 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA ADDING CHAPTER 4.110 TO TITLE 4 OF THE ANAHEIM MUNICIPAL CODE REGULATING CANNABIS DISTRIBUTION, MANUFACTURING, CULTIVATION, RETAIL SALE, DELIVERIES, AND TESTING LABORATORIES, AND REPEALING CHAPTERS 4.20, 4.21, AND 4.100 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE (TO TAKE EFFECT ONLY UPON PASSAGE OF A CANNABIS TAX MEASURE AT THE NOVEMBER 2020 ELECTION) WHEREAS, on October 9, 2015, Governor Brown signed three Bills into law (AB 266, AB 243, and SB 643), which collectively are known as the Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act (“MMRSA”) and which established a comprehensive state licensing scheme for commercial uses related to medicinal cannabis; and WHEREAS, in November 2016, the voters passed Proposition 64 or the Adult Use of Marijuana Act (“AUMA”), which established a similar state licensing scheme for adult use (i.e., non-medicinal) marijuana facilities; and WHEREAS, after the passage of the AUMA, the Legislature adopted and the Governor signed into law SB 94, which is known as the Medicinal and Adult Use Cannabis Regulation and Safety Act (the “MAUCRSA”); and WHEREAS, the MAUCRSA effectively consolidates the regulatory scheme provided for by the MMRSA (relating to medicinal marijuana) with the regulatory scheme provided for by the AUMA (relating to non-medicinal marijuana) to provide for one licensing structure for all cannabis related uses; and WHEREAS, under the MAUCRSA, cities retain their ability to regulate medicinal and adult use commercial cannabis related uses; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to allow certain cannabis related uses in limited areas within the City subject to the requirements of this Chapter, which are intended to mitigate potential negative impacts, prevent cannabis from reaching minors or the illicit market, preserve public health and safety, protect the environment, and promote diverse economic and employment opportunities. Now, therefore, the City Council for the City of Anaheim DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The above recitations are true and correct and made a part of this Ordinance. Page 2 of 26 SECTION 2. This ordinance shall only take effect if the electors of the City of Anaheim approve a City Council-sponsored sales and use tax measure for Commercial Cannabis Activities at the November 2020 election. If the voters pass such a ballot measure, Chapters 4.20, 4.21, and 4.100 of the Anaheim Municipal Code will be, and by this instrument hereby are, repealed and replaced in their entirety with Chapter 4.110, as follows: Chapter 4.110 COMMERCIAL CANNABIS FACILITIES 4.110.010. Purpose and Intent. It is the purpose and intent of this Chapter 4.110 to implement State Law, which includes, but is not limited to, the provisions of the Medicinal Adult-Use Cannabis Recreation and Safety Act, Business and Professions Code §§ 26000, et seq., as it may be augmented and amended from time to time (hereinafter, “MAUCRSA”), while imposing regulations on the use of land to protect the City's neighborhoods, residents, and businesses from negative impacts. It is a further purpose and intent of this Chapter 4.110 to regulate the indoor cultivation, retail sale, delivery, manufacturing, processing, testing, and distribution of cannabis and cannabis-related products in a manner which is responsible, which protects the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of Anaheim, and which is consistent with the rules and regulations imposed by State Law. Nothing in this Chapter 4.110 is intended to authorize the possession, use, sale, or provision of cannabis for purposes which violate State Law. In addition, nothing in this Chapter 4.110 is intended to allow persons to engage in conduct that endangers others or constitutes a public nuisance. The requirements of this Chapter 4.110 are in addition to any other permits, licenses or approvals required to conduct business in Anaheim or under State, County, or other law. Nothing in this Chapter shall be interpreted to allow Commercial Cannabis Uses other than those that strictly comply with the provisions contained herein. Operation of a Commercial Cannabis Facility without obtaining a Permit and complying with State Law and all of the provisions of this Chapter is strictly prohibited. 4.110.020. Fees and Taxes. All Commercial Cannabis Facilities shall pay all applicable fees and taxes established by the City Council by resolution, which shall include one (1) or more of the following: a. Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit Application Fees. Applicants shall submit a non-refundable fee to cover the cost of processing an application or amended application for a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit. b. Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit Renewal Fees. Applicants for renewal permits shall submit a non-refundable fee to cover the cost of processing an application or amended application for annual renewal of the Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit. Page 3 of 26 c. Business License Taxes. A Commercial Cannabis Facility shall at all times maintain a current and valid City of Anaheim business license and shall pay all business license taxes, deposits, charges, fees, deficiencies, penalties, interest, and other associated assessments as may be required by the Anaheim Municipal Code or other City rule or regulation. d. Commercial Cannabis Operating Agreement Fees. Prior If required, to commencing operations, a Commercial Cannabis Facility shall enter into an agreement with the City that includes the payment of fees and other charges to compensate the City for impacts on City services. e. Cannabis-specific gross receipts, excise taxes, or other municipal tax approved by the voters of the City of Anaheim. f. All required state taxes, including sales and use taxes, business/franchise or income taxes, payroll taxes, etc. g. All required federal taxes. h. All required transfer taxes and/or fees. 4.110.030. Commercial Cannabis Authorization and Restrictions .010. Minimum Standards Applicable to Commercial Cannabis Activity. Pursuant to Sections 5 and 7 of Article XI of the California Constitution, the provisions of the MAUCRSA, and any subsequent state legislation and/or regulations regarding the MAUCRSA, the City of Anaheim is authorized to adopt ordinances that establish standards, requirements and regulations for the licensing and permitting of Commercial Cannabis Activities. Any standards, requirements, and regulations regarding health and safety, security, and worker protections established by the State of California, or any of its departments or divisions, shall be the minimum standards applicable in the City of Anaheim to all Commercial Cannabis Activity. .020. Unauthorized Commercial Cannabis Activities Prohibited. Except as specifically authorized in this Chapter, the commercial cultivation, dispensing, manufacture, processing, storing, laboratory testing, labeling, sale, delivery, distribution or transportation (other than as provided under Bus. & Prof. Code section 26090(e)), of cannabis or cannabis products is expressly prohibited in the City of Anaheim. .030. Compliance with Laws. Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed as authorizing any actions that violate federal, state or local law with respect to the operation of a Commercial Cannabis Page 4 of 26 Facility. It shall be the responsibility of the owner(s) and/or operator(s) of a Commercial Cannabis Facility to ensure that the Facility is, at all times, operating in a manner compliant with all applicable federal, state and local laws, as they may be augmented or amended from time to time, including for as long as applicable, the Compassionate Use Act (“Prop. 215”), the Medical Cannabis Program Act (“MMPA”), the 2008 Attorney General Guidelines for the Security and Non-Diversion of Cannabis for Medical Purposes (“AG Guidelines”), the Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety Act (“MMRSA”), the Adult Use of Marijuana Act (“AUMA” or “Prop. 64”), the MAUCRSA, and any subsequently enacted state law or regulatory, licensing, or certification requirement (collectively “State Law”), as well as any specific, additional operating procedures or requirements which may be imposed as conditions of approval of a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit. 4.110.040. Definitions. When used in this Chapter, the following words shall have the meanings ascribed to them as set forth herein. Any reference to California statutes includes any regulations promulgated thereunder, and is deemed to include any successor or amended version of the referenced statute or regulatory provision. The definitions of terms below shall be consistent with the definitions contained in the MAUCRSA. Any term used in this Chapter that is not defined below shall have the same meaning contained in the MAUCRSA. a. Applicant: shall mean a person or entity applying for a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit. In the context of an annual renewal, Applicant shall mean a person or entity applying to renew a Permit. . b. Cannabis: shall mean all parts of the plant Cannabis sativa Linnaeus, Cannabis indica, or Cannabis ruderalis, whether growing or not; the seeds thereof; the resin, whether crude or purified, extracted from any part of the plant; and every compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the plant, its seeds, or resin. “Cannabis” also means the separated resin, whether crude or purified, obtained from marijuana. “Cannabis” also means “marijuana” as defined by Section 11018 of the Health and Safety Code as enacted by Chapter 1407 of the Statutes of 1972. The term “Cannabis” shall also have the same meaning as set forth in Business & Professions Code § 26001 (f), as it may be amended from time to time. “Cannabis” does not include the mature stalks of the plant, fiber produced from the stalks, oil or cake made from the seeds of the plant, any other compound, manufacture, salt, derivative, mixture, or preparation of the mature stalks (except the resin extracted therefrom), fiber, oil, or cake, or the sterilized seed of the plant which is incapable of germination. For the purpose of this chapter, “cannabis” does not mean “industrial hemp” as defined by Section 81000 of the Food and Agricultural Code or Section 11018.5 of the Health and Safety Code. c. Certificate of Accreditation: shall mean a document issued by an accreditation body that attests to a laboratory’s competence to carry out specific testing analysis Page 5 of 26 and is required for issuance of a state license pursuant to 16 Cal. Code Regs. § 5702. d. City: shall mean the City of Anaheim. e. City Cannabis Regulations: shall mean and refer to the regulations issued by the City Manager or his or her designee relating to the application for or renewal of a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit and/or the oversight and operation of Commercial Cannabis Facilities in the City. f. City Manager: shall mean the City Manager of the City of Anaheim or his or her designee. g. Commercial Cannabis Activity: shall have the same meaning as set forth in Business and Professions Code § 26001, as it may be amended from time to time. Commercial Cannabis Activity includes the cultivation, manufacture, possession, distribution, processing, storing, laboratory testing, packaging, labeling, delivery or sale of cannabis and cannabis products. h. Commercial Cannabis Facility: shall mean a business that has obtained a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit from the City of Anaheim in order to conduct a Commercial Cannabis Activity, and which is subject to the regulations set forth in State Law and this Chapter. Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit or Permit: shall mean a regulatory permit issued by the City of Anaheim pursuant to this Chapter to a Commercial Cannabis Facility, and which is required before any Commercial Cannabis Activity may be conducted in the City. The initial permit and annual renewal of a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit is made expressly contingent upon the business’ ongoing compliance with all of the requirements of this Chapter and any regulations adopted by the Page 6 of 26 City governing the Commercial Cannabis Activity at issue. i. j. Commercial Cannabis Operating Agreement: shall mean an agreement entered into by and between the City and a Commercial Cannabis Facility governing the operation of the Facility which shall, among other things, specify terms for local hiring and sourcing, community benefits, public safety, public outreach and education, community services, and payment of fees and other charges to compensate the City for impacts on City services. k. Cultivation or Cultivator: shall mean a Licensee engaged in activity involving the planting, growing, harvesting, drying, curing, grading, or trimming of Cannabis. l. Cultivation – Indoor: shall mean the Cultivation of Cannabis inside a permanent enclosed building or structure. m. Cultivation – Outdoor: shall mean the Cultivation of Cannabis outside a permanent enclosed building or structure. n. Delivery: shall mean the commercial transfer of Cannabis or Cannabis products to a customer located at a physical address. “Delivery” also includes the use by a Retailer of any technology platform used to transfer or sell Cannabis other than at the Retail Facility. o. Distribution or Distributor: shall mean a Licensee that engages in the procurement, sale, and transport of cannabis and cannabis products between other Licensees. p. Hearing Officer: shall have the meaning set forth in Section 1.12.110 of this Code. q. Labor Peace Agreement: means a written agreement between an Owner and any bona fide labor organization as defined by California Business and Professions Code § 26001(x) that, at a minimum, prohibits labor organizations and members from engaging in picketing, work stoppages, boycotts, and any other economic interference with the Owner’s business and contains an agreement by the Owner not to disrupt efforts by the bona fide labor organizer to communicate with, and attempt to organize and represent the Owner’s employees. r. License or State License: shall mean a license issued by the State of California or one of its departments or divisions under the MAUCRSA or any subsequent State of California legislation relating to Commercial Cannabis Activity. s. Licensee: shall mean an individual or entity that has obtained a State License. Page 7 of 26 t. Manufacture or Manufacturer: shall mean a Licensee that engages in the production, preparation, propagation, or compounding of Cannabis or Cannabis products either directly or indirectly or by extraction methods, or independently by means of chemical synthesis, or by a combination of extraction and chemical synthesis at a fixed location that packages or repackages Cannabis or Cannabis products or labels or relabels their containers. u. Owner: shall have the same meaning as set forth in Business and Professions Code section 26001(a1), as it may be amended from time to time, and shall generally mean an individual or entity with at least a twenty percent (20%) ownership interest in a business engaged in Commercial Cannabis Activity. v. Permittee: shall mean an individual or entity that has obtained a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit. w. Person: shall have the meaning set forth in Section 1.01.240 of this Code. x. Retail, Retailer, or Retail Facility: shall mean a licensed premises where Cannabis, Cannabis products, or devices for the use of Cannabis or Cannabis products are offered, either individually or in any combination for retail sale, including an establishment that Delivers Cannabis or Cannabis products as part of a retail sale. y. State: shall mean the State of California or any departments or divisions thereof. z. State Law: shall have the meaning set forth in Section 4.110.030 of this Chapter. aa. Testing Laboratory: means a laboratory, facility, or entity in the State that offers or performs tests of Cannabis or Cannabis products and that is both of the following: (1) accredited by an accrediting body that is independent from all other persons involved in Commercial Cannabis Activity in the State; and (2) licensed by the Bureau of Cannabis Control. 4.110.050. Procedures. .010. Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit Required. No person shall engage in Commercial Cannabis Activity in Anaheim unless: (1) the person has obtained a valid Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit issued by the City of Anaheim; (2) the person has obtained a valid Cannabis License issued by the State of California; and (3) the Facility is operated in compliance with all applicable State and local laws and regulations pertaining to its Commercial Cannabis Activity, including but not limited to the provisions of this Chapter and the City’s Cannabis Regulations. Any person who is an employee or who otherwise works within a Commercial Cannabis Facility must be legally authorized to do so under applicable State Law. Page 8 of 26 .020. Commercial Cannabis Operating Agreement Required. No approval required by this ordinance shall be given for any development of property for Commercial Cannabis Activity unless the City Council, prior to or concurrently with approves a development agreement, pursuant to Section 18.26b of this ordinance, setting forth the terms and conditions under which the Commercial Cannabis Activity will operate in addition to the requirements of this ordinance, all other local ordinances and regulations, state law and such other terms and conditions that will protect and promote the public health, safety and welfare. Prior to commencing operations, an Applicant for a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit shall be required to enter into a Commercial Cannabis Operating Agreement with the City setting forth the terms and conditions under which the Commercial Cannabis Facility will operate that are in addition to the requirements of this Chapter, including, but not limited to, terms for local hiring and sourcing, community benefits, public safety (including both police and fire services), public outreach and education, community services, payment of fees and other charges as mutually agreed, and such other terms and conditions as will protect and promote the public health, safety and welfare. .030. Application Process and Requirements a. The City Manager is authorized toshall prepare and promulgate Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit application form(s), and to modify those forms as the need arisesrequired. Any individual or entity that seeks to operate a Commercial Cannabis Facility shall submit an application on a form prepared by the City Manager together with a non-refundable processing fee. b. Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit application requirements, processes and procedures shall be set forth in the City’s Cannabis Regulations. Failure to disclose information fully and accurately in an application form, if not properly remedied, may lead to denial or revocation of, or failure to renew, a Permit. c. Within ten thirty (1030) calendar days of any change in the information provided in a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit application form or any change in status of compliance with the provisions of this Chapter, an Applicant shall file an updated application form for review as required, along with an any application amendmentrequired fees. d. Applications shall be reviewed by the City Manager in accordance with the standards and criteria set forth in the City’s Cannabis Regulations. Such review shall incorporate a merit-based scoring or ranking system that takes into accountapplications shall include prior successful experience operating a commercial cannabis business, the similarity and location of any prior cannabis business, ownership or control of the site upon which the business is to operate, the Applicant’s operational and security plan for the Commercial Cannabis Facility, and the Applicant’s proposed community, charitable and local hire programs. At the completion of the application process, Applicants shall be ranked from the most Page 9 of 26 points to the least points in each Commercial Cannabis Activity category. The City Manager shall award Commercial Cannabis Facility Permits to all the top qualified Applicant(s) for in each Commercial Cannabis Activity category, up to the maximum number of Permits allowed in this Chapter. .040. City Manager Authority to Approve or Deny Permit The City Manager shall either deny, approve, or conditionally approve an application for a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit. The City Manager’s decision shall be final. The City Manager shall provide the Applicant with written notice of his/her decision. a. If an application is denied, a new application may not be filed for one (1) year from the date of the denial. b. If a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit is approved or conditionally approved, it shall only be valid for a term of twelve twenty-four (1224) months from the date it is issued, and shall expire at the end of the twelve twenty-four (1224) month period unless it is renewed as provided in this Chapter. A Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit does not confer any property interest, entitlement or vested right and shall not run with the land. Permits issued pursuant to this Chapter are not transferable to any other individual, entity, premises or location, except as set forth in this Chapter. c. The City Manager retains full authority to deny anshall approve an application and/or reduce points awarded for a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit in the event thatunless he/she determines any of the following: 1. The Applicant has not provided the information required on the application form. 2. The Applicant has falsified or made misrepresentations in the application. 3. The Applicant has previously failed to comply with any of the requirements set forth in this Chapter. 4. The Applicant has failed to comply with State Law and/or remit taxes as required by the Revenue and Taxation Code. 5. The Applicant has denied the City or the State access to the licensed premises after proper notice. The Applicant has been previously operated convicted an of a crime which disqualifies the Applicant from operating a illegal cannabis dispensary or business. 6. 7. Page 10 of 26 d. An application for a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit may be approved on a provisional basis if: 1. The Applicant possesses a current valid state license for the same business type. 2. The Applicant possesses a current valid local business license for the same business, and is otherwise in compliance with applicable local law. 3. The Applicant seeks authorization for the same business type under this Chapter. 4. The Applicant has entered into a Development Agreement with the City pursuant to Section .020. 5. e. Provisional approval pursuant to paragraph (d) shall be effective immediately and authorize all business activities under this Chapter until such time as the regular application process is completed and the Permit is duly approved or denied. 7. The approval could result in harm to the public health, safety, or welfare. .050. Amendment to Cannabis Facility Permit No Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit shall be amended without the prior written approval of the City. .060. Renewal Process and Requirements a. An application for renewal of a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit shall be filed at least sixty (60) calendar days prior to the expiration date of the current Permit on an application renewal form prepared by the City Manager. The City’s Cannabis Regulations shall set forth the renewal application process, including the applicable deadlines and renewal requirements. The renewal application shall generally request or require confirmation of information required for new applications, and may be subject to the same site inspection and City staff approvals required for new applications. b. The Applicant shall pay a fee in an amount to be set by the City Council to offset the cost of processing a renewal application, together with any costs incurred by the City to administer the program created under this Chapter. The City Council shall establish the renewal fee by resolution. Page 11 of 26 c. An application for renewal of a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit may be denied for any of the following reasons: 1. The application was filed less than sixty (60) days before expiration of the Permitincomplete. 2. The Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit or State License has been suspended or revoked at the time of the application. 3. The Commercial Cannabis Facility has not been in regular and continuous operation in the ninety (90) days prior to the renewal application without any indication of intent to resume operation. 4. The Commercial Cannabis Facility has failed to conform to the requirements of this Chapter, the City’s Cannabis Regulations, its Commercial Cannabis Operating Agreement, or State Law. 5. The Applicant fails or is unable to renew its State License. 6. For any of the reasons set forth in Chapter 4.110.050.040(c). d. The City Manager is authorized to make all decisions concerningresponsible for the renewal of a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit. In determining whether to renew a Permit, the City Manager is authorized to impose additional conditions on the Permit, if deemed necessary to ensure compliance with state or local laws and regulations or to preserve the public health, safety or welfare. e. The City Manager’s decision to approve, conditionally approve, or deny an application to renew a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit may be appealed as provided in this Chapter. f. If a renewal application for a Commercial Cannabis Facility is denied, a person may file an application for a new Permit pursuant to this Chapter no sooner than one (1) year from the date of the denial. .070. Revocation, Modification and Suspension Requirements. a. Commercial Cannabis Facility Permits may be suspended, revoked or modified by the City Manager based upon any of the following: 1. A violation of any State or local law, rule, regulation requirement and/or standard, including but not limited to the provisions of this Chapter, the City’s Cannabis Regulations, the Commercial Cannabis Operating Agreement, or the City’s Municipal Code. Page 12 of 26 2. A determination that the Applicant falsified or misrepresented information on its Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit application or renewal application. 3. An unauthorized transfer of ownership or change of location of a Commercial Cannabis Facility. b. Suspension of a State License shall immediately suspend the ability of a Commercial Cannabis Facility to operate within the City. The City may, in its sole and absolute discretion, reinstate the Commercial Cannabis Facilities Permit if the State reinstates or reissues the State License. Should the State revoke or terminate the License of a Commercial Cannabis Facility, such revocation or termination shall automatically revoke or terminate the Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit and the ability of a Commercial Cannabis Facility to operate within the City of Anaheim. Upon notification by the State, a Permittee shall notify the City immediately in writing of State proceedings to revoke or suspend a State License. If a Permittee fails to do so, the City Manager may impose a daily fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) for each day notification is delayed. c. The City Manager’s determination to suspend, modify, or revoke a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit shall be effective immediately upon written notice from the City., and shall not be stayed in the event an appeal is filed. d. The City Manager’s determination to suspend, modify or revoke a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit may be appealed as provided in this Chapter. .080. Transfer of Commercial Cannabis Facility or Permit a. No Owner or Permittee shall transfer his/her/it’s ownership or control of a Commercial Cannabis Facility or any rights acquired under a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit, to another person without written notification to the City. Such notification shall be provided a minimum of ninety (90) days before the proposed transfer and shall be accompanied by the information required in the City’s Cannabis Regulations, which shall be similar to the information required of Applicants for new Permits. The City Manager shall have ninety (90) days from receipt of the required information to make a determination on the transfer request, which time shall not begin to run until a completed transfer application packet is submitted to the City. The City Manager may approve, deny, or conditionally approve the transfer request. b. A Commercial Cannabis Facility may change the form of business entity that owns the Commercial Cannabis Facility or holds its Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit, provided that the membership owners of the new business entity is substantially similar to original Permit holder business entity (at least ninety-five percent (95%) of the membership is identical). The Permittee is required to notify the City Manager in writing of the proposed change thirty (30) days prior to the Page 13 of 26 effective date of the proposed change. A change in the form of the business entity that occurs without prior notification to the City shall result in the immediate suspension of the Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit, shall be null and void, and may constitute grounds for Permit revocation. c. Any transfer a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit, or change in the ownership, business structure, or operational control of a Commercial Cannabis Facility, either directly or indirectly, in violation of this section shall be null and void and is grounds for suspension or revocation of the Permit. d. No transfer shall occur pursuant to this Section for two years from the date a Permit was first issued to an Owner or operator of a Commercial Cannabis Facility. f.d. Any transfer that occurs pursuant to this Section shall be subject to a transfer fee that is established by the City Council by resolution. .090. Relocation of Commercial Cannabis Facility a. Neither a Commercial Cannabis Facility nor its Permit shall be transferred or relocated from one premises to another without the City Manager’s prior written consent, which must be requested a minimum of ninety (90) days before the proposed relocation. The request will be processed in accordance with the City’s Cannabis Regulations and the City Manager may require the Permittee to submit additional application materials for the new location. A Permittee shall not operate from a new location unless and until it applies for and receives written approval from the City Manager, who has discretion to approveshall approve, or conditionally approve, or deny the request.such request unless the reason for the denial is given in writing. b. A transfer or relocation of a Commercial Cannabis Facility or its Permit from one premises to another in violation of this section shall be null and void and is grounds for suspension or revocation of the Permit. c. No transfer shall occur pursuant to this Section for two years from the date a Permit was first issued to an Owner or operator of a Commercial Cannabis Facility. d. Any transfer or relocation location that occurs pursuant to this Section shall be subject to a transfer fee that is established by the City Council by resolution. .100. Appeal Hearing and Procedure a. Unless specifically provided elsewhere to the contrary, whenever an appeal is provided for in this Chapter from a decision of the City Manager or his/her designee(s), the appeal shall be conducted as prescribed in this Chapter. b. Within ten (10) calendar days after the date of a decision of the City Manager or his/her designee(s) to revoke suspend or not to renew a Commercial Cannabis Page 14 of 26 Facility Permit, a Permittee may appeal such action by filing a written appeal with the City Clerk setting forth the reasons for contesting the decision. c. At the time of filing, the appellant shall pay the designated appeal fee established by resolution of the City Council. d. Upon receipt of the written appeal, the City Clerk shall set the matter for a hearing before the City’s Hearing Officer. The Hearing Officer shall hear the matter de novo, and shall conduct the hearing pursuant to the procedures set forth by the City. e. The appeal shall be held within a reasonable time after the date the appeal is filed. The City shall notify the appellant of the time and location of the hearing at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the hearing. f. At the hearing, the appellant may present any information it deems relevant to the decision appealed. The formal rules of evidence and procedure applicable in a court of law shall not apply to the hearing. g. At the conclusion of the hearing the Hearing Officer may affirm, reverse or modify the decision appealed. The decision of the Hearing Officer shall be final. . 4.110.060. Number and Location of Cannabis Facility Permits .010. Maximum Number of Commercial Cannabis Facility Permits. The City Manager shall be authorized to issue the following number of Commercial Cannabis Facility Permits for each type of Commercial Cannabis Activity: a. Retail: Twenty No more than sixty (2060) total Commercial Cannabis Facility Permits for retail/delivery may be issued. No more than three (3) Retail Permits shall be issued to the same Owner(s). Testing Laboratories: There shall be no limit on the number of Commercial Cannabis Facility Permits issued for Cannabis Testing Laboratories, Cultivation, Distribution or Manufacturing. c. Indoor Cultivation: Twenty (20) total Commercial Cannabis Facility Permits may be issued for Indoor Cultivation. No more than three (3) Indoor Cultivation Permits shall be issued to the same Owner(s). A Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit for Indoor Cannabis Cultivation shall not authorize any individual to engage in any Outdoor Cannabis Cultivation. e. Manufacturing: Twenty (20) total Commercial Cannabis Facility Permits may be issued for Cannabis Manufacturing. No more than three (3) Manufacturing Permits shall be issued to the same Owner(s). Page 15 of 26 Distribution: Twenty (20) total Commercial Cannabis Facility Permits may be issued for Cannabis Distribution. No more than three (3) Distribution Permits shall be issued to the same Owner(s). b. h. Testing Laboratories: There shall be no limit on the number of Commercial Cannabis Facility Permits issued for Cannabis Testing Laboratories. No more than three (3) Testing Laboratory Permits shall be issued to the same Owner(s). .020. Location and Separation Requirements .0101 A Commercial Cannabis Facility that meets the Separation Requirements identified in Table 1 (Permitted Zones and Separation Requirements), and has obtained a valid Cannabis Facility Permit and Operating Agreement per this Chapter, may locate on any parcel designated by the General Plan for Industrial land use and located within the Industrial (I) Zone or Development Areas 1 and 2 of the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan No. 2015-01 (SP2015-01) Zone. .0102 No Commercial Cannabis Facility Retailer shall be located within six hundred (600) feet of any school (whether public, private, or charter, including pre- school, transitional kindergarten, and K-12), or any licensed commercial day care center, youth center, park or public library. .0103 Outdoor Cultivation is expressly prohibited in all zoning districts in the City. .0104 Cannabis Retailers are prohibited in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Area and the Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Area. Page 16 of 26 .0105 Cannabis Deliveries within the City of Anaheim are prohibited, unless the Delivery originated from a Retailer located in Anaheim that has obtained a valid Commercial Cannabis Delivery Permit, or if the Retailer is located outside the City of Anaheim, and has obtained a business license from the City of Anaheim. .0106 Table 1 (Permitted Zones and Separation Requirements) identifies the permitted zones and separation requirements for Commercial Cannabis Facilities based on permit-type and State license-types. Commercial Cannabis Facility State License Type Zoning District Buffer Zone Permit Type Required Cultivation – Indoor Type 1A (Indoor<5000 SF), Type 2A (Indoor 5001- 10,000 SF), Type 3A Indoor 10,001- 22,000), Type 4 (Nursery – Indoor Only), Type 5A (Indoor 22,000+ SF) Industrial 600 feet away from schools, licensed commercial day care centers, youth centers, parks, and libraries Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit; State License; Anaheim Business License Cultivation – Outdoor Type 1 (Outdoor <5000 SF), Type 1B (Mixed Light <5000 SF), Type 2 (Outdoor 5001- 10,000 SF); Type 2B (Mixed Light 5001- 10,000 SF); Type 3 (Outdoor 10,001-22,000 SF); Type 3B (Artificial Light 10,001-22,000 SF); Type 4 (Nursery – Outdoor), Type Prohibited N/A N/A Page 17 of 26 5 (Outdoor 22,000+ SF); Type 5B (Mixed Light (22,000+ SF) Delivery – Non Anaheim Retailer Type 9 (non- storefront);Type 10 (storefront); Type 10A (less than 3 retailers) N/A N/A Anaheim Business License Delivery – Anaheim Retailer Type 9 (non- storefront);Type 10 (storefront); Type 10A (less than 3 retailers) Retailer must be located in Industrial Zone N/A Retailer must obtain Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit; State License; Anaheim Business License Distribution Type 11 (distribution); Type 12 (transportation) Industrial 600 feet away from schools, licensed day care centers, youth centers, parks, and libraries Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit; State License; Anaheim Business License Manufacturing Type 6 (non- volatile); Type 7 (volatile) Industrial 600 feet away from schools, licensed day care centers, youth centers, parks, and libraries Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit; State License; Anaheim Business License Retailer Type 9 (non- storefront);Type 10 (storefront); Type 10A (less than 3 retailers) Industrial 600 feet away from schools, licensed day care centers, Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit; State License; Anaheim Page 18 of 26 youth centers, parks, and libraries Business License Testing Laboratory Type 8 Industrial 600 feet away from schools, licensed day care centers, youth centers, parks, and libraries Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit; State License; Anaheim Business License 4.110.070. Operational Standards .010 Pre-Operational Requirements Prior to commencing operations, and as a precondition for commencing such operations, a Commercial Cannabis Facility and its Owners and operators shall: a. Obtain any and all required land use entitlements and approvals and comply with any California Environmental Quality Act requirements related thereto. b. Be subject to a mandatory building inspection and obtain all required permits and approvals that would otherwise be required for any business of the same size and intensity operating in the Industrial zone. This includes but is not limited to obtaining any required building permit(s), certificates of occupancy, Fire Department approvals, Health Department approvals and other zoning and land use permit(s) and approvals. c. Enter into a Commercial Cannabis OperatingDevelopment Agreement with the City setting forth the terms and conditions under which the Commercial Cannabis Facility will operate that are in addition to the requirements of this Chapter, including, but not limited to, providing for public safety, public outreach and education, community services and benefits, payment of fees and other charges as mutually agreed, and such other terms and conditions as will protect and promote the public health, safety and welfare. d. Execute an agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney, agreeing to indemnify, defend (at applicant’s sole cost and expense), and hold the City of Anaheim, and its officers, officials, employees, representatives, and agents, harmless, from any and all claims, losses, damages, injuries, liabilities or losses which arise out of, or which are in any way related to, the City’s issuance or failure to issue a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit, the City’s decision to Page 19 of 26 approve or its refusal to approve the operation of the Commercial Cannabis Facility, the process used by the City in making its decision, or the alleged violation of any federal, state or local laws by the Commercial Cannabis Facility or any of its officers, employees or agents. e. Obtain and consistently maintain insurance at coverage limits and with conditions thereon determined necessary and appropriate by the City Attorney. f. Obtain a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit and pay all fees and charges required by the City or any other local or State agency for the operation of a Commercial Cannabis Facility. g. Comply with all State and local laws and regulations, including but not limited to the requirements of this Chapter, the City’s Cannabis Regulations, the requirements of the Commercial Cannabis Permit, and State law. h. Obtain a valid State License allowing for the operation of a Commercial Cannabis Facility. i. Apply for and obtain a City of Anaheim business license. .020 Operational Standards Applicable to All Cannabis Facilities While engaged in Commercial Cannabis Activities, all Commercial Cannabis Facilities shall comply with the following operational requirements: a. Conform with the City’s general plan, any applicable specific plans, master plans, and design requirements. b. Comply with all applicable zoning and related development standards. c. Be constructed in a manner that minimizes odors to surrounding uses, and promotes quality design and construction, and consistency with the surrounding properties. d. Be provided with adequate electricity, sewerage, disposal, water, fire protection and storm drainage facilities for the intended purpose. e. Maintain sufficient security measures to deter and prevent the unauthorized entrance into areas containing Cannabis or Cannabis products, and to deter and prevent the theft of Cannabis or Cannabis products at the Commercial Cannabis Facility, consistent with State Law. f. Cooperate with the City if it makes a request, upon reasonable notice to the Commercial Cannabis Facility, to inspect or audit the effectiveness of any security plan or of any other requirement of this Section. Page 20 of 26 g. Prohibit the consumption or sampling of Cannabis by any employee, visitor, customer, operator or vendor on the premises of the Commercial Cannabis Facility. h. Refrain from displaying Cannabis products or graphics depicting Cannabis or Cannabis products so as to be visible from the exterior of any property issued a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit, or on any of the vehicles owned or used as part of the Commercial Cannabis Facility. i. Refrain from displaying any signage, packaging, or other display that is “attractive” to minors as defined by State Law, as well as from any outdoor storage or display of Cannabis or Cannabis products. j. Provide the City with the name, telephone number of an on-site employee or Owner to whom emergency notice can be provided at any hour of the day. k. Prohibit any person under the age of twenty-one (21) years old from entering upon the Commercial Cannabis Facility premises or being employed by the Commercial Cannabis Facility. l. Prohibit the sale, dispensing, or consumption of alcoholic beverages or tobacco products on or about the premises of the Commercial Cannabis Facility. m. Ensure that the Commercial Cannabis Facility is monitored at all times by web- based closed circuit television for security purposes and maintain and provide the City with access to those recordings as provided in the City’s Cannabis Regulations. n. If the Commercial Cannabis Facility employs two (2) or more employees (computed as “full time” non-supervisorial employee equivalent positions where an employee full time equivalent works 1700 hours per year), enter into a Labor Peace Agreement and provide City with evidence of such Labor Peace Agreement within ninety (90) days following the date when the number of employees exceed two (2) full time positions. o. Comply with the City’s Commercial Cannabis Regulations and any Commercial Cannabis Facility operational requirements or regulations as are determined by the City Manager to be necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare. .030. Additional Operational Standards Applicable to Cannabis Retailers. a. Cannabis Retailers shall only operate between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Page 21 of 26 b. Cannabis Retailers shall not operate as or with a drive-in or drive-thru at which Cannabis goods are sold to persons within or about a motor vehicle. c. All structures included as part of the permitted Commercial Cannabis Facility shall be permanently affixed to land by a method that would normally cause the structure to ordinarily remain affixed for an indefinite period of time. d. Commercial Cannabis Retailers shall provide at least one (1) private security guard during all hours of operation who is licensed and possesses a valid Department of Consumer Affairs “security guard card.” g. No non-Cannabis food or concessions shall be sold or distributed at the Premises. h. Shipments of Cannabis goods may only be accepted during regular business hours. i. A permitted Commercial Cannabis Retail Facility shall have twelve (12) months after Permit issuance by the City of Anaheim to commence operations. .040. Additional Operational Standards Applicable to Cannabis Retail Deliveries. a. Commercial Cannabis Retail Deliveries may be made only from a Commercial Cannabis Retail Facility permitted by the City in compliance with this Chapter and State Law. Deliveries from Cannabis Retailers located outside the City of Anaheim are prohibited, unless the Retailer obtains an Anaheim Business License. b. Cannabis goods shall only be delivered to a residential dwelling, or to a commercial building or structure being lawfully used for lodging or temporary dwelling purposesvalid address, building or structure (e.g., hotels or motels) if such Delivery is expressly permitted by the owner of thein such building or structure. Deliveries shall not be made to, or thorough the use of, any kiosk or temporary building or structure, nor for purposes of re-sale of the Cannabis product that is delivered. c. All employees who deliver Cannabis shall have valid identification and a copy of the Commercial Cannabis Retail Facility Permit and State License at all times while making Deliveries. d. During Delivery, the Delivery employee shall maintain a physical or electronic copy of the Delivery request and shall make it available upon request by the licensing authority and law enforcement officers. The Delivery request documentation shall comply with State Law. Page 22 of 26 e. A Commercial Cannabis Retail Facility shall maintain a list of all Deliveries, including the address delivered to, the amount and type of product delivered, and any other information required by State Law. .050. Additional Operational Standards Applicable to Cannabis Manufacturers. a. Any manufacturing that will be conducted by a commercial Cannabis Manufacturer shall be included on the Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit application. No additional manufacturing activity shall be conducted without notifying the City Manager, after which a determination will be made if the new activity may commence with or without modification to the Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit or if a new Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit is required. b. At all times, the commercial Cannabis manufacturing facility shall comply with all State regulations for Cannabis manufacturing. Signage shall be posted regarding the type(s) of chemicals being used at the manufacturing facility as required by law. c. Commercial Cannabis manufacturing facilities shall not contain an exhibition or product sales area or allow for retail distribution sale of products at that locationpremises. d. Extraction equipment and extraction process utilizing hydrocarbon solvents shall be located in a room or area dedicated. to extraction. e. All commercial Cannabis manufacturing facilities shall comply with any and all applicable safety guidelines adopted by the Orange County Fire Authority, the State of California, and/or the City of Anaheim for Cannabis plant processing and extraction. .060. Additional Operational Standards Applicable to Cannabis Distributors. a. A Distributor shall ensure that Cannabis goods are stored in compliance with applicable State Laws and regulations in conformity with all applicable Track and Trace systems required by the State. b. Employee breakrooms, eating areas, changing facilities, locker rooms and bathrooms shall be completely separated from areas where Cannabis is stored. .070. Additional Operational Standards Applicable to Cannabis Cultivators. a. There shall be no exterior evidence of Cannabis Cultivation from a public right-of- way. Page 23 of 26 b. The Building Official may impose additional specific requirements to meet the California Building Code and Fire Code, including but not limited to installation of fire suppression sprinklers. c. Compliance with Section 13149 of Water Code as enforced by the State Water Resources Control Board is required. d. All commercial Cannabis Cultivation facilities shall comply with any and all applicable safety guidelines adopted by the Orange County Fire Authority, the State of California, and/or the City of Anaheim for cannabis carbon dioxide enrichment systems. e. Commercial Cannabis Cultivation facilities shall not contain an exhibition or product sales area or engage inallow for retail distribution of products at that locationpremises. .080. Additional Operational Standards Applicable to Cannabis Testing Laboratories. A licensed Cannabis Testing Laboratory and/or its Owners or employees may not hold an interest in any other Cannabis business except another Testing Laboratory business. .090. Co-location. Co-location of Permittees engaged in more than one (1) type of Commercial Cannabis Activity on one (1) site or parcel shall occur only if authorized by State Law and , the Anaheim Municipal Code, and the City’s Commercial Cannabis Regulations. All co- located Permittees and/or Cannabis Facilities must have separately metered utilities. 4.110.080. Regulations and Inspection. .010 Commercial Cannabis Regulations The City Manager is authorized to establish City Cannabis Regulations governing the Commercial Cannabis Permit application and renewal criteria and processes, the regulation and oversight of Commercial Cannabis Facilities, the operational requirements imposed on such Facilities directly related to these requirements, and any other subject determined to be necessary to carry out the purposes of this Chapter. Compliance with the City’s Commercial Cannabis Regulations is required to engage in Commercial Cannabis Activity, and failure to do so is grounds for revocation, suspension or non- renewal of a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit, as well as the other penalties set forth in this Chapter. .020 Inspection Page 24 of 26 The City Manager is charged with enforcing the provisions of this Chapter and may enter the location of a Commercial Cannabis Facility at any time, without notice, and inspect the location of any Commercial Cannabis Facility as well as any records required to be maintained pursuant to this Chapter or under applicable provisions of State Law. 4.110.090. Fees Deemed Debt to City of Anaheim. The amount of any fee, cost or charge imposed pursuant to this Chapter shall be deemed a debt to the City of Anaheim that is recoverable via an authorized administrative process as set forth in the Anaheim Municipal Code, or in any court of competent jurisdiction. 4.110.100. Permit Holder, Owners, Operators Responsible for Violations. The person to whom a Permit is issued pursuant to this Chapter, as well as each and every Owner and operator of a Commercial Cannabis Facility, shall be responsible for all violations of this Chapter, State Law, the Anaheim Municipal Code and/or of the City’s Cannabis Regulations by the Facility, whether committed by the Permittee or any employee or agent of the Permittee. 4.110.110. Violations Declared a Public Nuisance. Each and every violation of the provisions of this Chapter is hereby deemed unlawful and a public nuisance. 4.110.120. Each Violation a Separate Offense. Each and every violation of this Chapter shall constitute a separate violation and shall be subject to all remedies and enforcement measures authorized by the Anaheim Municipal Code. Additionally, as a nuisance per se, any violation of this Chapter shall be subject to injunctive relief, with any Permit issued pursuant to this Chapter being deemed null and void, and the City entitled to disgorgement or payment of any monies unlawfully obtained, costs of abatement, costs of investigation, attorney fees, and any other relief or remedy available at law or in equity. The City may also pursue any and all remedies and actions available and applicable under state and local laws for any violations committed by the Commercial Cannabis Facility Owner, operator or persons related to, or associated with, the Commercial Cannabis Facility. Additionally, when there is determined to be an imminent threat to public health, safety or welfare, the City Manager or the Chief of Police or his/her designee(s), may take immediate action to temporarily suspend a Commercial Cannabis Facility Permit issued by the City, and close down the Commercial Cannabis Facility pending a hearing before the City Hearing Officer. 4.110.130. Criminal Penalties. Each and everysubstantive violation of the provisions of this Chapter may, in the discretion of the City Attorney, be prosecuted as a misdemeanor and upon conviction be Page 25 of 26 subject to a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) or imprisonment in the county jail for a period of not more than twelve (12) months, or by both such fine and imprisonment. Each day a violation is committed or permitted to continue shall constitute a separate offense. 4.110.140. Remedies Cumulative and Not Exclusive. The remedies provided herein are not to be construed as exclusive remedies. The City is authorized to pursue any proceedings or remedies provided by law. SECTION 3: This Ordinance shall only go into effect upon the passage of a City Council sponsored ballot measure at the November 2020 election imposing a tax on Commercial Cannabis Activities. In the event that a City Council sponsored ballot measure imposing a tax on Commercial Cannabis Activities is not passed by the voters in the November 2020 election, Chapters 4.20, 4.21 and 4.100 of the Anaheim Code shall not be repealed, and this Ordinance shall not take effect and shall be null and void. SECTION 4: In adopting this Ordinance, the City Council finds that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Title 14 California Code of Regulations Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15378, in that it can be seen with certainty that the Municipal Code amendments propose no activity that may have a significant effect on the environment and will not cause a direct physical change in the environment or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. SECTION 5: If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, sentences, clauses, phrases or portions thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 6: The Mayor shall sign and the Clerk shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. The Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official newspaper within fifteen (15) days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days from its adoption. INTRODUCED at a regular meeting of the Anaheim City Council held on the ____ day of _______, 2020, and thereafter, PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Anaheim City Council held on the ____ day of ________, 2020. Page 26 of 26 Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk I, _________, Clerk of the Anaheim City Council, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 20- ___, was duly adopted and passed by the Anaheim City Council at a regular meeting thereof held on ______ day of _____, 2020, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBER: NOES: COUNCILMEMBER: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER: _________________________________ City Clerk 2 Public Comment From:Jim Fitzpatrick Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:27 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Item #28: Comments from Cannabis Chamber of Commerce Attachments:Letter to Anaheim City Council- From Cananbis Chamber 06-08-20.pdf Please see attached comments for Anaheim City Council Meeting for Item # 28 Jim Fitzpatrick Solutioneer The Cannabis Chamber of Commerce San Diego, CA 92108 June 8, 2020 Anaheim City Council 200 S Anaheim Boulevard 7th Floor Anaheim, CA 92805 Dear City Councilmembers, On behalf of the legal cannabis community, we are writing in support of the Anaheim City Council’s proposed Cannabis Ordinance, which would legally regulate Commercial cannabis businesses within the City of Anaheim. We encourage you to pass this Ordinance and place the Cannabis Tax Measure on the November Ballot, allowing the people of Anaheim to decide on the proposed Cannabis Ordinance. California is the world's largest and most dynamic cannabis market. According to the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, the state’s cannabis tax program has generated $1.17 billion in total program revenue since January 2018. This impressive collection of taxes includes $569.8 million in cannabis excise tax, $140.2 million in cultivation tax, and $456.9 million in sales tax.1 Regulating cannabis will produce hundreds of jobs and additional tax revenue for the City of Anaheim. Legal and regulated cannabis in the Anaheim community is necessary in order to combat the prevalent illegal and unregulated market. Children under the age of 18 are easily able to purchase cannabis on the illicit market. Drug dealers don’t care about laws to protect children, or about regulations that ensure practices to protect the health of consumers. California law requires licensed cannabis businesses to check and confirm the identity and age of the customer. Only individuals 21 years of age or older are allowed to enter and purchase cannabis from a licensed cannabis dispensary. Studies in Colorado and Washington found that this was the most effective compliance technique in prohibiting sales to underage customers.2 State laws and regulations also require licensed cannabis businesses to adhere to strict rules relating to safety and security. Unlike illegal businesses, the legal cannabis market must have all cannabis products tested prior to sale. This information is entered into the state’s track-and-trace system and is then clearly labeled on child- resistant packaging for the consumer to see the exact ingredients of the product they are about to ingest. 1 CDTFA News Release, “California Department of Tax and Fee Administration Reports Cannabis Tax Revenues for 1st Quarter of 2020”, dated May 26, 2020, available at: 2 “Compliance With Personal ID Regulations by Recreational Marijuana Stores in Two U.S. States”, Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, available at: Licensed cannabis businesses must also adhere to state and local employment laws. Employees of these businesses have rights that are not afforded to them when working in the illicit market. Employees can be assured that they are paid accurate wages, have access to healthcare benefits, and are not subject to harassment from their employers. If these employees are not afforded such rights, then they have legal avenues available to them to hold their employers accountable. In an illicit market, these rights are not necessarily available to them. In conclusion, we urgently recommend that the City Council adopt this draft ordinance and take this opportunity to regulate commercial cannabis businesses in the City of Anaheim. Without a legal regulated market, the City of Anaheim continues to abet the illicit market and promotes the sale of potentially contaminated cannabis to customers, and underage individuals. Please vote to approve this ordinance. Sincerely, Chris Boudreau Chair, Cannabis Chamber of Commerce 3 Public Comment From:Ilya Ross Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:36 AM To:Public Comment; Council Subject:I SUPPORT CANNABIS IN ANAHEIM Attachments:Anaheim Public Comment (6.9.20).docx Hello, I am resending my comments to reflect an updated subject heading in this email to ensure proper receipt. Thank you, -- Ilya Ross Principal Law Offices of Ilya E. Ross *The Law Offices of Ilya E. Ross provide services legal services and counseling which are strictly limited to state legal activities pertaining to marijuana. All activities related to marijuana are illegal under the federal laws of the United States of America and nothing contained herein nor any of our services provided are intended to assist in any way with violation of any applicable law.* **Any information, including enclosures, transmitted via this correspondence are private, confidential and protected by attorney-client privilege. If you believe that you are not the intended recipient, please so indicate and immediately delete and dispose of this email. Do not print, copy, retransmit, disseminate or otherwise use this information.** Law Offices of Ilya E. Ross June 9, 2020 To Our Esteemed Councilmen, The Law Offices of Ilya E. Ross understand that the Anaheim Council will meet on Tuesday, June 9, 2020, to consider allowing cannabis activities (“Cannabis Licensing”) within the city of Anaheim (the “City”). We wish to provide the following comments pertaining specifically to the City’s zoning qualifications for cannabis businesses. In the interest of generating significant revenues for the City and supporting the growth of the cannabis industry locally, we strongly encourage and advocate that all properties within the industrial zones of the City be qualified for cannabis business licenses. Jurisdictions all throughout the State of California have been hit hard by the COVID-19 restrictions and the ensuing economic impact on local businesses and State revenues. In response to this unprecedented economic challenge, we commend the City for its adaptive solutions and are encouraged by the City’s consideration of Cannabis Licensing. Our experience representing cannabis operators in the State of California and nationally has provided us with a first-hand view of how cannabis can provide communities with economic stimulus and job growth. From our experience, a local regulatory regime promoting streamlining, efficiency and clarity is best poised to maximize the revenue potential and buttress a vibrant and active industry. As such, we are advocating for a simple and streamlined application process that is open to all applicants that can obtain or rent qualified property within the City. Specifically, we request the removal of the cap of twenty (20) businesses for each license type within the City, in order to promote growth and allow each successful applicant to vertically integrate their business within the City. In the interest of public policy and the goals accompanying the passage of Proposition 64, we also request that the City grant preference to any cannabis business that was issued a city business permit prior to 2018. Our firm is proud to work with entrepreneurs and farmers who wish to participate in the growth of the local cannabis industry and the accompanying benefit to the local economy. We thank the City for considering Cannabis Licensing and humbly request that our recommendations be taken into consideration by the Anaheim Council. Sincerely, Ilya E. Ross Principal 4 Public Comment From:Ilya Ross Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:56 AM To:Public Comment; Council Subject:Comments for Council Meeting to Consider Cannabis (6/9/20) Attachments:Anaheim Public Comment (6.9.20).docx To Whom it May Concern, Attached please find some comments for your consideration for today's meeting of the Anaheim Council. Please let me know of any questions and thank you for your time Best, -- Ilya Ross Principal Law Offices of Ilya E. Ross *The Law Offices of Ilya E. Ross provide legal services and counseling which are strictly limited to state legal activities pertaining to marijuana. All activities related to marijuana are illegal under the federal laws of the United States of America and nothing contained herein nor any of our services provided are intended to assist in any way with violation of any applicable law.* **Any information, including enclosures, transmitted via this correspondence are private, confidential and protected by attorney-client privilege. If you believe that you are not the intended recipient, please so indicate and immediately delete and dispose of this email. Do not print, copy, retransmit, disseminate or otherwise use this information.** Law Offices of Ilya E. Ross June 9, 2020 To Our Esteemed Councilmen, The Law Offices of Ilya E. Ross understand that the Anaheim Council will meet on Tuesday, June 9, 2020, to consider allowing cannabis activities (“Cannabis Licensing”) within the city of Anaheim (the “City”). We wish to provide the following comments pertaining specifically to the City’s zoning qualifications for cannabis businesses. In the interest of generating significant revenues for the City and supporting the growth of the cannabis industry locally, we strongly encourage and advocate that all properties within the industrial zones of the City be qualified for cannabis business licenses. Jurisdictions all throughout the State of California have been hit hard by the COVID-19 restrictions and the ensuing economic impact on local businesses and State revenues. In response to this unprecedented economic challenge, we commend the City for its adaptive solutions and are encouraged by the City’s consideration of Cannabis Licensing. Our experience representing cannabis operators in the State of California and nationally has provided us with a first-hand view of how cannabis can provide communities with economic stimulus and job growth. From our experience, a local regulatory regime promoting streamlining, efficiency and clarity is best poised to maximize the revenue potential and buttress a vibrant and active industry. As such, we are advocating for a simple and streamlined application process that is open to all applicants that can obtain or rent qualified property within the City. Specifically, we request the removal of the cap of twenty (20) businesses for each license type within the City, in order to promote growth and allow each successful applicant to vertically integrate their business within the City. In the interest of public policy and the goals accompanying the passage of Proposition 64, we also request that the City grant preference to any cannabis business that was issued a city business permit prior to 2018. Our firm is proud to work with entrepreneurs and farmers who wish to participate in the growth of the local cannabis industry and the accompanying benefit to the local economy. We thank the City for considering Cannabis Licensing and humbly request that our recommendations be taken into consideration by the Anaheim Council. Sincerely, Ilya E. Ross Principal 1 Public Comment From:Tamara Jimenez <tjimenez@lighthousetreatment.com> Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:35 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Item 30   From: Tamara Jimenez  Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 8:01 PM  To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <toneil@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes  <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>;  Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Gregory Garcia  <GGarcia@anaheim.net>; Sandra Sagert <SSagert@anaheim.net>; Jorge Cisneros <JCisneros@anaheim.net>; Patrick  Russell <prussell2@anaheim.net>; Joe Reiss <JReiss@anaheim.net>  Cc: Annie Mezzacappa <AMezzacappa@anaheim.net>; Justin Glover <JGlover@anaheim.net>; Helen Myers  <HMyers@anaheim.net>; Cynthia Ward <CWard@anaheim.net>; Salvador Figueroa <sfigueroa@anaheim.net>;  Samantha Saenz <SSaenz@anaheim.net>; Amanda Edinger <AEdinger@anaheim.net>; Nam Bartash  <NBartash@anaheim.net>; Sarah Bartczak <SBartczak@anaheim.net>; maramirez@anaheim.net  <maramirez@anaheim.net>  Subject: We Support APD & AFD!!!  Good evening,  Anaheim Lighthouse would like to express our strong support and extreme gratitude to the Anaheim Police &  Fire Departments and to those Council Members who stand behind them. These past 2 weeks have been  heartbreaking for us to watch as the protesters in Anaheim have attacked our officers with bottles, fireworks,  rocks and other items and well as screaming profanities and vulgarities at them. What has added to the  heartbreak was to see leaders throughout the community joining in this behavior. We want you to know that  here at Anaheim Lighthouse we stand with the Police & Fire Departments 100%. Without them we could not  save lives the way we do. In fact these protests completely disrupted our programming and our ability to serve  our clients and it also affected our employees. Due to streets being closed, businesses being shutdown,  protesters walking through the residential neighborhood erratically & blocking people from driving down  streets, our families were unable to visit their loved ones or participate in family therapy programs. Our clients  who are already feeling scared about being in treatment were now terrified because of the protesters. This  added major undue stress to them. The curfew helped and we are thankful the city put that in place. Our  clients were unable to get to some of their off site appointments. Some stores had closed which prevented us  from picking up needed items. Some of our employees were unable to get to work. The lot we pay to use for  our employees to park at so that we don't park on the residential street we are on (per our CUP) was blocked  by protesters which caused major problems for our employees. Our transportation of clients was completely  disrupted and some intakes had to be cancelled which means a life could have been lost!!! We do believe in  the right to protest but NOT when it prevents businesses from running and people saving lives. We would  hope in the future the City would uphold stronger regulations. Anaheim PD is the ONLY PD in the State that  has the Drug Free Anaheim Program for which we are proud to be a part of. We are proud to partner with APD  & AFD. Again, we want to emphasize our strong support for these HEROES who put their lives on the line  every day no matter what for all of us. They deserve our utmost respect and a City that shows them the  same!!!     Have a beautiful day,  2 Tamara Jimenez  Community Relations Manager  Lighthouse    CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message is protected under the Federal regulations governing Confidentiality of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Patient Records, 42 C.F.R. Part 2, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 ("HIPAA"), 45 C.F.R. Pts. 160 & 164 and cannot be disclosed without written consent unless otherwise provided for in the regulations. The Federal rules prohibit any further disclosure of this information unless a written consent is obtained from the person to whom it pertains. The Federal rules restrict any use of this information to criminally investigate or prosecute any alcohol or drug abuse patient. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.  From:MARVN To:Public Comment Subject:NO ON RESOLUTIONS 5, 6, & 19 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:13:40 PM Good evening Mr. Brandman, My name is Ramon Lopez and I wanted to voice my dismay at the resolutions above having been approved. I, and many of my peers, are still very wary as to the potential misuse of this software that's been approved - AT A COST OF $750,000 DURING THESE UNPRECEDENTED TIMES. Many of your peers commented at the number of requests they'd received and at least made an effort to further clarify or question the motive behind these objectives. You remained silent. I think our residents will be paying much more attention to local politics, and I hope it remains this way until the actions passed match the voices "heard." Kind regards, Ramon Lopez From:Leiva Garcia de Lopez To:Jordan Brandman; Samantha Saenz; Public Comment Subject:NO ON RESOLUTIONS 5, 6, & 19 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:06:43 PM Good evening Mr. Brandman, My name is Leiva Garcia and I wanted to voice my dismay at the resolutions above having been approved. I, and many of my peers, are still very wary as to the potential misuse of this software that's been approved - AT A COST OF $750,000 DURING THESE UNPRECEDENTED TIMES. Many of your peers commented at the number of requests they'd received and at least made an effort to further clarify or question the motive behind these objectives. You remained silent. I think our residents will be paying much more attention to local politics, and I hope it remains this way until the actions passed match the voices "heard." Kind regards, Leiva Garcia From:Vern Nelson To:Loretta Day; Public Comment; Jose Moreno; Denise Barnes; Stephen Faessel; Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Trevor O"Neil; Lucille Kring; Jordan Brandman Subject:6/9/2020 letter on items 5, 19, 28-30, & 33-36 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:37:44 PM 6/9/2020   Councilmembers, staff, whoever will hopefully read this:   First, roughly addressing items 5 & 19 – these items spend over $800K on our police force, which has been costing our town more and more, more than we can afford, between the generous contract with the union that was ALREADY unaffordable even before the COVID crisis hit, as well as the growing judgments against our police for excessive force - $13.2million for the choking of Vincent Valenzuela, $2.9 million for the shooting of Eliud PenalozaNava, and probable upcoming awards in the cases of Chris Eisinger and Daniel Ramirez.   Our police force, still ranked as the 9th most dangerous in this nation for cities our size, is costing us way too much, and we should demand some actions in return.  I suggest, to begin with:   · The firing of SWAT officer Nick Bennallack, who has now killed his fourth victim, Daniel Ramirez, who’s being represented in a lawsuit against the city by Dale Galipo, the same lawyer who won awards from us for the killings of Manuel Diaz, Vincent Valenzuela, and Eliud Nava.  Bennallack was found guilty of excessive force by a federal civil jury in 2017, and if he’d been fired then, Daniel Ramirez would probably be alive today. · The banning of any kind of chokehold including the carotid one that killed Vincent Valenzuela (costing us $13.2 million) as well as several other APD victims.  This would only be getting a little ahead of the State of California, which is preparing to ban it, but if we do it sooner we may save a life or two. · Other repeat killer policemen who should be fired include Kelly Philips and KevinFlanagan; there are probably more. · Given many recent events, the Public Safety Board should be given more powers, such as subpoena power.  Item 30, continuing a “state of emergency” based on “civil unrest,” seems dishonest, since the city spokesman, Mayor, and others all admit the obvious, that the post-George Floyd protests in Anaheim have been notably peaceful.  We realize this is about trying to get money from the state and/or feds.  This could at least be balanced off by a commendation of Anaheim’s peaceful protesters, a condemnation of the killing of George Floyd, and a resolution confirming that “black lives matter.”  Items 33 thru 36 are styled as “public hearings.”  This is absurd and wrong; they can’t possibly be public hearings without the public there.  These items should all be continued to the next meeting that the public can attend, which we all hope will be June 23.   Finally, on Items 28 & 29, the cannabis regulation and taxation:  I want to congratulate Mayor Sidhu on the FPPC finding that this is not a conflict for him.  And I want to strongly encourage him to vote YES on both items – it will be VERY good for Rohan!   Thank you   Vern Nelson, the White Man of Anna Drive! From:Jesus Martinez To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:18:45 PM My name is [Jesus Martinez] and I am a resident of [Anaheim California ]. I am writing indeep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clearthat a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at thelocal level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Jesus Martinez From:Sienna parga To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:06:23 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is sienna Parga and I am a resident of Anaheim . I am writing in deep concern forthe health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve ?Resolution 19? that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Sienna Parga From:Gracy Grande To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:00:41 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Gracy Grande and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Gracy Grande From:Jailene A To:Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Anaheim Resident - Request to Divert Police Funds to the Anaheim Community Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:56:38 PM To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Martha Aguirre and I am a resident of District 5/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Martha Aguirre A former student of Abraham Lincoln Elementary School, South Junior High School, Katella High School Class of 2015, UCLA Class of 2019, and current Ph.D.student in Human Development and Family Studies at UIUC. Born and raised in Anaheim, where my family currently resides and where I maintain my permanent address. From:Mariana Ramos To:Public Comment Subject:Defund Anaheim Police Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:13:44 PM To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Mariana Ramos and I am a resident of Anaheim, Ca. I am writing in deep concernfor the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Mariana Ramos From:Saltation Ignite To:Public Comment Subject:Defund police Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:02:41 PM To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Mardhavi Rodrigo and I am a resident of Santa Ana, CA. I am writing in deepconcern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear thata radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the locallevel. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residentsand that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Mardhavi Rodrigo Sent from my iPhone From:Angela Escamilla To:Public Comment Subject:Defund the Anaheim Police Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:28:26 PM To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Angela Escamilla and I am a resident of District 46/Anaheim. I am writing indeep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clearthat a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at thelocal level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Angela Escamilla From:Howard Dinh To:Public Comment Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:44:58 PM To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Howard Dinh and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern forthe health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Howard Dinh Sent from my iPhone From:Meleny Bonilla To:Public Comment Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:50:14 PM To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Meleny Bonilla and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concernfor the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Meleny Bonilla From:vanessa azpeitia To:Public Comment Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:58:27 PM To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Vanessa Azpeitia and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concernfor the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Vanessa Azpeitia From:Janette Stanford To:Public Comment Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:16:24 PM To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Janette and I am a resident of Placentia. I am writing in deep concern for thehealth of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift inour concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Janette Stanford Sent from my iPhone From:Catherine Oak To:Public Comment Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:39:08 PM publiccomment@anaheim.net To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Catherine Oak and I am a resident of Fullerton CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Catherine Oak From:Elena Trujillo To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:23:53 PM Dear City Council Members, My name is Elena Trujillo and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern forthe health and safety of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that aradical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the locallevel. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council VETO “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council VETO "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council VETO "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a localemergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Sincerely, Elena Trujillo From:Jenny Perez To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:45:59 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jenny Perez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council NOT approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council NOT approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council NOT approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jenny Perez From:CSUF To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:33:09 PM My name is Julian L. and I am a resident of District 5 / Anaheim. I am writing in deep concernfor the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. JL. From:aaliyah cervantes To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:36:15 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Aaliyah Cervantes and I am a resident of Orange County, Anaheim. I am writingin deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more thanclear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place atthe local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Sincerely, Aaliyah Cervantes From:bebet ss17 To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:41:12 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Nathaniel Santos and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deepconcern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear thata radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residentsand that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Nathaniel Santos From:Nathaniel Santos To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:42:37 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Nay Nay and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. -Nay Nay From:Brandy Lea To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:05:15 PM My name is Brandy Gorlewski and I am a resident of district 4, Anaheim, Ca. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Brandy Gorlewski From:ViGiLaNTe Games To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:32:42 PM My name is Bryan and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Bryan Cisneros From:Ruben Aguila To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 and 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:05:44 PM My name is Ruben Aguila and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ruben Aguila From:Mia Brunette To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5, 19 and 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:14:27 PM My name is Mia Brunette and I am a resident of District 4 in Anaheim . I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Mia Brunette From:Kimberly Teran To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:14:36 PM My name is Kimberly Teran and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern forthe health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Kimberly Teran From:Emily Neva To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 Date:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 1:38:35 AM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Emily Boliver and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community, especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. I know that Disneyland and our low income neighborhoods are big reasons for why we need a strong police force, but you know as well as I do that there are other resources that can be used. Maybe a negotiation with Disney could be made for a larger security team that works closely with both Disney and the city. As for our neighborhoods, social workers and other trained employees of government can take on some of the work load that police should not need to take care of. Police should be focusing on emergencies. Emily Boliver From:Lawrence dion. To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 Date:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 11:49:53 AM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Lawrence D. and I am a resident of Brea, California. I am writing in deep concernfor the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors.Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the communityespecially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Lawrence D. From:Salaam Sbini To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:11:23 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Salaam and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for thehealth of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift inour concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Salaam Sbini From:Andrea Briseno To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:01:39 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Andrea Briseño Tellez and I am a resident of West Anaheim. I am writing in deepconcern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear thata radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the locallevel. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residentsand that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotesters. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Andrea Briseño Tellez From:Ben Bottles To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, and 30 Date:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 10:43:41 AM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Ben Bottles and I am a resident of Mission Viejo. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thankyou. Ben Bottles From:j_villegas To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, and 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:15:01 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jio and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jio Villegas From:Max Growick To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:30:59 PM I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has becomemore than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must takeplace at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black andBrown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. From:Noah Martinez To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:50:34 PM Anaheim City Council: My name is Noah Martinez and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concernfor the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Noah Martinez From:Victoria Banegas To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:02:24 PM My name is Victoria Banegas and I am a resident of Orange County. I am writing in deepconcern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear thata radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the locallevel. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residentsand that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council NOT approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Thank you for taking the time to thoroughly review my request, Victoria Banegas From:Joanna Mendoza To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:23:02 PM My name is Joanna Mendoza and I am a resident of of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deepconcern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear thata radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the locallevel. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. -Joanna Mendoza From:Jasmin Gato-Lytle To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:14:12 PM My name is Jasmin Gato and I am a resident of [Fullerton]. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jasmin Gato From:Nik S To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:06:30 PM My name is Niko Schuelke and I am a former resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerest regards, Niko Schuelke From:Edgar Aguilar To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:09:33 PM To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Edgar Aguilar and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern forthe health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Edgar Aguilar Cortes From:Steven Trinh To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:16:32 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Steven Trinh and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for thehealth of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift inour concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Steven Trinh From:Jessica To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:16:50 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jessica Z. and I am a resident of District 4/Anaheim. I am writing in deepconcern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear thata radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the locallevel. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residentsand that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Jessica Z. Sent from my iPhone From:Anne Grambusch To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:18:10 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Anne Grambusch and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deepconcern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clearthat a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at thelocal level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments inthe world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of themwere unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PDexceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the averagefor police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend$700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutalityprotests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMANDthat the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 policevehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue tocriminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs thatbenefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. Weas a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to furtherterrorize our community. Anne Grambusch From:Paul Vallett To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:59:51 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Paul Vallett and I am a resident of district 5 in Anaheim. I am writing in deepconcern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear thata radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the locallevel. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residentsand that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Paul Vallett From:Andrea Aguayo To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:10:43 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Andrea Aguayo and I am a resident of Stanton, CA. I am writing in deep concernfor the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Sincerely, A concerned citizen From:Katelyn Bako To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:29:19 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Katelyn Bako and I am a resident of Tustin, CA and work in Anaheim, CA. I amwriting in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become morethan clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take placeat the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black andBrown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Katelyn Bako From:Yesenia Altamirano To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:31:03 PM My name is Yesenia Altamirano and I am a resident of Anaheim's 5th District. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. WE DEMAND that these funds be reallocated to education, health, and mental health programs for our low-income and most vulnerable comminuties. We can no longer excuse the systemic violence communities of color are facing at the hands of militarized police. We must invest in the prosperous futures of our youth!We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best, Yesenia Altamirano From:Lucy Do To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:39:21 PM To the Anaheim City Council, My name is Lucy D. and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift inour concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Lucy D. From:TheRainSword . To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:31:54 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Myles Rogers and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Myles Rogers From:Jackie Avila To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:36:06 PM To The Anahiem City Council My name is Jacqueline Avila and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing indeep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clearthat a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Jacqueline Avila Sent from my iPhone From:Melissa Munoz To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:38:43 PM Good afternoon, My name is Melissa Muñoz and I am a resident of District 2 in Anaheim. I am writing in deepconcern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear thata radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the locallevel. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Melissa Muñoz From:chamomile dreams To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:39:38 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Valery Zuniga and I am a resident of Anaheim. California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear thata radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the locallevel. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residentsand that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity Sincerely, Valery Zuniga From:Amanda Zambrano To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:42:12 PM My name is Amanda and I am a resident of Mission Viejo. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Amanda Z From:Nicole Ceballos Gonzalez To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:42:21 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Nicole Gonzalez Ceballos and I am a resident of Anaheim in District 5. I amwriting in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become morethan clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take placeat the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. -Nicole Gonzalez Ceballos From:Evanna Rodarte To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:45:38 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Evanna Rodarte and I am a resident of Anaheim, Ca. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Evanna Rodarte From:Jennyfer Pham To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:48:41 PM My name is Jenny Pham and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concernfor the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. - Jenny Pham From:Taylor Juleen To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:54:00 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Taylor Juleen and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Taylor Juleen From:Amy Rivas To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:05:26 PM My name is Amy Rivas and I am a resident of Anaheim’s District 5. I am writing in deepconcern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear thata radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the locallevel. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residentsand that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Amy Rivas From:Miriam A To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:06:18 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Miriam Admasu and I am a resident of Anaheim, City Council District 1. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Miriam Admasu From:Marie Parga To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:09:15 PM My name is sienna Parga and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for thehealth of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift inour concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Sienna Parga From:Beep Kween To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:09:48 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Leigh and I am a resident of District 2. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policingand community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim hasdisproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest militarybudget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is nodifferent: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim PoliceDepartment killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study bythe ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projectsrelated to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that willuse $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit andenrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Leigh From:Alejandra Huerta To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:09:54 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Alejandra Huerta and I am a resident of the city of Anaheim in District 5. I amwriting in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become morethan clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take placeat the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black andBrown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend$700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutalityprotests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We alsoDEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest,which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money increating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a globalpandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. With certainty,Alejandra Huerta (She/Her/Hers) CSUF GEAR UP College Coach From:hannah ochoa To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:11:20 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Hannah Ochoa and I am a resident of Anaheim California. I am writing in deepconcern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear thata radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the locallevel. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Hannah Ochoa From:Johanna Perez To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:12:03 PM My name is Johanna Perez Herrera and I am a resident of District 3, Anaheim. I am writing indeep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clearthat a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at thelocal level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotesters. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Johanna Perez Herrera From:Sandra Khamsouk To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:13:40 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is sandra and I am a resident of Anaheim, Ca. I am writing in deep concern for thehealth of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift inour concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Sandra From:JOHANNA PEREZ HERRERA To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:13:48 PM My name is Johanna Perez Herrera and I am a resident of District 3, Anaheim. I am writing indeep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clearthat a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at thelocal level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotesters. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Johanna Perez Herrera From:Proyecto Feminista 714 To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:14:49 PM My name is Johanna Perez Herrera and I am a resident of District 3, Anaheim. I am writing indeep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clearthat a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at thelocal level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotesters. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Johanna Perez Herrera From:Fernando Juarez To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:15:38 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Fernando Juarez and I am a resident of District 3. I am writing in deep concern forthe health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Fernando Juarez From:Pamela Perez To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:19:51 PM My name is Pamela Perez Herrera and I am a resident of District 3, Anaheim. I am writing indeep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clearthat a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at thelocal level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotesters. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Pamela Perez Herrera From:Michelle D To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:23:47 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Michelle DeSantis and I am a resident of Anaheim Hills - 92807. I am writing indeep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clearthat a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at thelocal level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best,Michelle From:Ryan Aguayo To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:28:09 PM My name is Ryan Aguayo and I am a resident of Yorba Linda. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ryan Aguayo From:Sindy Paola Hernandez To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:41:08 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Sindy Hernandez and I am a resident of District 3 in Anaheim. I am writing indeep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clearthat a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at thelocal level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Sindy Hernandez From:Sepehr Rahmani To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:41:55 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Sepra Ramani and I am a resident of Anaheim City. I am writing in deepconcern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clearthat a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at thelocal level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments inthe world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of themwere unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PDexceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the averagefor police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend$700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutalityprotests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 policevehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming thecontinuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue tocriminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs thatbenefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. Weas a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sepra Ramani, Thank you, From:Jennifer Cuahutencos To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:43:13 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jennifer Cuahutencos and I am a resident of Anaheim’s District 3. I am writing indeep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clearthat a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at thelocal level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the communityespecially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Jennifer Cuahutencos From:Nayelli Rojas To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:46:52 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Nayelli and I am a resident of La Habra. I am writing in deep concern for thehealth of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift inour concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Nayelli Rojas From:Grecia Moreno To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:50:51 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Grecia I am a resident of Anaheim . I am writing in deep concern for the health ofthe greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in ourconcept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence inAnaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to anend. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Grecia Moreno -- Best Regards -Grecia Moreno From:America Sosa To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:51:08 PM My name is America Sosa and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deepconcern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear thata radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the locallevel. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residentsand that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. America Sosa-Avonce From:Denise Fernandez To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:53:22 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Denise Fernandez and I am a resident of district 5 in Anaheim. I am writing indeep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clearthat a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at thelocal level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Denise Fernandez From:Amara Nakamura To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:55:27 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Amara and I am a resident of Buena Park. I am writing in deep concern for thehealth of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift inour concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Amara From:Lauren Mabazza To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:58:33 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Lauren Mabazza and I am a resident of District 6 in Anaheim. I am writing indeep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clearthat a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Lauren Mabazza From:anusha To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:33:13 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Anusha Lingampally and I am a resident of Cypress. I am writing in deep concernfor the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Anusha Lingampally From:Meg Leigh To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:38:16 PM My name is Megan Leigh and I am a resident of Corona who works in Anaheim. I am writingin deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more thanclear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place atthe local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Megan Leigh From:Bethany Ahlberg To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:53:02 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Bethany Ahlberg and I am a resident of District 3 of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become clear that aradical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the locallevel. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residentsand that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. -Bethany Ahlberg Sent from my iPhone From:Jessica Manu To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:18:42 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jessica Manu and I am a resident of Orange. I am writing in deep concern for thehealth of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift inour concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Jessica Manu From:Eric Ahlberg To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:04:39 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Eric Ahlberg and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for thehealth of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift inour concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Eric Ahlberg From:Cindy Nguyen To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:22:01 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Cindy Nguyen and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors.Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the communityespecially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Cindy Nguyen From:Kamari . To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:24:37 PM My name is Kamari Rhone-Pratt and I am a 20 year old black resident of Anaheim California (Brookhurst and Lincoln). I have personally dealt with Anaheim PD and most of my experience has not been ideal. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Kamari Rhone-Pratt From:Kristin Armstrong To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:50:45 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Kristin Armstrong and I am a resident of Anaheim (45th congressional district). Iam writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has becomemore than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must takeplace at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Kristin Armstrong From:River Skydancer To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:53:27 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Kaila Mason and I am a resident of Fallbrook of Northern San Diego County. Iam writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community where I oftenspend time. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing andcommunity health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim hasdisproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. - Kaila Mason From:Marisol Meza-Rodriguez To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:28:40 PM To the Anaheim City Council, My name is Marisol Meza and I am a resident of Santa Ana. I am writing in deep concern forthe health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. -Marisol Meza Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android From:Alinne Rivera To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:31:51 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Alinne Rivera and I am a resident of Orange, CA. I am writing in deep concernfor the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunityAlinne Rivera From:Jordan Mendoza To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:45:38 PM Greetings, My name is Jordan Mendoza and I am a resident of 3rd District/Anaheim. This is my secondtime emailing the city. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheimcommunity. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing andcommunity health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Jordan Mendoza From:Beatriz Tapia To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 12:10:13 AM My name is Beatriz Tapia and I am a resident of Fullerton. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Beatriz Tapia From:Jerusalem Taylor To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 12:12:53 AM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jerusalem Taylor and I am a resident of Huntington Beach, CA. I am writing indeep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clearthat a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at thelocal level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Jerusalem Taylor From:Guray, Dawnn M To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 8:16:09 AM Attachments:95901fdd-70c1-47df-8110-0d77902d00d8.png To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Dawnn Guray and I am a resident of Anaheim I am writing in deep concern forthe health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Dawnn Guray  Pronouns: She/Her California State University, Los Angeles Master of Social Work Student   NASW Code of Ethics 6.04 Social and Political Action (a) Social workers should engage in social and political action that seeks to ensure that all people have equal access to the resources, employment, services, and opportunities they require to meet their basic human needs and to develop fully. Social workers should be aware of the impact of the political arena on practice and should advocate for changes in policy and legislation to improve social conditions in order to meet basic human needs and promote social justice. (b) Social workers should act to expand choice and opportunity for all people, with special regard for vulnerable, disadvantaged, oppressed, and exploited people and groups.  (c) Social workers should promote conditions that encourage respect for cultural and social diversity within the United States and globally. Social workers should promote policies and practices that demonstrate respect for difference, support the expansion of cultural knowledge and resources, advocate for programs and institutions that demonstrate cultural competence, and promote policies that safeguard the rights of and confirm equity and social justice for all people.  (d) Social workers should act to prevent and eliminate domination of, exploitation of, and discrimination against any person, group, or class on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, marital status, political belief, religion, immigration status, or mental or physical ability.   In Solidarity with the Black Lives Matter Movement   From:Linda Banh To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 9:14:16 AM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Linda Banh and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Linda Banh From:Nathaniel Santos To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:55:43 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Nathaniel Santos and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deepconcern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear thata radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the locallevel. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residentsand that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Nathaniel Santos From:Lauren Sanford To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19, & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:06:31 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Lauren Sanford and I am a resident of District 45. I am writing in deep concernfor the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Lauren Sanford From:Josie Fernandez To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19, & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:00:49 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Josie Peña and I am a resident of District 5 in Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Josie Peña From:Anna Cortez To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5,19, 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:31:07 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Annalie Cortez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern forthe health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Annalie Cortez From:Feby Boediarto To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19, and 30 #CARENOTCOPS!! Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:27:09 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Feby and my hometown is Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for thehealth of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift inour concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. In Solidarity, Feby Boediarto From:Leslie Medina To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19, and 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:06:12 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Leslie B. Medina and I am a resident of the 46th district in Anaheim. I am writingin deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more thanclear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place atthe local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brownresidents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of alocal emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. -Thank you, Leslie B Medina From:Alec Rodriguez To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19,30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:54:52 PM To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Alec Rodriguez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Alec Rodriguez From:Joanna Cazares To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 6, 19, & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:23:57 PM To the Anaheim City Council My name is Joanna Cazares and I am a resident of Santa Ana, CA. I am writing in deepconcern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear thata radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the locallevel. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Joanna Cazares From:Edgar Arellano To:Public Comment; Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:No on Resolution 19, 5, & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:01:50 PM My name is Edgar Arellano, resident of District 2 writing in deep concern for the health of thegreater Anaheim community. It is clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim hasdisproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Edgar Arellano From:Evan Lightcap To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolutions 5, 19, and 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:15:46 PM My name is Evan Lightcap and I am a resident of District 45. I am writing in deep concern forthe health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Policeviolence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Evan Lightcap From:Jennifer Martinez To:Jose Moreno; Public Comment Subject:No on Resolutions 5, 19, and 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:04:18 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jennifer Martinez and I am a resident of Anaheim’s district 3 for 18 years now. Iam writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has becomemore than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. During my enrollment at Anaheim High School there were efforts thatcame to fruition for ethnic studies classes. We learned about school to prison pipeline andexcessive police force during protest against environmental disasters at The Lakota. We alsohad police on campus even after we saw Eric Garner’s death all over the media with no use ofa weapon. Anaheim has hosted around 8 peaceful Black Lives Matter protest the earliestbeing in 2016. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black, Indigenous,and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors.With that said I would also like there to be an agreement on withdrawing Anaheim PoliceDepartment access to Ring Inc. a HOME surveillance network. Instead, invest that money increating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members.Regardless if these people are ex-convicts, detainees, people with disabilities, women, fatpeople, low-income, homeless, armed people, protestors, looters, suspects, people resistingarrest, and people that are practicing self defense, they have done nothing to justify their ownhomicide and we need stop allowing law enforcement to believe that they are. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Jennifer Martinez From:Juan Álvarez To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolutions 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:55:24 PM Anaheim City Council members, My name is Juan Gabriel Álvarez and I am a resident of district 3 residing at 1223 N RavennaStreet. I am on the board of trustees for the Anaheim Elementary School District and teachmath at Sycamore Junior High. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greaterAnaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheimhas disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. We need to make broader investments in community services to our residents and that is why Iurge you to vote no on resolutions 5, 19 and 30. Sincerely, Juan Gabriel Álvarez From:Jacqueline Leigh To:Public Comment Subject:NO! on Resolutions #5,19, 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:14:42 PM My name is Jacqueline Leigh. I am a resident of the 39th Congressional district of California in the city of La Habra. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. We DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protesters. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jacqueline Leigh From:Eumi Son To:Public Comment Subject:Request to reallocate police funds into the right things. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! Date:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 2:09:58 AM To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Eumi Son and I am a resident of Orange County. My grandfather, a veteran, is a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. I care about the safety of the residents in Anaheim, and especially for the safety of my grandfather. The largest threat to the community is the police department and it is time you reevaluate the egregious funds that go into the department. Anaheim is known to be one of the most violent PDs in California; it’s reputation for police brutality is horrible. If the massive amounts of funds were originally intended to keep citizens safe, consider this: reinvesting and reallocating those resources into poorly funded social services means less of a need for aggressive and heavy policing in Anaheim neighborhoods. It is a vicious cycle. You create criminals out of people you cannot properly care for. If it is clear as day to me, then it should be just as clear to you as city leaders. I urge you to be on the right side of the history that we, the people, are creating today. Thank you, Eumi Son From:Brittany Clark To:Public Comment Subject:URGENT: No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:28:39 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Brittany Clark and I am a resident of Laguna Niguel. I am writing in deep concernfor the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radicalshift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that mustcome to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largestmilitary budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in theworld. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to lawenforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, AnaheimPolice Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them wereunarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that ofLAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police inCalifornia, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and thatany future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council notapprove "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMANDthat the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peacefulprotestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich thecommunity especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as aconcerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize ourcommunity. Sincerely, Brittany M. Clark St. John's University School of Law J.D. Candidate 2022 From:mbusch71 . To:Public Comment Subject:Anaheim PD Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:54:00 PM To whom it may concern, The Anaheim Police Department budget is out of hand. I am a Disney employee and every day I drive by countless numbers of homeless people. YOU REMOVED THE BENCHES SO THEY COULD NOT SLEEP ON THEM. How about instead of hiring more officers and militarized equipment, you invest the money in ways that will actually HELP the community. Please do the right thing. Michael Busch From:Bianca Alcock To:Public Comment Subject:Budget workshop comment - Gate Tax Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 5:53:07 PM I would like to thank Council Member Moreno for taking the time to bring forward a viable option to assist with our current budget challenge. I would like to see the council support Dr. Moreno’s recommendation to have staff look at a gate tax as another tool in helping our city. I do not believe it’s the only option that should be considered but I would like to see this option added to the list of options and ultimately let the citizens decide if they wish or do not wish to see implementation of this tax. This tax would be similar to our TOT tax, which the city relies on and welcomes every year and is primarily paid by those who visit our city. If we are seriously considering cannabis as a viable revenue source, we can take the same time and money spent by staff to look at that option to look at a gate tax. Thank you! From:Mi Jin Kim To:Public Comment Subject:Budget Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:18:49 PM Is it true that Anaheim’s police budget was 150 million for 2019-2020 and you are thinking of cutting the budget for community support? Please do not cut more funding for community support and put in more money to the police department. I am a high school counselor and know the importance of funding needs like education and mental health. Suicide is 2nd leading killer for adolescents and I have many depressed students (seems like more and more every year) so how about putting more money for mental health supports in education? Thanks for your time! MJ Kim Tustin, CA Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone From: To:Public Comment Cc: Subject:City Budget Date:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 6:34:15 AM Dear City if Anaheim, My name is Henry Campos and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing to ask you to reconsider the proposed budget for the fiscal year of 2020/2021. I care deeply about making our community safer, and I believe that allocating 42% of the city’s general funds to the Anaheim Police Department will continue and increase harm to our citizens. From 2003 to 2016, 33 people were killed by on-duty Anaheim police officers. 61% of those people who were killed by the police department were Latino, and 12% were Black, representing 73% of the deaths due to APD actions. Additionally, most of these deaths occurred in Districts two, three, four, and five. Census data shows these four districts having a high concentration of Latinos and is generally low-income. On the other hand, District Six has only ever experienced one death due to APD during the period of 2003-2016. It is evident that the Anaheim Police Department targets low-income, minority neighborhoods, and I am disappointed to see this kind of systemic discrimination in my city. Systemic racism will continue to plague the city if here is no substantial change. Stop allocating the majority of the city’s proposed general fund to the police department, year after year there have been increases to this budget item & it continues to dominate the budget allocation despite reductions due to covid19. About 42% is still proposed to be allocated to police, the money should go to providing the necessities and ensuring the quality of life, as defined by the proposed city budget for fiscal year 2020/2021. Defund the police. Throughout Southern California we are calling for more police accountability and you have shown that you would rather dominate the streets with force than provide space to discuss the matter. Use your power to edit and revise the city’s proposed budget, quit funding draconian overreach by our militarized police force and provide the citizens of Anaheim with as many resources as possible to endure the global pandemic. The city should help its citizenry instead of harassing it. Thank you, Henry Campos. From:Jennifer Chen To:Public Comment Subject:Community service budget Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:03:44 PM Hello, My name is Jennifer Chen, I am currently a resident of neighboring Brea, but grew up and was raised in Anaheim where I still visit often and have family and friends. I spend much of my recreational time in Anaheim including being a patron of restaurants and movie theaters and am currently a Disneyland annual pass holder. I am concerned with potential 20% cut or any cut to community service/ programs. Community service is a vital aspect to the city of Anaheim, it promotes learning, increases the bonds within a community, and prevents crime. I spent my childhood attending community events at my local library and community centers and I think it was a vital element to my growth as a person and pivotal as to why I am a doctor today. More focus needs to be placed on community services and programs. We do not need to increase budget in the police, we need to increase the budget for our people. Thank you. --- Jennifer S. Chen, DPM MPH From:Abdullah Mamun To:hsidhu@anaheim.netl; Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:32:43 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Abdullah Mamun, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Rancho Santa Margarita, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: · Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds · Require De-escalation · Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting · Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles · Implement Use of Force Continuum · Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens.       From:Maristelle Maula To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:00:45 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Maristelle, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Rancho Santa Margarita. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Maristelle Maula From:Wandering Wisdom To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:57:15 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is David Miller, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Orange, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, David Miller From:jaielen Perez To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:00:50 PM My name is jaielen, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in anaheim. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, jaielen perez From:Nick Wong To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:00:58 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Nicholas Wong, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Nicholas Wong From:Edgar Arellano To:Public Comment; Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease police funding Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:00:59 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Edgar Arellano, a long time resident of this fair city. I live in district 2 and I am outraged. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC, we remember clearly every instance APD has used brutal force against our neighbors. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a major portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Anaheim will not forget the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we ask that restrictions be placed in the lobbying strategies used by police unions to influence our local policies. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Edgar Arellano Resident & business owner District 2 From:Kira Kawano To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:01:02 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Kira Kawano, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Kira Kawano From:Heather Saravia To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:04:56 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Heather Saravia, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Heather Saravia From:joann orzechowski To:Public Comment; Harry Sidhu (Mayor) Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:16:21 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Joann Orzechowski, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I work in Anaheim and live in La Mirada, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Joann Orzechowski 8 Can't Wait Cities that enact these eight use-of-force policies can reduce policeviolence by 72%. Look up your city and con... From:Angelica Campos To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:17:44 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Angelica Campos, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim California. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Angelica Campos From:Juliet Johnson To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Stephen Faessel; Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:37:46 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Juliet Johnson, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Long Beach, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Juliet Johnson From:Alexander San To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:55:21 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Alexander San, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Alexander San -- Alexander C. San Scientist II, Quality Laboratories ADVANCED STERILIZATION PRODUCTS (ASP) Email: Tel:+1 ( Mobile: + Irvine, CA 92618 From:Nadia Uddin To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:00:48 PM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Nadia, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, CA. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Nadia From:jamie joel To:Public Comment Subject:Decrease Police Funding Date:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 2:04:12 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Jamie, and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Santa Ana .The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Jamie Ojendi If you choose to support through phone call as well, here is a phone script: Dear Mayor Sidhu/Council Member, My name is [NAME] and I am calling on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I am from [CITY, STATE]. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to racial injustice in this country and, in particular, police brutality against black people and other people of color. The Anaheim Police Department is a part of the problem. We call on the City of Anaheim to re-allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. First, reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. More funds must be redirected to efforts that will address issues in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health. Second, weaken police unions that repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, an officer that commits an act of substantiated misconduct must be fired and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, I urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Thank you. My phone number is From:Katherine Rosecrance To:Public Comment Subject:Defund the police immediately Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:39:51 PM My name is Katherine Rosecrance and I am a resident of Costa Mesa and UCI Medical Student. I am writing in deep concern for the health of OC's community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. It is unacceptable that Black, Indigenous, and People of Color communities are living in persistent fear of being killed by state authorities like police, immigration agents or even white vigilantes who are emboldened by state actors. Despite continued profiling, harassment, terror and killing of Black communities, local and federal decision-makers continue to invest in the police, which leaves Black people vulnerable and our communities no safer. Moreover, this deep lack of trust that the government is breeding by terrorizing its own people, rather than safeguarding our health, is an alarming risk for future generations to live peacefully and safely with each other. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. While police and military funding has increased every single year since 1973, funding for public health and community outreach decreased every year, crystallized most recently when the Trump administration eliminated the US Pandemic Response Team in 2018, citing “costs”. The time has come to defund the police. Anaheim Police is the 9th most violent department in the U.S. This is not what Orange County, CA stands for. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Fran PD and is 74% higher than average for police in California. How can it be that agents funded for "public protection" are responsible for 17% of all homicides in the city (2003-2016)? In the years 2009 and 2016, 36% of all homicides were in the hands of Anaheim officers. Frankly, this is unacceptable. It is inhumane and impossible to ignore as an issue anymore. Rather, our city needs a radical increase for funding towards community services and healthcare. We need youth programs, increased mental health services, neighborhood infrastructures, childcare, and community outreach for those who need these services most. We need more funds for rehabilitation and the re-entry process for formerly incarcerated individuals, and to help increase employment and education rates. Orange County needs to build a society that does not need the level of policing. I join in solidarity with the freedom fighters in Minneapolis, Louisville, and across the United States. And I call for the end to police terror. I call for defunding of police and for those dollars to be rerouted to strengthen community health systems. Sincerely, Katherine Rosecrance Costa Mesa, CA 92627 From:Scott Moody To:Public Comment Subject:FUND THE POLICE! Keep us safe! Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:40:25 PM To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Scott Moody and am an Anaheim Public Utilities customer. Although I technically reside in Buena Park, the instant I step off my property I am in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of our community. However, dismantling the police department or eliminating their budget is NOT the solution. I believe better qualified and better trained officers are. PLEASE APPROVE ALL RESOLUTIONS NECESSARY TO FURTHER ENSURE PUBLIC SAFELY! Very truly yours,Scott Moody From:Mi-J Kim To:Public Comment Subject:Furloughs Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:16:47 PM We really want fabulous than layoffs employees. Thank you From:Karen L. To:Public Comment Subject:Increase Community Programs Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:20:57 PM Hello, I am strongly advocating for you to please support community services that are geared to support youth and growth our society. Do not defund our programs instead invest in our community it is our future. Karen M. Bravo From:Mary Beckelheimer To:Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Public Comment Cc:Denise Barnes; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil Date:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 1:59:18 AM Dear Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, My name is Mary Beckelheimer ], and I am writing on behalf of myself and the citizens of Anaheim. I live in Anaheim, Ca. The deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd have called attention to longstanding racial tensions in this country and police brutality against black people and other POC. As you may know, Mayor Garcetti recently stated he would cut funding to LAPD by at least $150 million. We call on the City of Anaheim to re- allocate a portion of its budget away from police programs and take steps to eliminate police violence. Although the recent killings occurred far from Anaheim, Anaheim has its own history of police violence. Many of us remember the summer of 2012, when two unarmed men, Manuel Diaz and Joel Acevedo were killed by Officers Nick Bennallack and Kelly Phillips of the Anaheim Police Department in two separate incidents. In 2017, the ACLU ranked Anaheim PD the 9th deadliest force in the country for its record of officer-involved shootings. And in 2018, Anaheim police officers Sean Staymates and Kevin Pedersen shot at Eliuth Penaloza Nava more than 70 times before killing him, an incident that you remarked at the time was “disturbing.” The officers involved in these shootings must face consequences for their actions. In the case of Manuel Diaz, it took a total of four years and an appeal to the Supreme Court to rule that Officer Bennallack used excessive force and award the amount of damages to the Diaz family. Even then, Officers Bennallack and Phillips faced no consequences for their actions and remain active in the Anaheim PD. What does it say when the people we trust to protect our streets, are responsible for taking innocent lives? To its credit, the City fired Officer Pedersen and placed Officer Staymates on administrative leave in light of the 2018 incident. But this is not enough. We are not satisfied with retroactive justice. The City of Anaheim has to act to prevent violence from happening in the first place. First, we demand that the City reduce police funding. In the FY 2020/2021 Proposed Budget, approximately 42% of our budget will be dedicated to law enforcement. Allocating a larger portion of these funds to efforts in education, homelessness, affordable housing, and mental health would greatly improve quality of life and reduce inequality in our neighborhoods. By focusing on these preventative measures, we will uplift our communities, see reduced crime, and diminish the need for police intervention. Second, we must restructure law enforcement governance. In particular, we want to diminish the role of police unions, which repeatedly stand by officer misconduct and actively hinder efforts to oversee them. Furthermore, it should be required that if an officer commits a single act of misconduct they are immediately released from duty pending review of the incident. If the incident is substantiated they should be fired (NOT placed on desk duty) and should not be able to be rehired by another department. Finally, we urge you to support the 8 Can’t Wait Initiative to minimize police violence. We call on Anaheim to: Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds Require De-escalation Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles Implement Use of Force Continuum Require Comprehensive Reporting Mayor Sidhu and Council Members, let us not be on the wrong side of history and instead make Anaheim a model for other cities to follow. We demand that you address these concerns in this month’s city council meetings, and work to ensure the safety of all our citizens. Best, Mary Beckelheimer From:maria gomez To:Public Comment Subject:Please Do Not Cut Community Service Funding Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:16:52 PM I have just been made aware that the city plans to cut the community service budget. I ask that you do not move forward with this as it will harm the youth in the community greatly. Thank you From:Jamey Stambler To:Public Comment Cc:Jamey Stambler Subject:Please DO NOT LAYOFF City Employees Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:18:47 PM Attachments:image001.png Dear City Council, I work for Anaheim Public Utilities in the Integrated Resources Department and I am emailing to urge the Anaheim City Council to do everything in your power to not layoff city employees. Since the start of the COVID-19 crisis, employees have worked diligently to mitigate the impacts to the City of Anaheim. If not for our important work the financial and social outlook would likely be far worse than it is currently. Laying off staff instead of finding alternative measures is a short term solution that could have extremely negative longer-term consequences. For many departments, mine included, the amount of work we have has not decreased as a result of the crisis, but actually increased. Cutting staff would almost surely cause the remaining staff to be overburdened and cause expensive mistakes to be made. Once the current crisis begins to abate it will be even more imperative to have staff on hand in the departments that may have seen their work decrease during this period. We need trained personnel that can meet this need so that the City can get back on its feet rapidly. It is expensive and time-consuming to rehire staff, and if that staff needs to be trained that only exacerbates the issue further. Please strive to find alternative methods to get the City through this trying time so that employees that have worked arduously for this City can remain employed, provide for their families, and help quicken the City’s ascension out of this crisis. Thank you for your time, Jamey Stambler Integrated Resources Planner II Anaheim Public Utilities From:Jessica Torres To:Public Comment Subject:Public Comments - Budget Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:52:10 PM Good afternoon, I would like to express my concern with the financial obstacles that the City of Anaheim is currently facing due to the recent COVID-19 pandemic. I understand there needs to be drastic reductions to the city’s budget, but I’d like to encourage the council members to try their best to avoid any layoffs if at all possible. I greatly appreciate your consideration and I thank you for your time. Jessica Torres Senior Office Specialist City of Anaheim | Public Works | Operations Office 714-765-6921 | Fax 714-765-6842 From:DAVID DURAN To:Public Comment Cc: Subject:Re: Public Comment Received Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:55:49 PM The slide presentation given at City Council Meeting all were almost illegible. Please email a quality and legible copy to all who have emailed public comments; otherwise, I will add this issue to the City Council's malicious efforts to ill-inform the public. Your prompt response is greatly appreciated. Regards, David Duran On Tue, Jun 9, 2020, 2:57 PM Public Comment <publiccomment@anaheim.net> wrote: The City is in receipt of your public comment. Your comment will be distributed tothe City Council for their consideration and made part of the public record of the City Council meeting. From:Gilbert Torres To:Public Comment Subject:Safety culture Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:18:59 PM Hi I’m writing in support of efforts to defund Anaheim police department. Although public safety is important, it’s evident there is zero trust Within the public in modern day policing. This is evidenced by daily protest against police, police brutality, and the lack of accountability across all police departments. As a result every effort should me made to defund, dismantle, and ultimately rewrite the playbook on modern day policing. Please take action as soon as possible as this matter is of the upmost urgency and importance to the people who elected you to represent them. Sent from my iPhone Sent from my iPhone From:Cora Stucker To:Public Comment Subject:We Need To Defund Police Date:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 11:43:08 AM Hello My name is Cora Stucker and I have been actively protesting these past couple of weeks for Black Lives Matter. I have been in Northridge, Beverly Hills, Fairfax, South LA, and Anaheim, and can say with all my heart that the only problem that arose was police brutality every single time. Officers laughed at us. I was sexually harassed by one. They shot my friend in the legs twice and beat her with batons. They arrested one of my friends after not being clear about the curfew and when I inquired where I could pick her up at, they yelled at me through a megaphone in their car that I would be arrested if I did not leave due to curfew even though they said nothing to the people in the neighborhood who cheered them on. I had never run from the police before and I can 100% understand why anyone would when this is the type of ‘safety and law keeping’ that they do. The police force is a disgrace. If my child tells me they want to be a police officer when they grow up, I will be disappointed. We do not need what we have right now in place. The system we have is killing your citizens and creating a world where officers can do whatever they want with no repercussions. You absolutely need to abolish the police. But until that can happen, you need to begin the process by defunding them. Not measly. Extremely. They do not need tear gas. They do not need rubber bullets that can kill. They do not need tanks. They do not need to have a safety net for when they themselves commit crimes. They need to be defunded and seen as an outdated system. Your city needs funding. Just think of all the schools that are not on equal footing because their budgets were cut. All of those who are homeless that could be given shelter if we stopped arresting them for the crime of circumstances out of their control. Your citizens want to live. Let them. Cora Stucker From:Lisa Hughes To:Theresa Bass; Public Comment Subject:FW: [EXTERNAL]Re: [EXTERNAL]Re: [EXTERNAL]Fwd: Cannabis Issue Opposition Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:06:01 PM Attachments:anti cannbis_06092020_034355.pdf     From: Paul Kott  Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2020 3:52 PM To: Lisa Hughes <LHughes@anaheim.net> Subject: [EXTERNAL]Re: [EXTERNAL]Re: [EXTERNAL]Fwd: Cannabis Issue Opposition Hi Lisa, One last batch that just trickled in. Would you please forward. Thanks, On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 12:27 PM Lisa Hughes <LHughes@anaheim.net> wrote: Sure thing.   Thank you.   Lisa     From: Paul Kott  Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2020 12:23 PM To: Lisa Hughes <LHughes@anaheim.net> Subject: [EXTERNAL]Re: [EXTERNAL]Fwd: Cannabis Issue Opposition Hi Lisa, Here are more people against the cannabis proposal. Please distribute to City Council. Thanks, On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 1:53 PM Lisa Hughes <LHughes@anaheim.net> wrote: Absolutely.  Thank you J   Lisa     From: Paul Kott  Sent: Monday, June 08, 2020 1:12 PM To: Lisa Hughes <LHughes@anaheim.net> Subject: [EXTERNAL]Fwd: Cannabis Issue Opposition Hi Lisa, Could you please forward this correspondence/attachments to all of the City Council members? Thanks, ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Paul Kott < Date: Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 10:16 AM Subject: Cannabis Issue Opposition To: Loretta Day <LDay@anaheim.net> Hi Loretta, Could you please forward this email and these letters to the City Council Members? Kindly acknowledge receipt of this email. Thanks so much! Dear Mayor Sidhu and Members of the Anaheim City Council, Please see the attached letters in opposition to the cannabis issue and subsequent ballot measure. They are all in opposition to Items 28 and 29 on the June 9, 2020 City Council Agenda. This entire issue is so wrong for so many reasons and on so many levels. I urge you to make the right and moral decision for the City of Anaheim and VOTE NO on these items. The entire City of Anaheim will be watching this vote. Please, No Extensions, No Ballot Measures, No Modifications, No Marijuana in Anaheim. (I actually can't believe that someone would have to request this on such a bad idea!) Sincerely, Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. From: To:Theresa Bass; Public Comment; Council; City Manager; Lucille Kring; Jordan Brandman; Jose Moreno; Denise Barnes; sfassel@anaheim.net; Trevor O"Neil; HarrySidhu@harrysidhu.com; fabela@anaheim.net; Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Cynthia Ward Cc:"Jakki Hernandez" Subject:Cannabis is Essential - Please Allow In Anaheim Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:25:19 PM Dear Anaheim City Council: I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California. There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35%, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – a – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Please feel free to reach out to me directly if you would like to discuss this further. Sincerely, From:Lauren Torres To:Public Comment Subject:FW: Commercial cannabis legalization - Anaheim Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:06:46 PM     From: Nicole King  Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2020 3:51 PM To: Council <council@anaheim.net> Subject: Commercial cannabis legalization - Anaheim I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California.There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Nicole King Sent from my iPhone From:Lauren Torres To:Public Comment Subject:FW: I Support Cannabis in Anaheim Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:06:30 PM     From: Greg Conway   Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2020 3:21 PM To: Public Comment <publiccomment@anaheim.net>; Council <council@anaheim.net> Subject: I Support Cannabis in Anaheim Please allow adults to make the decisions they want that help them and hurt nobody else. The City would also benefit greatly from the tax revenue, especially amidst the multitude of current crises. Thank you, Greg From:Lauren Torres To:Public Comment Subject:FW: Please support legal and safe cannabis in Anaheim Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:07:01 PM     From: Jon Landis  Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2020 4:00 PM To: Council <council@anaheim.net> Cc:  Subject: Please support legal and safe cannabis in Anaheim   Dear Honorable Council Members:   I am an activist and attorney and board member of the Orange County Veterans Democratic Club and Costa Mesa Democratic Club..  I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial  cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California. There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market.   As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities.  What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities.   Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level.  As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products.  However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market.  In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators.  One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings.    Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City.  As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole:  when one shuts down, another opens down the street.  These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City.  The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim.   Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim.  While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff.  Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California.    These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community.  Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain.    Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents.  Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down.   This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation.  Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding.  Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market.    The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim.  The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City.  Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents.   Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status.  In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support.  Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes.  Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start.   Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance.   Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue.      Sincerely,   Jonathan Landis               CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files, or previous e-mail messages attached to it, may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this message is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify us by reply email and destroy the original transmission and its attachments without reading them or saving them. Thank you. Dear Anaheim City Council: I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California. There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35%, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial From:City Manager To:Theresa Bass Cc:Public Comment Subject:FW: Public Comments - Cannabis in Anaheim Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:09:39 PM     From: Jazmin Lucero  Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2020 2:54 PM To: Jazmin Lucero  Subject: Public Comments - Cannabis in Anaheim cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – a – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Please feel free to reach out to me directly if you would like to discuss this further. Sincerely, Dear Anaheim City Council: I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California. There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35%, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected From:Lauren Torres To:Public Comment Subject:FW: Public Comments - Cannabis in Anaheim Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:15:36 PM     From: Jazmin Lucero  Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2020 2:54 PM To: Jazmin Lucero  Subject: Public Comments - Cannabis in Anaheim testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – a – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Please feel free to reach out to me directly if you would like to discuss this further. Sincerely, Dear Anaheim City Council: I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California. There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35%, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, From:Theresa Bass To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: Public Comments - Cannabis in Anaheim Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:56:11 PM Begin forwarded message: From: Jazmin Lucero Date: June 9, 2020 at 2:54:10 PM PDT To: Jazmin Lucero Subject: Public Comments - Cannabis in Anaheim  nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – a – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Please feel free to reach out to me directly if you would like to discuss this further. Sincerely, From:Greg Conway To:Public Comment; Council Subject:I Support Cannabis in Anaheim Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 3:21:49 PM Please allow adults to make the decisions they want that help them and hurt nobody else. The City would also benefit greatly from the tax revenue, especially amidst the multitude of current crises. Thank you, Greg From:Jon Landis To:Public Comment Cc: Subject:Please support safe and legal cannabis in Anaheim Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:00:26 PM Dear Honorable Council Members: I am an activist and attorney and board member of the Orange County Veterans Democratic Club and Costa Mesa Democratic Club.. I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California. There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Sincerely, Jonathan Landis CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission, and any documents, files, or previous e-mail messages attached to it, may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this message is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify us by reply email and destroy the original transmission and its attachments without reading them or saving them. Thank you. Dear Anaheim City Council: I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California. There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35%, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these From:Jazmin Lucero To:Jazmin Lucero Subject:Public Comments - Cannabis in Anaheim Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:54:10 PM unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – a – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Please feel free to reach out to me directly if you would like to discuss this further. Sincerely, From:Stephanie Burglin To:Public Comment Subject:Re: Public Comment Received Date:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 8:06:50 AM Thank you for your reply. Please be sure it is attached to the relevant council meeting which took place yesterday, June 9, 2020. Respectfully, Stephanie Mercadante On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 7:31 AM Public Comment <publiccomment@anaheim.net> wrote: The City is in receipt of your public comment. Your comment will be distributed tothe City Council for their consideration and made part of the public record of the City Council meeting. From:MARVN To:Public Comment Subject:Resolution 28 & 29 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:45:21 PM HOW ARE YOU SPENDING AN ENTIRE HOUR ARGUING SEMANTICS OVER A RESOLUTION THAT'S NOT BEEN VOTED ON, BUT APPROVE A $750K BUDGET INCREASE FOR ANAHEIM POLICE DEPARTMENT IN EIGHT MINUTES?! THIS IS OUTRAGEOUS! From:Stephanie Burglin To:Public Comment Subject:The Vote on the Legalization of Cannabis Dispensaries Date:Wednesday, June 10, 2020 7:31:42 AM Dear Anaheim City Council, City Council of Anaheim, I am writing to you today to get clarification for the record on the vote for the legalization of cannabis dispensaries in Anaheim which took place last night, June 9, 2020. When the vote was cast I heard Council Members, Jordan Brandman, Lucille Kring, and Harry Sidhu vote yes for the legalization of cannabis dispensaries. Council Members, Steven Faessel, Denise Barnes, Jose Moreno and Trevor O'Neill voted no. Legal cannabis dispensaries failed in Anaheim. The council then went on to vote on the taxation of legal cannabis dispensaries. During this vote Mayor Sidhu interrupted the dialogue to make sure his previous vote on the legalization was recorded as a no. One of the council members commented on the record that Mayor Sidhu changed from his original vote of yes and now wanted the record to show a no vote. I wish the record to reflect all the voting, as it happened. It is important that the record is correct for transparency in order for the voting public to know who/how to vote for their elected officials going forward. Respectfully, Stephanie Mercadante From:Sarah Murphy To:Public Comment Subject:todays meeting Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:11:43 PM To All Concerned Parties, Please support and continue to consider items: 28. ORDINANCE NO. (INTRODUCTION) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA adding Chapter 4.110 to Title 4 of the Anaheim Municipal Code regulating cannabis distribution, manufacturing, cultivation, retail sale, deliveries, and testing laboratories, and repealing Chapters 4.20, 4.21, and 4.100 of the Municipal Code (to take effect only upon passage of a cannabis tax measure at the November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election) (continued from Council meeting of May 12, 2020, Item No. 23). Determine that this ordinance is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to sections 15004, 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), 15061(b)(3), 15301, 15303, and 15332 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, because it will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, because there is no possibility that it may have a significant effect on the environment, because it is not a project, as defined in section 15378, and because it is also the subject of categorical exemptions from CEQA. (continued from Council meeting of May 12, 2020, Item No. 23). MOTION: 29. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA calling for the placement of a general tax measure on the ballot for the November 3, 2020 General Municipal Election submitting to the qualified voters a proposed ordinance adding Chapter 2.15 to Title 2 of the Anaheim Municipal Code establishing a tax on cannabis businesses operating within the City; requesting that the Orange County Board of Supervisors consolidate the City’s Municipal Election with the Statewide General Election to take place on November 3, 2020; setting rules and deadlines for the filing of arguments and rebuttal arguments; and directing the City Attorney to prepare an impartial analysis [approval of this resolution includes determination that the ballot measure is not a project within the meaning of California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and the State CEQA Guidelines, Section 15378(b) because it relates to organizational or administrative activities of governments that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment]. during today's' meeting. There are many people who could benefit from these actions. The medically encumbered patients, the growers & workers, the state/ local revenue flow, and the general public all deserve the opportunities potentially afforded in your favorable consideration and voting activities. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, S. Murphy 1 Jennifer L. Hall From:Alnie Royalty Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:40 PM To:Council Subject:Cannabis / 5503 Dear Anaheim Council Members, We would like to see both medical and recreational Cannabis shops REMAIN ILLEGAL IN ANAHEIM. For years the organization M.A.D.D. has made great efforts to bring awareness to the tragedy and heart ache brought by driving under the influence. We know marijuana comes under this. The fact that Marijuana leads to harder drugs has not changed. Surveys from U.S.News and World Report, May 2,019 and from N.B.C. Oct. 2,018 reported the increase in traffic accidents due to Cannabis sales. With these shops coming here, the streets of Anaheim may hold more buzzed drivers. Lets not bring these junk shops to our lovely Anaheim. Thank-you. JoAnne & Alnie Royalty 1 Jennifer L. Hall From:Shelly McKay Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 1:35 PM To:Council Subject:Cannabis Attachments:weedwise_poster_orange.png I want to thank the City Councilmembers and City Staff for considering cannabis in the City of Anaheim. My name is Shelly McKay and I’m a Co-founder of Kannabis Works, which is a licensed cannabis dispensary in Santa Ana. We have been open for two years and are grateful that we have been deemed essential during the current times. We have a large amount of clients who use cannabis as a wellness tool for a variety of health conditions. We deem it necessary too. The state of California currently has 660 licenses for Storefront Retail. The state of CA currently has 39 million people. At this time, safe access to cannabis is not available to all Californians who voted in favor of Prop 64. There are many cities in the state who have opted out. Sadly, because there are not enough retailers in the state, people choose to go to an illicit dispensary which does not require to have clean and tested products like the legal industry. We assure the customer that all products in a legal dispensary are clean & tested and tracked from seed to sale. While this matters to a few, there are many who would rather pay less. This now becomes a safe-access issue. All products that are in an unlicensed dispensary are not tested. This unsafe practice of not testing product is what led to the tragic vaping epidemic. Unscrupulous operators were adding ingredients that led to EVALI. Countless people became sick and even worse at least 60 people have died. Safe access to clean cannabis is imperative. I am an advocate for cannabis and I would like to see that more cities allow for cannabis retail so that we can bring quality and clean, tested products to the people we serve. With gratitude, Shelly McKay Health & Wellness Educator Kannabis Works Santa Ana, CA 92704 1 Jennifer L. Hall From:Arielle O'Daniel Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:55 PM To:Council Subject:Cannabis in Anaheim Dear Honorable Council Members: I am a resident of the City of Anaheim. I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California.There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. 2 The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Sincerely, -- Arielle O'Daniel 1 Jennifer L. Hall From:Karen Luna Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:26 PM To:Council Subject:Cannabis I would like to express my opposition on the distribution the growing the selling of cannabis in the city of Anaheim I think it would be harmful to families to teens and young adults I feel that the crime rate will go up in Anaheim we don't need to be manufacturing it here we don't need to be selling it here we do not need that kind of publicity for a place where people think it's the happiest place on earth we want to stay family-friendly and support the growth of healthy families and individuals The last thing Anaheim needs would be to draw people in who abuse marijuana I oppose all of it I want my city to be safe family oriented a place where people want to come and raise a young family thank you for taking the time to read my opposition please I beg that you do not go forward with any plans of cultivating selling manufacturing cannabis in the city of Anaheim. Thank you Karen Luna 1 Jennifer L. Hall From:blazea glory Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:51 PM To:Council Subject:Stop the war on drugs please Dear Honorable Council Members: I am a resident of the City of Anaheim. I am writing to you today to urge you to support reasonable commercial cannabis legalization in line with the will of the voters in approving Proposition 64 in 2016. Cannabis businesses were recently declared essential businesses by the State of California.There is no question that the State, and the residents of this State, are strongly in support of a regulated commercial cannabis market. As a reminder, in 2016, Anaheim’s voters approve Prop 64 by 51.35 %, which strongly signals their desire to participate in and for you to regulate commercial cannabis activities. What is more, we have every indication that if the vote were to be held today, an even greater majority of voters would approve legalization of commercial cannabis activities. Commercial cannabis regulation is vitally necessary at the local level. As you know, in 2019, we experienced a series of illnesses, nationwide, that were attributed to adulterated cannabis vaporizing products. However, upon further investigation and testing, it was confirmed that all of these contaminated products were purchased from the unregulated market. In other words, none of the cannabis vaporizing products were purchased from licensed commercial cannabis operators. One of the State of California’s leading and most respected testing laboratories released a report in October 2019 confirming these findings. Because the City of Anaheim does not regulate commercial cannabis activities, unlicensed operators have continued to operate throughout the City. As the police department will confirm, it is extremely difficult to shut down these unlicensed dispensaries; the common metaphor used throughout law enforcement and the cannabis industries is that shutting down these shops is like playing Whack – A – Mole: when one shuts down, another opens down the street. These unlicensed dispensaries are not held to the same standards licensed operators are, and they do not pay their fair share of taxes to the State or the City. The residents of Anaheim should have safe access to legal cannabis, which can only happen if you regulate commercial cannabis activities in Anaheim. Any licensed retail dispensary in California can deliver into the City of Anaheim. While that may help some residents access clean, tested, legal cannabis, many need the assistance and recommendations of well trained, qualified dispensary staff. Additionally, by forcing residents to purchase cannabis outside of the City of Anaheim, the City is not generating any revenue from commercial cannabis sales taking place within its borders. Commercial cannabis activities have been declared essential services by the State of California. These essential businesses provide good paying jobs for the local community. Beyond retail, botanists, chemists and skilled technicians all play a role in the commercial cannabis supply chain. Security and safety are among the common concerns expressed by residents. Studies have shown that where legal commercial cannabis operations take place, crime actually goes down. This is why the most police departments are now in support of commercial cannabis regulation. Prop 64 also requires cities or counties to legalize cannabis retail and cultivation in order to qualify for 2 enforcement funding. Regulating cannabis gives our police the resources to eliminate the unregulated market. The City of Anaheim can regulate commercial cannabis activities by adopting a reasonable ordinance that addresses zoning and sensitive use restrictions that make sense for Anaheim. The City can also use the development agreement process to derive community benefits from the cannabis businesses that operate legally in the City. Cannabis businesses can support homelessness relief, or food drives or contribute time in addition to money to help the City and the local community organizations that serve its residents. Finally, we urge you to acknowledge the disproportionate impact the failed War on Drugs had on communities of color and low socioeconomic status. In so doing, we strongly recommend including a social equity component in any Ordinance you support. Given what we have seen unfold over the past weeks, it is clear now more than ever that our leaders must account for creating systemic policy changes. Cannabis regulation is the perfect place to start. Please do what is best for the City of Anaheim and all of its residents by adopting a reasonable commercial cannabis regulatory ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device From:Pat D To:Denise Barnes; Public Comment Cc:Jose Moreno; Harry Sidhu (Mayor); Jordan Brandman; Lucille Kring; Stephen Faessel; Trevor O"Neil Subject:Today"s meeting Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:52:54 PM Greetings Very full agenda tonite. Can't wait to hear the Budget meeting. Would be quite useful to consider ways to make call in public comments possible and/or read them into the record during the meeting as COVID-19 continues and many at even more risk, myself included. You need to hear from your citizens! A few of the items of concern: The whole Cannabis piece (items 28 & 29) needs to have more community input and understanding. I question why so fast besides the ballot which is not enough. Slow it down. Not convinced any kind of money maker for our city. Plenty of other entities that could be taxed if truly worried about revenue as you should be. Item 30 so disproportionate to the sappy and patronizing Anaheim City updates by Mike Leister. Which is it? Our young people have lots to say and you need to pay attention, take it in and make some changes. Sure hope I hear you all articulate that Black Lives Matter!!! How about an update on how our PD will check itself on abusive practices? What do items 5 and 19 do? Add more resources to the APD tool kit? Maybe save that money and have focus switch to real community policing. Need to revisit the contracts and practices to show our city isn't totally insensitive and tone death. (Return the outrageous raises recently approved.) Any housing projects ( I see #33, 34, & 35) that do not include low and very low income affordable housing units - not cheap, evasive set asides- should not ever be approved. Addressing RHNA numbers should be a reality for our city, but apparently not. General disregard for low income folx is the name of this majority City Council's game while lucky donors get a HIGH return!!! Sorry couldn't include more Pat Davis Sent from my phone. Please excuse brevity and typos. From:DAVID DURAN To:Public Comment Cc:Kelly Aviles Subject:RE: Public Comments regarding Tonight"s Agenda Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:56:59 PM The word "Approve" leads several of the Council's Agenda items. Does the Council believe the Brown Act is not applicable to you? Where/When has the public had opportunity to give public comments on these matters? The Council's advertised premeditated evidence that "approved" agenda items demonstrates the Councils malicious prejudice to exclude the public's input during Council meetings. The ongoing COVID-19 crisis and the current George Floyd does NOT give the Anaheim City Council the right/privilege to act without transparency regarding taxpayer funds. In addition, other "non-corrupt" city councils are allowing the reading of public comments during their meetings. We the people, the citizens, and residents of Anaheim will continue to gather documentation/evidence regarding Anaheim City Council malicious and calculated efforts to eliminate the rights of the public. Very Concerned, David Duran Anaheim Resident -- David L. Duran Orange County, California cell: email: Breach of confidentiality & accidental breach of confidentiality This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. From:Megan Moscol To:Public Comment Subject:Fwd: Take Action Right Now to Decrease Police Violence Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:46:42 PM In addition to my comment below, I would like to encourage the City Council to reject the no- bid contract with Fog Data Science. Thank you! ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Megan Moscol Date: Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 9:35 AM Subject: Take Action Right Now to Decrease Police Violence To: <hsidhu@anaheim.net> Cc: <CityManager@anaheim.net>, <sfaessel@anaheim.net>, <dbarnes@anaheim.net>, <jbrandman@anaheim.net>, <jmoreno@anaheim.net>, <lkring@anaheim.net>, <%20toneil@anaheim.net> Mayor Sidhu, First, I would like to commend Anaheim Police for incorporating the 2 best practices below, as detailed by police operations: -Require Warning Before Shooting -Duty to Intervene However, the additional 6 practices below should be incorporated into police operations as quickly as possible in order to comply with practices proven to reduce the incidence of police violence: -Ban Chokeholds and Strangleholds -Require De-escalation -Require Exhausting Other Means Before Shooting -Ban Shooting at Moving Vehicles -Have Use of Force Continuum -Require Comprehensive Reporting These are practices that can be implemented immediately to reduce/prevent violence while the City considers and implements additional long term steps toward police abolition/reform. For more information, please see Thank you! Placentia Resident and Frequent Visitor to Anaheim, Megan Moscol 92870 From:MARVN To:City Clerk Subject:Question re: Resolution 5 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 6:33:43 PM When are we next scheduled for purchasing more patrol cars? From:MARVN To:City Clerk Subject:NO ON RESOLUTION 19 Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 7:18:39 PM NO ON RESOLUTION 19 You can't provide data regarding how many cases are affected, but had the information readily available for how you intend to use it? You tell us not to focus on how it can be used, but rather how it's been used. Using language like "tactical" and having exigent circumstances naturally grants the opportunity for misuse and eventually abuse. From:andrew conde To:Public Comment Subject:Police Brutality I suffered. Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:54:18 PM Hi, My name is Andrew Conde. I am an Air Force veteran. Also I suffer from a mental condition. That I am still trying to recover from after my Brutal arrest. I was peacefully protesting one week ago. And was arrested at gunpoint while leaving peacefully. 4 Anaheim PD plain clothed officers jumped out of a white mini- van in the middle of an intersection. Did not identify themselves. I debate whether or not officer Curiel drew his tazer or gun on me for no reason. I had no weapons at all.. When I said that he had to identify him self he pointed to the little “POLICE” patch on body armor. Which I could not see because of his raised arms pointing a gun at me. This is how people die. What if I truly did not realize who he was? My friend & I were then told that they picked us out of the crowd because we were launching mortars at a helicopter ... thats damn near terrorism. While handcuffed in one of your interrogation rooms I was intimidated and beaten by badge number “87” while handcuffed. Seeing as how he was not wearing a name tag or rank and not telling me who he was after he beat me. He elbowed me in the back while I was sitting in a chair in handcuffs subdued by two Jailers. Is throwing elbows into peoples spines while handcuffed taught in the police academy? I was also choked by him. I then cried because I already have a fractured vertebrae in my spine and it sent nerve pain throughout my body after taking an elbow to my back by badge number “87”. He then stood outside of the door and made fun of me as I cried. Officer “J. Pratt” took a report on the misconduct that had just happened. All the while mocking me. Please watch the video. We were told we were going to cited and released for hours. Then thrown into a jail cell. Told we were going to be released “when the paperwork was finished”. By 2 am we were finally told were going to be released at 5:30 am. I went out and peacefully protested. I had a gun drawn on me, beaten by badge “87” while handcuffed in A anaheim police department interrogation room, and jailed without cause and not told when we were going to be released. This all happened because I was peacefully protesting. Andrew Conde Sent from my iPhone From:andrew conde To:Public Comment Subject:Police Brutality I suffered. Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:54:22 PM Hi, My name is Andrew Conde. I am an Air Force veteran. Also I suffer from a mental condition. That I am still trying to recover from after my Brutal arrest. I was peacefully protesting one week ago. And was arrested at gunpoint while leaving peacefully. 4 Anaheim PD plain clothed officers jumped out of a white mini- van in the middle of an intersection. Did not identify themselves. I debate whether or not officer Curiel drew his tazer or gun on me for no reason. I had no weapons at all.. When I said that he had to identify him self he pointed to the little “POLICE” patch on body armor. Which I could not see because of his raised arms pointing a gun at me. This is how people die. What if I truly did not realize who he was? My friend & I were then told that they picked us out of the crowd because we were launching mortars at a helicopter ... thats damn near terrorism. While handcuffed in one of your interrogation rooms I was intimidated and beaten by badge number “87” while handcuffed. Seeing as how he was not wearing a name tag or rank and not telling me who he was after he beat me. He elbowed me in the back while I was sitting in a chair in handcuffs subdued by two Jailers. Is throwing elbows into peoples spines while handcuffed taught in the police academy? I was also choked by him. I then cried because I already have a fractured vertebrae in my spine and it sent nerve pain throughout my body after taking an elbow to my back by badge number “87”. He then stood outside of the door and made fun of me as I cried. Officer “J. Pratt” took a report on the misconduct that had just happened. All the while mocking me. Please watch the video. We were told we were going to cited and released for hours. Then thrown into a jail cell. Told we were going to be released “when the paperwork was finished”. By 2 am we were finally told were going to be released at 5:30 am. I went out and peacefully protested. I had a gun drawn on me, beaten by badge “87” while handcuffed in A anaheim police department interrogation room, and jailed without cause and not told when we were going to be released. This all happened because I was peacefully protesting. Andrew Conde Sent from my iPhone From:andrew conde To:Public Comment Subject:Police Brutality I suffered. Date:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 2:52:29 PM Hi, My name is Andrew Conde. I am an Air Force veteran. Also I suffer from a mental condition. That I am still trying to recover from after my Brutal arrest. I was peacefully protesting one week ago. And was arrested at gunpoint while leaving peacefully. 4 Anaheim PD plain clothed officers jumped out of a white mini- van in the middle of an intersection. Did not identify themselves. I debate whether or not officer Curiel drew his tazer or gun on me for no reason. I had no weapons at all.. When I said that he had to identify him self he pointed to the little “POLICE” patch on body armor. Which I could not see because of his raised arms pointing a gun at me. This is how people die. What if I truly did not realize who he was? My friend & I were then told that they picked us out of the crowd because we were launching mortars at a helicopter ... thats damn near terrorism. While handcuffed in one of your interrogation rooms I was intimidated and beaten by badge number “87” while handcuffed. Seeing as how he was not wearing a name tag or rank and not telling me who he was after he beat me. He elbowed me in the back while I was sitting in a chair in handcuffs subdued by two Jailers. Is throwing elbows into peoples spines while handcuffed taught in the police academy? I was also choked by him. I then cried because I already have a fractured vertebrae in my spine and it sent nerve pain throughout my body after taking an elbow to my back by badge number “87”. He then stood outside of the door and made fun of me as I cried. Officer “J. Pratt” took a report on the misconduct that had just happened. All the while mocking me. Please watch the video. We were told we were going to cited and released for hours. Then thrown into a jail cell. Told we were going to be released “when the paperwork was finished”. By 2 am we were finally told were going to be released at 5:30 am. I went out and peacefully protested. I had a gun drawn on me, beaten by badge “87” while handcuffed in A anaheim police department interrogation room, and jailed without cause and not told when we were going to be released. This all happened because I was peacefully protesting. Andrew Conde Sent from my iPhone 1 Public Comment From:Amaranta Villalon Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:19 PM To:Public Comment Subject:SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Amaranta Villalon and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Regards, Amaranta Villalon -- Amaranta Villalon CSU DOMINGUEZ HILLS ALUMNI ⁞ Carson, CA 90747 Email: 2 Public Comment From:Jocelyn Garcia Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:00 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jocelyn Garcia I am a resident of CENTRAL Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jocelyn Garcia 3 Public Comment From:Eric McLaughlin Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:18 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Eric McLaughlin and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. I thank you for your time and hope you'll take this matter seriously, as this is a very serious matter to your residents. Regards, Eric McLaughlin 4 Public Comment From:Matthew Florido Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:18 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No On Resolution 5,19, &30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is [YOUR NAME] and I am a resident of [YOUR DISTRICT/CITY]. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Matthew Florido 5 Public Comment From:Sam Barrios Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:17 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council, My name is Samantha and I am a resident of the 46th Congressional District. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best, Samantha S Barrios 6 Public Comment From:Emmy M Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:16 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Emma Gonzalez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Emma Gonzalez 7 Public Comment From:Marlene Medina Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:16 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Marlene Medina and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Marlene Medina 8 Public Comment From:Brian James Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:13 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Concerned Citizen comment To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Brian Carrillo and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which assumes residents are a danger. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Brian Carrillo 9 Public Comment From:Angel Miramontes Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:13 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Angel Miramontes and I am a resident of Chino, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Angel Miramontes 10 Public Comment From:Natalie Gallardo Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:12 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council My name is Natalie Gallardo and I am a resident of Anaheim for over 20 years now. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Natalie Gallardo 11 Public Comment From:Isabella Rae Musngi Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:12 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Isabella Rae Musñgi and I am a resident of the 46th Congressional District of California/Orange. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Isabella Rae Musñgi 12 Public Comment From:michelle ramirez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:11 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resplution 5, 19 & 30 Anaheim City Council: My name is Michell Ramirez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Michell Ramirez 13 Public Comment From:Hannah Abad Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:11 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Hannah and I am a resident of Riverside, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Hannah 14 Public Comment From:Pia Ulit Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:11 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolutions 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Pia-Carmela Ulit and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Pia-Carmela Ulit 15 Public Comment From:Karina garcia Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:10 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5,9 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Karina Garcia and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Karina Garcia 16 Public Comment From:Javier Ramos Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:08 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19, & 30 My name is Javier Ramos and I am a resident of District 5/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Javier Ramos 17 Public Comment From:Regan Delgado Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:04 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Regan Delgado and I am a resident of district 3, Anaheim, I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Regan Delgado 18 Public Comment From:Angelina diaz Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:04 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Anaheim City Council My name is Angelina A. Diaz and I am a resident of West Anaheim . I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Angelina A. Diaz 19 Public Comment From:Nikki Nguyen Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:04 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Concern citizen My name is Nikki Nguyen and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Nikki Nguyen Sent from my iPhone 1 Public Comment From:Simon Barrett Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:23 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Simon Barrett and I am a resident of the 48th District, Costa Mesa. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Simon Barrett 2 Public Comment From:Daniel Beltran Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:30 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19,30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Daniel and I am a resident of District 11, Anahiem. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Daniel 3 Public Comment From:Karla rojas Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:28 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Karla Rojas and I am a resident of Anaheim CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Karla Rojas 4 Public Comment From:Laura Yorba Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:28 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Laura Yorba and I am a resident of San Diego. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Laura Yorba 5 Public Comment From:Itzel Valle Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:24 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Itzel Valle and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Itzel Valle 6 Public Comment From:Hayley Leyns Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:20 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council My name is Hayley Leyns and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Hayley Leyns 7 Public Comment From:Leslie Arita Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:16 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Leslie Arita and I am a resident of District 3, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Leslie Arita 8 Public Comment From:Sarah Arreguin Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:13 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Sarah and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. Public libraries play a huge role in my community. They have become safe places for me and my fellow student who go there after school. If money were to be cut from our public communities then many students and children would not be able to know the things we know. Our library shows us jobs and opportunities we can take after highschool, new hobbies we can learn in our free time, and read the many books that can benefit our health. Without them, we would not be here today. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sarah. 9 Public Comment From:Marianna Solis Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:11 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Marianna Solis and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Marianna Solis 10 Public Comment From:Jacob Franco Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:11 PM To:Public Comment Subject:SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jacob Franco and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jacob Franco 11 Public Comment From:Allison Baca Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:09 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO ON RESOLUTION 5,19,30] publiccomment@anaheim.net To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Allison Baca and I am a resident of Norwalk. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. 12 Public Comment From:Paul Nagel Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:09 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Paul Nagel and I am a resident of Garden Grove, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. - Paul Nagel 13 Public Comment From:Daisy Monroy Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:08 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Daisy Monroy and I am a resident of Orange County, Garden Grove. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Daisy Monroy 14 Public Comment From:Rocio Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:08 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Rocio Zuniga and I am a resident of Anaheim California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Rocio Zuniga Sent from my iPhone 15 Public Comment From:Cindy Son Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:04 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, and 30 To the Anaheim City Council, My name is Cindy Ha Soul Son and I am a resident of Garden Grove, California. I lived in Anaheim for 3 years until this past December. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Cindy Ha Soul Son 16 Public Comment From:Priscilla Olivas Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:04 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19, & 30 publiccomment@anaheim.net My name is Priscilla Olivas and I am a resident of the 46th district. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Priscilla Olivas 17 Public Comment From:Uriel Sandoval Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:57 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19, & 30 To The Anaheim City Council: My name is Uriel Sandoval and I am a resident of Placentia, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Uriel Sandoval Sent from my iPhone 18 Public Comment From:Guadalupe Flores Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:57 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Guadalupe Flores and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Guadalupe Flores 19 Public Comment From:Camelia Sanchez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:55 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Camelia Sanchez and I am a resident of District 1 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protesters. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Camelia Sanchez  20 Public Comment From:Chantal Elise Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:51 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19 & 30!! To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Chantal Hales and I am a resident of 46th district, Orange. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Chantal Hales 21 Public Comment From:Hugo Sopeña Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:49 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 &30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Hugo Sopeña and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Hugo Sopeña Sent from my iPhone 22 Public Comment From:Beatriz Moreira Armenta Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:48 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Beatriz Moreira and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Beatriz Moreira 23 Public Comment From:Andre Mayen Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:47 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Andre Mayen, a resident of our beloved city of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Andre Mayen 24 Public Comment From:school ilashi Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:47 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Ida Ilashi and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ida Ilashi 25 Public Comment From:Marlene Solis Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:47 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Marlene Solis and I am a resident of Anaheim in CA-District 39. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Marlene Solis 26 Public Comment From:Christopher Florido Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:44 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Christopher Florido and I am a resident of District 3/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE THE PEOPLE DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 19" that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. There are better avenues toward which this proposed money can be allocated, such as public and mental health facilities, homeless-resident improvement initiatives, public schooling improvement, or public infrastructure improvements/renovations. As an Anaheim and U.S. citizen and resident, as a student, as a Mexican-American, as a human being: I DEMAND that the Anaheim City Council be on the right side of history as we move forward as a nation and community. By approving these motions to further benefit the police the only message that you are sending to your constituents and the Anaheim public is that you are severely detached from what is occurring within the community of Anaheim and the nation as a whole. Do not be detached. Be part of the change that will bring about the resolution and reform of the policing pandemic in Anaheim and across the nation. Be the trailblazers to change in local government on the side of the governed, not just the elite. We are calling on our ELECTED officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community REFUSE to remain silent on the use of technology and militarized police departments to further terrorize our community. Christopher Florido 27 Public Comment From:Kacie Morgan Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:41 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Kacie Morgan and I am a resident of Los Angeles. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Kacie Morgan 28 Public Comment From:Sabrina Kalam Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:40 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Sabrina Kalam and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sabrina Kalam 29 Public Comment From:Andrea Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:38 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Andrea Rodriguez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Andrea Rodriguez 30 Public Comment From:Tiffany Wells Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:35 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Tiffany Wells and I am a resident of Huntington Beach, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Tiffany Wells 31 Public Comment From:Daniel Salgado Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:34 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Daniel Salgado and I am a resident of District 3. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Daniel Salgado 32 Public Comment From:Alexandra Retana Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:31 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolutions 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Alexandra Retaba and I am a resident of District 3. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Alexandra Retana 33 Public Comment From:Danilo Macias Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:29 PM To:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Danilo Macias and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Danilo Macias Sent from my iPhone 34 Public Comment From:Samantha Joson Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:28 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 My name is Samantha Joson and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Samantha Joson 35 Public Comment From:caitlin walsh Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:25 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Caitlin Walsh and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Caitlin Walsh 36 Public Comment From:Gianella Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:21 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19 & 30 publiccomment@anaheim.net To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Gianella Urbiola and I am a resident of DISTRICT 1, ANAHEIM. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Gianella Urbiola 1 Public Comment From:Vanessa V. Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:43 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Vanessa Valdovinos and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Vanessa Valdovinos 2 Public Comment From:Julia Sumera Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:51 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Julia Sumera and I am a resident of Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Julia Sumera 3 Public Comment From:Rain Lima Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:46 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Rain Lima and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Rain Lima 4 Public Comment From:Francisco Rizo Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:40 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19, and 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Francisco Rizo and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Francisco Rizo 5 Public Comment From:Kimberly Rodriguez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:39 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No On Resolution 5,19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Mrs. Kimberly Rodriguez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Your Neighbor, Kimberly 6 Public Comment From:Alberto Hernandez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:35 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Alberto Hernandez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Alberto Hernandez 7 Public Comment From:Kylie Alkire Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:35 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, and 30 To the Anaheim City Council, My name is Kylie Alkire and I am a resident of District 5 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Kylie Alkire 8 Public Comment From:Christián González Reyes Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:18 PM To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Sacramento González Vega and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sacramento González Vega -- Saludos, Christián González Reyes University of California, San Diego Spanish Literature B.A. & Latin American Studies B.A. Minor: English Literature. Pronouns/pronombres: él, suyo/ he, him, his "Ya no voy a seguir buscando mi alimento entre cadáveres de perros y criminales. Si voy a comer mierda, que sea a mi manera"― Ases Falsos. 9 Public Comment From:Marisol Gonzalez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:16 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Rosa González and I am a resident of Anaheim . I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Paz, Rosa -- Marisol Gonzalez Applied Mathematics, B.S. Thurgood Marshall College, UC San Diego '21 10 Public Comment From:Ariana Diaz Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:15 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5, 19, 30 My name is Ariana Diaz and I am a resident of Anaheim, Ca. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ariana Diaz 11 Public Comment From:nancy ruiz Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:13 PM To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Nancy Ruiz and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our communities. Nancy Ruiz 12 Public Comment From:Amairani Cortez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:10 PM To:Public Comment Subject:o on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Amairani and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Amairani Cortez 13 Public Comment From:Marlene Perez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:08 PM To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Marlene Pérez and I am a resident of District 46/Anaheim . I am writing in deep concern for the. health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Marlene Perez Sent from my iPhone 14 Public Comment From:Marisol Gonzalez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:02 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Marisol González and I am a resident of Anaheim . I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best, Marisol -- Marisol Gonzalez Applied Mathematics, B.S. Thurgood Marshall College, UC San Diego '21 15 Public Comment From:veronica Borja Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:01 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Veronica Borja and I am a resident of Orange County/ Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize Our community. Best, Veronica Borja 16 Public Comment From:Alyssa Ashby Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:59 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Alyssa Ashby and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. 17 Public Comment From:Christián González Reyes Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:58 PM To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Christián González Reyes and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Christián González Reyes Department of Literature PhD Candidate University of California, Berkeley -- Con Paz Christián González Reyes Department of Comparative Literature University of California, Berkeley| 18 Public Comment From:Yogo Klein Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:56 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Nicole Klein and I am from Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Nicole Klein -- - - Yogo Klein CEO+Founder 19 Public Comment From:Angie Mateo Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:55 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Angelica Mateo and I am a resident of District 4, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Angelica Mateo 20 Public Comment From:David Garcia Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:55 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is David and I am a resident of Anaheim ca. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. David Garcia Sent from my iPhone 21 Public Comment From:Rocio Reynoso Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:52 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Rocio and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Rocio Reynoso 22 Public Comment From:monica prado Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:49 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Monica Prado and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Monica Prado 23 Public Comment From:Yoshi Melendez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:47 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Irioshi Melendez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Irioshi Melendez 24 Public Comment From:Christopher Salgado Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:47 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Christopher and I am a resident of OC, Dana Point. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Christopher 25 Public Comment From:Oscar Gonzalez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:47 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 My name is Oscar Gonzalez and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Oscar Gonzalez 26 Public Comment From:Hadi Sukar Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:38 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council:    My name is Hady Sukar and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater  Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health  must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents  and that must come to an end.  The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of  the most well‐funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019‐2020 budget  allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.  Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003‐2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33  people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest‐related  deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for  police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU.  WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on  surveillance technology of anti‐police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted.  We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We  DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency  regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating  programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic.  We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community  refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.    Hady Sukar      27 Public Comment From:Erica Solis Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:37 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Erica Solis and I am a resident of Garden Grove that frequently shops, eats, and visits entertainment such as Disneyland in Anaheim . I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -- Best, Erica Solis 28 Public Comment From:Becky Ibarra Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:37 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Rebecca and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Rebecca Ibarra 29 Public Comment From:Leslie SG Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:35 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19, and 30 My name is Leslie Soto and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Leslie Soto 30 Public Comment From:Gina Salman Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:35 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Gina Salman and I am a resident of Buena Park, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Gina Salman 31 Public Comment From:Anielka Valle Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:32 PM To:Public Comment Subject:[SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Anielka Valle and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Anielka Valle 32 Public Comment From:gerardo valdez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:28 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Gerardo and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Gerardo Valdez 33 Public Comment From:Camille Flores Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:24 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Resolution To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Camille Flores and I am a resident of Anaheim and I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Camille Flores Sent from my iPhone 34 Public Comment From:Luke Youngs Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:24 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Luke Youngs and I am a resident of Buena Park. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Luke Youngs 35 Public Comment From:Tito Canseco Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:14 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19,30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Iran Canseco and I am a resident of Anaheim, Ca. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Iran Canseco Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone 36 Public Comment From:Veronica Torres Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:12 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Veronica Torres and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Veronica Torres 37 Public Comment From:Sydney Wilson Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:09 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Sydney and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sydney Wilson 38 Public Comment From:Shalene Lundgren Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:02 PM To:Public Comment Subject:SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Anaheim City Council, My name is Shalene and I am a community member and resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Shalene Lundgren 39 Public Comment From:Sara Herrera Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:57 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO ON RESOLUTION 5,19,30 Anaheim Council-Public Comment publiccomment@anaheim.net To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Sara Herrera and I am a resident of District 2 ,Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. [YOUR NAME] 40 Public Comment From:Jhonny Guerrero Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:55 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jonathan Guerrero and I am a resident of Anaheim, Ca. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jonathan Guerrero 41 Public Comment From:Samantha Filko Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:52 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council, My name is Samantha Filko and I am a resident of Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Samantha Filko Sent from my iPhone 42 Public Comment From:Ciomara Franco Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:52 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 Edit with the Docs app Make tweaks, leave comments, and share with others to edit at the same time. NO THANKS USE THE APP Anaheim Council-Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council, My name is Ciomara Franco and I am a resident of Anaheim city. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. CIOMARA franco [YOUR NAME] 43 Public Comment From:Kenya Cortes Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:51 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Kenya Cortés and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Kenya Cortés 44 Public Comment From:Briana Frias Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:50 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Briana Frias and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Briana Frias 45 Public Comment From:Brianna Crafton Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:49 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Brianna Crafton and I am a resident of Newport Beach. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Brianna Crafton 46 Public Comment From:Sarai Michel Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:43 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Saraí Michel and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Saraí Michel 47 Public Comment From:Kimberly Cortés Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:42 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO ON RESOLUTION 5,19 & 30 My name is Kim and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Kim C 48 Public Comment From:Cristal Almonte Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:24 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Cristal Almonte and I am a resident of District 3 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. We know that there is an intersection between the use of technology and the violence enacted upon the Black and Brown communities in Anaheim. Invest in the enrichment of your community and divest from the white supremacist practices of surveillance and violence. Regards,   -- Cristal Almonte, M. A, ’18 (She/Her/Hers) Ph.D. Candidate in Higher Education/Student Affairs E-mail: Claremont, CA 91711      49 Public Comment From:Adrian Rangel Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:24 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Adrian Rangel and I am a resident of Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Best Regards, Adrian Rangel 50 Public Comment From:Stephanie Arredondo Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:23 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Stephanie Arredondo and I am a resident of Anaheim, District 5.I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Stephanie Arredondo 51 Public Comment From:Luke Reeder Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:19 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19, and 30! To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Luke Reeder and I am a resident of 46th district, Orange. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Luke Reeder 52 Public Comment From:Carlos Alcaraz Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:17 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Carlos Alcaraz and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Carlos Alcaraz 53 Public Comment From:Saul Rivera Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:17 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19,30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Saul Rivera and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Saul Rivera Sent from my iPhone 54 Public Comment From:Fatima Camacho Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:16 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Fatima Camacho and I am a resident of West/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Fatima Camacho 55 Public Comment From:Marina Schnittke Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:15 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Marina Schnittke. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Marina Schnittke 56 Public Comment From:Vanessa Aguilar Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:13 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Vanessa Aguilar and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Vanessa Aguilar 57 Public Comment From:Mariko Cilley Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:10 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Mari Cilley and I am a resident of Lake Forest, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Mari Cilley   58 Public Comment From:Janet Mancilla Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:09 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council:  [No on Resolution 5,19 & 30]  My name is Janet Mancilla and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater  Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health  must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents  and that must come to an end.  The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of  the most well‐funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019‐2020 budget  allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.  Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003‐2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33  people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest‐related  deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for  police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU.  WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on  surveillance technology of anti‐police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted.  We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We  DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency  regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating  programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic.  We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community  refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.    Janet Mancilla  59 Public Comment From:Sharon Almonte Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:08 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Sharon Almonte and I am a resident of District 3/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. In solidarity, Sharon Almonte (she/her/hers) MSW '19 | University of Michigan Interpersonal Practice | Mental Health M.A. Spanish '16 | Loyola University Chicago B.A. History & Hispanic Studies '14 | Lewis & Clark College E-mail: Land Acknowledgment “As we live and learn on these territories, we must keep in mind the community struggles for self- determination and colonial legacies of scholarly practices." - "I acknowledge that the land that I reside on is that of the Tongva people. I recognize that this land has been colonized and the original people's erased; therefore, it is important to remember that the land I reside on was stolen. I recognize the history and the power that this land carries and honor those ancestors who were betrayed by the colonizers." 60 Public Comment From:Daniel Corona Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:07 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5, 19 & 30 My name is [Daniel Corona Jr] and I am a resident of [Orange County/Anaheim]. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. [Daniel Corona Jr] Sent from my iPhone 61 Public Comment From:Pablo Aramburo Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:04 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Pablo Aramburo and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Pablo Aramburo 62 Public Comment From:kimberly herrera Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:04 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Kimberly and I am a resident of Orange, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Kimberly 63 Public Comment From:Marisol Sierra Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:02 PM To:Public Comment Subject:SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Marisol Sierra and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Marisol Sierra 64 Public Comment From:Rosabel Kamali Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:01 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Rosabel Kamali and I am a resident of Santa Ana. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Rosabel Kamali 65 Public Comment From:Cynthia Fonseca Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:01 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Cynthia Fonseca and I am a resident of Precinct: 02193 Anaheim California.. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Cynthia Fonseca 66 Public Comment From:Diana Herrera Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:58 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 My name is Diana Herrera and I am a resident of District 2 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Diana Herrera 67 Public Comment From:Citlalic Espinosa Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:54 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Citlalic Espinosa and I am a resident of Anaheim I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Citlalic Espinosa 68 Public Comment From:Fernando Castro Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:52 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Fernando Castro and I am a resident of Anaheim’s District 1. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Fernando Castro 69 Public Comment From:Alexandro Ordonez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:52 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5,19&30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Alexandro Ordonez and I am a resident of Anaheim California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sent from my iPhone 70 Public Comment From:ariana ortega Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:50 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No in Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Ariana Ortega and I am a resident of Anaheim . I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ariana Ortega Sent from my iPhone 71 Public Comment From:Wendy Acosta Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:46 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Resolutions 5, 19, & 30 on City Agenda To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Wendy Acosta and I am a resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Wendy Acosta-Elbandagji Sent from my iPhone 72 Public Comment From:Rachel McKeeman Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:45 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Rachel McKeeman and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Rachel McKeeman 73 Public Comment From:Daisy Robles Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:42 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council, My name is Daisy Robles and I am a resident of Anaheim/46th district. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well- funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Daisy Robles 74 Public Comment From:Crystal S Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:41 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5,19 & 30 Anaheim CouncTo the Anaheim City Council: My name is Crystal Soto and I am a resident of Anaheim I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. 75 Public Comment From:Joanne Gomez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:39 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Joanne Gomez and I am a resident of Long Beach. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Joanne Gomez 76 Public Comment From:jorge can Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:39 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jorge Can and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jorge Can 77 Public Comment From:Patrick Barradas Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:37 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 My name is Patrick Barradas and I am a resident of District 2 of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Patrick Barradas Sent from my iPhone 78 Public Comment From:Jessica Arredondo Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:36 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Jessica and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. JESSICA ARREDONDO 79 Public Comment From:Ailene Ortiz Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:36 PM To:Public Comment; Jordan Brandman Subject:SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Ailene Ortiz and I am a resident of Anaheim, district 2. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -- Ailene Ortiz University of Southern California '20 MSW | PPSC Candidate | University of California, Berkeley '18 BA Psychology | Ethnic Studies Minor | 80 Public Comment From:Yax Montano Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:35 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on resolution 5, 19 and 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Yaxaly Montano and I am a resident of Garden grove, I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sent from my iPhone 81 Public Comment From:Amar Al-Shanti Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:32 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Amar Al-Shanti and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Amar Al-Shanti Sent from my iPhone 82 Public Comment From:Ruby Denise Almonte Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:30 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Ruby Almonte and I am a resident of District 3, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ruby Almonte 83 Public Comment From:kandyce segovia Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:29 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Kandyce and I am a resident of Anaheim’s District 3. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Kandyce Segovia Piraino 84 Public Comment From:Reham Adam Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:28 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Reham Adem and I am a resident of West Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Reham Adem 85 Public Comment From:Austin Bittner Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:21 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Austin Bittner and I am a resident of Santa Ana, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Austin Bittner 86 Public Comment From:Teagan Boram Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:19 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Teagan Boram and I am a former resident of Fullerton. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Teagan Boram 87 Public Comment From:Itzel Quintana Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:20 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19, & 30 My name is Itzel Quintana and I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Itzel Quintana 88 Public Comment From:yareiry pineda Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:19 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Yareiry Pineda and I am a resident of the 46th congressional district in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Yareiry Pineda Sent from my iPhone 89 Public Comment From:Daisy Avalos Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:16 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Daisy Avalos and I am a resident of District 3 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Daisy Avalos 90 Public Comment From:Michael Ramirez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:13 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Michael Ramirez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater  Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health  must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents  and that must come to an end.  The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of  the most well‐funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019‐2020 budget  allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.  Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003‐2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33  people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest‐related  deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for  police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU.  WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on  surveillance technology of anti‐police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted.  We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We  DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency  regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating  programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic.  We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community  refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.      Michael Ramirez  91 Public Comment From:Natalie Z Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:09 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Natalie Zuk and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Natalie Zuk 92 Public Comment From:Johan Ocampo Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:09 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Johan Ocampo and I am a resident of district 2 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Johan Ocampo Sent from my iPhone 93 Public Comment From:Paige Wright Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:08 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, and 30 My name is Paige Wright and I am a resident of Placentia, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank you, Paige Wright 94 Public Comment From:Elizabeth Acosta Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:04 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Elizabeth and I am a now a resident of Aliso Viejo but I lived in Anaheim prior to this for 17 years. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Elizabeth Acosta Sent from my iPhone 95 Public Comment From:Hernandez, Jessennya Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:03 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Jessennya and I am a resident of the city of Corona. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jessennya Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone 96 Public Comment From:Noeli Barajas Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:03 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Noeli Barajas and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Noeli Barajas 97 Public Comment From:Brandy Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:59 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,9 &30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Brandy Temblador and I am a resident of Fullerton. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Brandy Temblador 98 Public Comment From:Joe Ayala Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:56 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on resolution 5, 19, & 30 My name is Joabiam Ayala and I am a resident of West District in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Joabiam Ayala 99 Public Comment From:Rosabell Janec Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:56 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, and 30 My name is Rosabell Janec and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Rosabell Janec 100 Public Comment From:Audrey Briseno Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:53 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Audrey Briseno and I am a resident of District 4 in Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Audrey Briseno 101 Public Comment From:Natalie Vega Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:51 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO ON RESOLUTION 5,19 &30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Natalie Vega and I am a resident of District 5, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Natalie Vega Sent from my iPhone 102 Public Comment From:Miriam Ramirez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:50 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19,30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Miriam Ramírez and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Miriam Ramírez 103 Public Comment From:Stephanie Valdivia Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:46 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19, & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Stephanie Valdivia and I am a resident of District 2/Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. A Concerned Resident, Stephanie Valdivia 104 Public Comment From:Jonathan Munganga Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:48 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No On Resolution 5,19 & 30 Sent from my iPhone To the Anaheim City Council: No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Jonathan Munganga and I am a resident of [AUHSD /Anaheim I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. 105 Public Comment From:Laly Ruelas Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:47 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Xitlaly Ruelas and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Xitlaly Ruelas 106 Public Comment From:Justine V. Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:47 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Justine Vibanco and I am a resident of Anaheim . I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Justine 107 Public Comment From:baigkas Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:46 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Kasibah Baig and I am a previous resident of Anaheim, California. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Kasibah Baig. 108 Public Comment From:DELANEY Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:44 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Delaney Yourstone and I am a resident of Orange. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Delaney Yourstone 109 Public Comment From:Brenda Monroy Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:44 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Brenda Monroy and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Brenda 110 Public Comment From:Ambereen Siddiqui Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:42 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Res5,19,30 the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Ambereen and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Ambereen Siddiqui 111 Public Comment From:Alessandra Vazquez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:40 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Alessandra Vazquez and I am a resident of Fullerton. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Alessandra Vazquez 112 Public Comment From:Andrew Yantani Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:33 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Andrew Yantani and I am a resident of Anaheim 92807. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. Sincerely, Andrew Yantani 113 Public Comment From:Nicole Alexandra Ortiz Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:32 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Nicole Ortiz and I am a resident of the 46th district/ Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Nicole Ortiz 114 Public Comment From:Jesse Garcia Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:32 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on 3, 19, and 30 My name is Jesse, and I in fact live in Bellflower, in your neighbor county of Los Angeles. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jesse Garcia 115 Public Comment From:Lesley Valle Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:31 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 My name is Lesley and I am a resident of Downtown Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Lesley 116 Public Comment From:Jeremy Leasure Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:53 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund the police (no on resolution 5, 19, & 30) To the Anaheim city council, My name is Jeremy Leasure and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jeremy Leasure 117 Public Comment From:David Nguyen Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:50 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Demand to NOT APPROVE Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is David, and I have been a resident of Anaheim for 21 years. I am writing this in deep concern for the health and opportunities of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, the Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Anaheim must focus ways to help our community, not hurt it. David -- David Nguyen Pronouns: He/Him/His The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file an 1 Public Comment From:Kaylie Valle Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:38 PM To:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Kaylie Valle and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Thank You for your time, Kaylie Valle 2 Public Comment From:Tallis Dawson Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:00 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Please say no on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Tallis Dawson. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Tallis Dawson 3 Public Comment From:Kimberly Mendoza Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:00 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Kimberly Mendoza and I am a resident of Anaheim (92805) . I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Kimberly Mendoza 4 Public Comment From:Nora Castro - Alumni Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 7:00 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Nora Castro and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Nora Castro 5 Public Comment From:Lesli Gonzalez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:56 PM To:Public Comment Subject:NO on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Leslie, and I am a resident of Anaheim Hills/East Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Leslie Gonzalez 6 Public Comment From:Laura R Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:55 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Laura Ramirez and I am a resident of District 3, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Laura Ramirez 7 Public Comment From:Juan Martinez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:44 PM To:Public Comment Subject:DEFUND THE POLICE I DO NOT APPROVE RESOLUTION 5, 19, & 30!!! DEFUND THE POLICE!!! Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone 8 Public Comment From:Kailynn Aguilar Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:21 PM To:Public Comment Subject:DEFUND APD To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Kailynn and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Kailynn 9 Public Comment From:Nate Perkins II Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 6:10 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Police funding To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Nathaniel Perkins and I am a resident of the Anaheim district 92801. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Nathaniel Perkins 10 Public Comment From:Abigail Martinez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 5:54 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund Anaheim police To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Abby Martinez and I am a resident of San Diego, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Abby Martinez 11 Public Comment From:bry O Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 4:29 PM To:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Bryan and I am a resident of Anaheim . I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Bryan 12 Public Comment From:C M Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:25 PM To:Public Comment Subject:SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: My name is Crystal Moreno and I am a resident of Lemoore, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Crystal Moreno 13 Public Comment From:Courtney Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:22 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Courtney Davila and I am a resident of Anaheim, 92807. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Courtney Davila 14 Public Comment From:Amy Nguyen Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 3:00 PM To:Public Comment Subject:No on Resolution 5, 19 & 30 To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Amy Nguyen and I am a resident of San Diego, but was born and raised in Santa Ana of Orange County. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Signed, Amy Nguyen 15 Public Comment From:G Santana Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:55 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Concern Regarding City Budget Allocation to Policing My name is Gregory Santana and I am a proud product of the City of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Sincerely, Gregory Santana 16 Public Comment From:vanessa sanchez Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:32 PM To:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Vanessa S. and I am a resident of DISTRICT 4 Anaheim, CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Vanessa S. 17 Public Comment From:Ash Hormaza Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:25 PM To:Public Comment Subject:To the Anaheim City Council To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Ash Hormaza and I am a resident of District 1, Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community Ash Hormaza 18 Public Comment From:Katherine Romero Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:20 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Redirection of Funds To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Katherine Romero and I am a resident of the city of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. 19 Public Comment From:Jazzmine Shipp Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 2:01 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Defund Anaheim police department Hello, My name is Jazzmine Shipp and I am a resident of Anaheim California, zip code 92801. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Regards, Jazzmine Shipp 20 Public Comment From:leyna nguyen Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:48 PM To:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Leyna Nguyen and I am a resident of Anaheim,CA. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. -Sincerely, Leyna Nguyen 21 Public Comment From:Tough Age Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:43 PM To:Public Comment Subject:anaheim council public comment to the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Jarrett Evan Samson and while I am a resident of Toronto, Ontario, Canada I have spent a not- insignificant chunk of my life in the Anaheim and Fullerton area and have many friends who call the area their home. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in the concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. Unlike my home country of Canada, the United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, you have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the communities of Anaheim, especially during a global pandemic. I am begging your elected officials to stop criminalizing Anaheim’s community members. As someone who considers the Anaheim area as such an important part of their life I stand in solidarity with the local community who refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize. Jarrett Evan Samson 22 Public Comment From:jennifer morales Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:42 PM To:Public Comment To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is [YOUR NAME] and I am a resident of [YOUR DISTRICT/CITY]. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Jennifer Morales 23 Public Comment From:lukasnorlinga Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 10:50 AM To:Public Comment Subject:Council Meeting 6/8/20 To the Anaheim City Council:   My name is Lukas and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end.   The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development.   Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU.   WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors. Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic.   We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community.   -Lukas Norling 1 Public Comment From:Carolina Castillo Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 1:30 PM To:Public Comment Subject:Great Concern Attachments:Untitled document.pdf Sent from my iPhone To the Anaheim City Council: [SUBJECT:No on Resolution 5,19 & 30] My name is Carolina Castillo and I am a resident of Anaheim. I am writing in deep concern for the health of the greater Anaheim community. It has become more than clear that a radical shift in our concept of policing and community health must take place at the local level. Police violence in Anaheim has disproportionately affected Black and Brown residents and that must come to an end. The United States does not have a national healthcare system. Instead, we have the largest military budget, and some of the most well-funded and militarized police departments in the world. Anaheim is no different: the 2019-2020 budget allocated $153.8 million to law enforcement and only $1 million to community development. Anaheim is the 9th most violent police department in the U.S. From 2003-2016, Anaheim Police Department killed 33 people during the process of arrest, and nearly 40% of them were unarmed. Since 2014, the rate of arrest-related deaths caused by Anaheim PD exceeds that of LAPD, NYPD, and San Francisco PD and is 74% higher than the average for police in California, according to a 2017 study by the ACLU. WE DEMAND that the city council not approve “Resolution 19” that would spend $700,000 dollars of taxpayer money on surveillance technology of anti-police brutality protests and that any future projects related to surveillance be halted. We also DEMAND that the council not approve "Resolution 5" that will use $100,000 to improve 10 police vehicles. We DEMAND that the city council not approve "Resolution 30" ​proclaiming the continuing existence of a local emergency regarding civil unrest, which will continue to criminalize peaceful protestors​.​ Instead, invest that money in creating programs that benefit and enrich the community especially during a global pandemic. We are calling on our elected officials to stop criminalizing our community members. We as a concerned community refuse to remain silent on the use of technology to further terrorize our community. Carolina Castillo Public Comments Distributed to the Anaheim City Council June 9, 2020 Council Meeting Updated 4:00 P.M. – Monday, June 8, 2020 1 Public Comment From:Amy Munoz Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 9:32 PM To:Public Comment Subject:DEV2017-00008 Hello,     This is in regards to the following:  Location: 1200 S Brookhurst St Anaheim CA 92804  Name: Nara Bistro    They have requested a conditional use permit number 2013‐05702A.    I am a homeowner that lives in the Brookhurst Condominium Complex located right behind Nara Bistro.     I object to their request. Any request that they have for improvement or modification, I am against.     Reason: This is a business that is open until 4am every single day. They play loud music which carries over into the  complex. The music is played until 4 am.   I have contacted Anaheim P.D. On several occasions since Nara Bistro is in violation of the noise ordinance. I finally gave  up.     Please don't allow Nara Bistro to do anything that'll attract more business (and rowdiness). I'm all for Nara Bistro  installing some kind of sound proofing or turning off their music at a decent hour.     Thank you for your time.    Amy Munoz            Sent from my iPhone  1 Public Comment From:buddyfitz Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:30 PM To:Public Comment Cc:mgoodman@aclusocal.org Subject:Public Comment for June 9 Meeting and Each Public Hearings Attachments:Anaheim Comments.pdf Attached is the comment for the June 9 meeting and each public hearing. Please note that you can not have a legal Public Hearing where the Public are not allow to attend and speak by phone or in person. They will not be Public Hearings if the only public comments must be made in writing prior to the Hearings. Anaheim Council Public Comments for June 912020, And Each Public Hearing Comment for Agenda Items # 32,33,34,35, & 36 VIA EMAIL TO: publiccomment@anaheim.net FROM: Home Owners Maintaining our Environment ,l|'* It is outrageous to have Pubtic Hearings without first allowing pubtic speakers the rights to there to listen to the opening hearing presentatironsr glq to their public comments. \ilithout the public allowed to speak by phone o" io person, the Public Hearings would not be legal. Having the Public Hearing Comments made in writing prior to the Anaheim council meeting is ridicules. At the start of a legitimate Public Hearingo the moving party is allowed to give argument before the Public Comments. Based on those opening arguments, if given or not, indications for comments are made if the matter is to benefit the City of Anaheim, or only to benefit the moving parties and the financial wealth* of the council members. At the beginning of a legitimate Public Hearing, each voting council member must disclosed by law to the pubtic if they had prior contact and discussions with the moving party concerning the matter of.the Public Hearing. This state law was made to alert the public of the possibilities of secret future bribes, kickbacks, or other deals being made to entice a favorable vote from a council member. When all the council members are able to state they did not meet with any of the moving parties, the public can be assured that the hearing matter should be taken as a whole to benefit the City of Anaheim. That would make taking the time to speak at a Public Hearing almost unnecessary. Therefore. Comments must be made during the Hearins. not prior in writing. Another indication of corruption is why there were five Pubtic Hearings scheduled all at once for this possible last council meeting where the public are not allowed to speak in person. These five Public Hearings should be continued to the council meeting on June 23,2020 or later, that may be open to the public. *Past Anaheim councilmembers had questionable increases in their personal wealth from serving on the Anaheim City Council. Examples are Tom Tait with his promoting the 1998 $500 million rebate of our tax money to Disneyland for California Adventureo and the current mayor in the 2012 hotel rebate deal of about $156 million for his fellow countryman, Mr. Patel. Public Comments Distributed to the Anaheim City Council June 9, 2020 Council Meeting Updated 4:00 P.M. – Wednesday, June 10, 2020 1 Jennifer L. Hall From:Lauren Torres Sent:Thursday, June 4, 2020 4:44 PM To:'James O'Malley'; 'James O'Malley' Cc:Theresa Bass; Jennifer L. Hall; Theresa Bass; Jennifer L. Hall Subject:RE: Signed Letter with Presentation Agenda Item #34 Attachments:Shopoff Lincoln At Loara Letter and Presentation.pdf Hello James, I am confirming receipt of the attached letter, on behalf of the Mayor and Council. Best, Lauren Torres Senior Secretary Office of the Mayor and City Council ltorres@anaheim.net 714-765-4393 From: James O'Malley <JOMalley@shopoff.com> Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2020 4:12 PM To: Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net> Cc: lkriing@ahaheim.net; Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; sfaessel@anheim.net; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; toniel@anaheim.net; Gregory Garcia <GGarcia@anaheim.net>; Loretta Day <LDay@anaheim.net>; Joanne Hwang <JHwang@anaheim.net>; Michael Gregg <MGregg@shopoff.com> Subject: FW: Signed Letter with Presentation Agenda Item #34 Mayor Sidhu and City Council, Please see attached letter and a short presentation pursuant to our application coming before you this June 9, 2020. The item in reference is #34 on the City Council Agenda for that evening. We look forward to bringing this fantastic community to your great City. James O’Malley LINCOLN CITY OF ANAHEIM AT EUCLID REALTYINVESTMENTS REALTYINVESTMENTS CITY COUNCIL HEARING June 9th EE||PP||DD SSoolluuttiioonnss,, IInncc.. AERIAL IMAGELINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM Disneyland Park Chapman University Honda Center Loara Elementary School Brookhurst Junior High School Adventure City Disney California Adventure Park Knott’s Berry Farm Knott’s Soak City Servite High School Anaheim High School The Outlets At Orange The Orange Circle Cal State University Fullerton Angel Stadium of Anaheim LINCOLN CITY OF ANAHEIM AT EUCLID VIEW 7 18034 2019-04-01 VIEW 1 VIEW 3 VIEW 5 VIEW 2 VIEW 4 VIEW 6 LINCOLN AT EUCLID Site Photos KEY MAP I-5 FREEWAY SITE LOCATION LO A R A S T RA I L L I N E E U C L I D S T R E E T LINCOLN AVE125 64 7 3 VIEW 7 18034 2019-04-01 VIEW 1 VIEW 3 VIEW 5 VIEW 2 VIEW 4 VIEW 6 LINCOLN AT EUCLID Site Photos KEY MAP I-5 F R E E W A Y SITE LOCATION LO A R A S T RA I L L I N E E U C L I D S T R E E T LINCOLN AVE125 64 7 3 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONSLINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM VIEW 7 18034 2019-04-01 VIEW 1 VIEW 3 VIEW 5 VIEW 2 VIEW 4 VIEW 6 LINCOLN AT EUCLID Site Photos KEY MAP I-5 F R E E W A Y SITE LOCATION LO A R A S T RA I L L I N E E U C L I D S T R E E T LINCOLN AVE125 64 7 3 VIEW 7 18034 2019-04-01 VIEW 1 VIEW 3 VIEW 5 VIEW 2 VIEW 4 VIEW 6 LINCOLN AT EUCLID Site Photos KEY MAP I-5 F R E E W A Y SITE LOCATION LO A R A S T RA I L L I N E E U C L I D S T R E E T LINCOLN AVE125 64 7 3 VIEW 7 18034 2019-04-01 VIEW 1 VIEW 3 VIEW 5 VIEW 2 VIEW 4 VIEW 6 LINCOLN AT EUCLID Site Photos KEY MAP I-5 F R E E W A Y SITE LOCATION LO A R A S T RA I L L I N E E U C L I D S T R E E T LINCOLN AVE125 64 7 3 VIEW 7 18034 2019-04-01 VIEW 1 VIEW 3 VIEW 5 VIEW 2 VIEW 4 VIEW 6 LINCOLN AT EUCLID Site Photos KEY MAP I-5 F R E E W A Y SITE LOCATION LO A R A S T RA I L L I N E E U C L I D S T R E E T LINCOLN AVE125 64 7 3 VIEW 7 18034 2019-04-01 VIEW 1 VIEW 3 VIEW 5 VIEW 2 VIEW 4 VIEW 6 LINCOLN AT EUCLID Site Photos KEY MAP I-5 F R E E W A Y SITE LOCATION LO A R A S T RA I L L I N E E U C L I D S T R E E T LINCOLN AVE125 64 7 3 VIEW 7 18034 2019-04-01 VIEW 1 VIEW 3 VIEW 5 VIEW 2 VIEW 4 VIEW 6 LINCOLN AT EUCLID Site Photos KEY MAP I-5 F R E E W A Y SITE LOCATION LO A R A S T RA I L L I N E E U C L I D S T R E E T LINCOLN AVE125 64 7 3 1 2 3 4 5 67 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 6/8/2018 . http://apps.spatialstream.com/production/dashboard/8/9/0/CurrentBuild/html/Reporting.html 1/2 © 2018 Digital Map Products. All rights reserved. 312 feet ASSEMBLAGE ANAHEIM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ANASTASI DEVELOPMENT CO LLC GRECO, LAWRENCE A ANAHEIM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT GOODMAN, LOUIS NELSON, GLEN R ANASTASI DEVELOPMENT CO LLC ANAHEIM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REDFOX CAMERA & AUDIO VISUAL INC ROBERT K WONG & MAY L WONG FAMILY LTD PTNSHP III LINCOLN AT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM 76 2 2 3 4 5 6 9 10 7 8 1 4 853 1 9 10 SITE PLANLINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM SITE SUMMARY TOTAL SITE ACREAGE 7.17 ACRES GROSS RESIDENTIAL ACREAGE 7.05 ACRES (EXCLUDING .12 ACRE NW SLOPE AREA) NET SITE ACREAGE 4.95 ACRES NET (EXCLUDES PUBLIC AND PRIVATE STREETS, AND ALLEYS NEEDED FOR CIRCULATION SERVICES) TOTAL DWELLING UNITS 115 UNITS GROSS DENSITY 16.3 DU/AC SITE COVERAGE 84,970S.F. = 28% (% OF SITE COVERED BY BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES - INCLUDES 480 S.F. FOR POOL BUILDING) REC CLUB DOG PARK POCKET PARK POCKET PARK FIRE PIT/LOUNGE AREA COURTYARD PARK GATED ENTRY OPEN SPACELINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM MHMH MH MH MH P P PP P PPP P MH MH MH MH MH MH MH MHMHMH MHMH MH MH MH MH MHMH P PP P P P P P MH PPPPPPPPPPPPP MH Ground Obscured Piles Piles Ground Obscured MH P L A N 4 P L A N 3 P L A N 3 PLA N 4 PLA N 3 PLA N 3 4 N A L P PLAN 4PLAN 3PLAN 3 P L A N 4 P L A N 3 P L A N 3 P L A N 4 P L A N 3 P L A N 4 P L A N 3 P L A N 3 P L A N 4 P L A N 4 P L A N 3 P L A N 4 P L A N 3 P L A N 3 P L A N 4 P L A N 3 4 N A L P P L A N 4 P L A N 3 P L A N 3 P L A N 4 P L A N 3 P L A N 4 PL A N 4 P L A N 4 PL A N 3 P L A N 3 P L A N 4 PLA N 4 P L A N 3 P L A N 3 PLA N 3 P L A N 4 PLA N 4 P L A N 3 PLA N 3 PLAN 4 P L A N 4 PLAN 3 PLAN 3 P L A N 3 P L A N 4 PLAN 4 P L A N 3 PLA N 3 P L A N 4 PLAN 4 P L A N 3 PLAN 3 4 N A L P 4 N A L P 3 N A L P 3 N A L P 4 N A L P 4 N A L P 3 N A L P 3 N A L P 4 N A L P 4 N A L P 3 N A L P 3 N A L P PL A N 3 PLAN 4 P L A N 4 PLAN 3 PLAN 3 P L A N 3 PLAN 4 P L A N 4 PLAN 3 P L A N 3 P L A N 4 PLAN 4 P L A N 3 PLAN 3 Limit of Work Limit of Work Limi t o f W o r k Lim i t o f W o r k Li m i t o f W o r k Li m i t o f W o r k Lim i t o f W o r k T T L I N C O L N A V E. E U C L I D S T . SO U T H E R N P A C I F I C R A I L R O A D T Blg 103 Blg 104 Blg 208 Blg 207 Blg 206Blg 205 Blg 507 Blg 404 Blg 506 Blg 505 Blg 204 Blg 503 Blg 504 Blg 403Blg 203 Blg 202 Blg 304Blg 501 Blg 402 Blg 502 Blg 401 Blg 201 Blg 303 Blg 302 Blg 102 Blg 101 Blg 301 ADA ADA ADA ADA ADA ADA ADA ADA ADA ADA ADA ADA COURTYARD PARKLINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM Project No.: SRI06 Oct. 25, 2019 5th City Submittal_TTMSchematic Open Space - Courtyard Park & East Pocket Park KEYMAP (N.T.S.) 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Plan View - 'Courtyard Park' 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Plan View - 'East Pocket Park' KEYMAP (N.T.S.) *Images, herein, are conceptualrepresentatives of the proposed elements. Metal Bench Custom BBQ island with overhead shade structure and seating area. Community metal bench seating with turf area. Custom BBQ island with overhead shade structure and seating area. Community metal bench seating with turf area. Turf area Bench seating Project No.: SRI06 Oct. 25, 2019 5th City Submittal_TTMSchematic Open Space - Courtyard Park & East Pocket Park KEYMAP (N.T.S.) 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 010'5' Plan View - 'Courtyard Park' 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Plan View - 'East Pocket Park' KEYMAP (N.T.S.) *Images, herein, are conceptual representatives of the proposed elements. Metal Bench Custom BBQ island with overhead shade structure and seating area. Community metal bench seating with turf area. Custom BBQ island with overhead shade structure and seating area. Community metal bench seating with turf area. Turf area Bench seating POCKET PARKLINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM Project No.: SRI06 Oct. 25, 2019 5th City Submittal_TTMSchematic Open Space - Courtyard Park & East Pocket Park KEYMAP (N.T.S.) 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 010'5' Plan View - 'Courtyard Park' 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Plan View - 'East Pocket Park' KEYMAP (N.T.S.) *Images, herein, are conceptual representatives of the proposed elements. Metal Bench Custom BBQ island with overhead shade structure and seating area. Community metal bench seating with turf area. Custom BBQ island with overhead shade structure and seating area. Community metal bench seating with turf area. Turf area Bench seating Project No.: SRI06 Oct. 25, 2019 5th City Submittal_TTMSchematic Open Space - Courtyard Park & East Pocket Park KEYMAP (N.T.S.) 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Plan View - 'Courtyard Park' 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Plan View - 'East Pocket Park' KEYMAP (N.T.S.) *Images, herein, are conceptual representatives of the proposed elements. Metal Bench Custom BBQ island with overhead shade structure and seating area. Community metal bench seating with turf area. Custom BBQ island with overhead shade structure and seating area. Community metal bench seating with turf area. Turf area Bench seating Project No.: SRI06 Oct. 25, 2019 5th City Submittal_TTMSchematic Open Space - Dog Park & Fire Pit Lounge KEYMAP (N.T.S.) 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Plan View - 'Dog Park' Fire pit with Adirondacks Metal bench seating with trash receptacle and bike rack 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Plan View - 'Fire Pit -Lounge Area' Dog park with lawn and DG areas Game lawn Fire pit with Adirondacks Dog park Dog park Corn hole boards on lawn KEYMAP (N.T.S.)*Images, herein, are conceptual representatives of the proposed elements. Metal Bench DOG PARKLINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM Project No.: SRI06 Oct. 25, 2019 5th City Submittal_TTMSchematic Open Space - Dog Park & Fire Pit Lounge KEYMAP (N.T.S.) 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Plan View - 'Dog Park' Fire pit with Adirondacks Metal bench seating with trash receptacle and bike rack 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Plan View - 'Fire Pit -Lounge Area' Dog park with lawn and DG areas Game lawn Fire pit with Adirondacks Dog park Dog park Corn hole boards on lawn KEYMAP (N.T.S.)*Images, herein, are conceptual representatives of the proposed elements. Metal Bench Project No.: SRI06 Oct. 25, 2019 5th City Submittal_TTMSchematic Open Space - Dog Park & Fire Pit Lounge KEYMAP (N.T.S.) 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Plan View - 'Dog Park' Fire pit with Adirondacks Metal bench seating with trash receptacle and bike rack 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Plan View - 'Fire Pit -Lounge Area' Dog park with lawn and DG areas Game lawn Fire pit with Adirondacks Dog park Dog park Corn hole boards on lawn KEYMAP (N.T.S.)*Images, herein, are conceptual representatives of the proposed elements. Metal Bench Project No.: SRI06 Oct. 25, 2019 5th City Submittal_TTMSchematic Open Space - Dog Park & Fire Pit Lounge KEYMAP (N.T.S.) 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Plan View - 'Dog Park' Fire pit with Adirondacks Metal bench seating with trash receptacle and bike rack 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Plan View - 'Fire Pit -Lounge Area' Dog park with lawn and DG areas Game lawn Fire pit with Adirondacks Dog park Dog park Corn hole boards on lawn KEYMAP (N.T.S.)*Images, herein, are conceptual representatives of the proposed elements. Metal Bench FIRE PIT/LOUNGE AREALINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM Fire pit with Adirondacks Project No.: SRI06 Oct. 25, 2019 5th City Submittal_TTMSchematic Open Space - Dog Park & Fire Pit Lounge KEYMAP (N.T.S.) 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 010'5' Plan View - 'Dog Park' Fire pit with Adirondacks Metal bench seating with trash receptacle and bike rack 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Plan View - 'Fire Pit -Lounge Area' Dog park with lawn and DG areas Game lawn Fire pit with Adirondacks Dog park Dog park Corn hole boards on lawn KEYMAP (N.T.S.)*Images, herein, are conceptual representatives of the proposed elements. Metal Bench REC CLUBLINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM Project No.: SRI06 Oct. 25, 2019 5th City Submittal_TTMSchematic Open Space Enlargement - Rec. Club KEYMAP (N.T.S.) 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Chaise Lounge Private Cabanas with Decorative accent Wall Picnic Tables Custom BBQ island with bar seating Pool with ADA Chair Lift Custom BBQ island with bar seating Private Cabanas with Decorative accent Wall Pool with ADA Chair Lift Metal picnic table-ADA accessible Metal trash receptacle Bike rack Lounge seating Chaise lounge *Images, herein, are conceptualrepresentatives of the proposed elements. *Images, herein, are conceptual representatives of the proposed elements. Project No.: SRI06 Oct. 25, 2019 5th City Submittal_TTMSchematic Open Space Enlargement - Rec. Club KEYMAP (N.T.S.) 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Chaise Lounge Private Cabanas with Decorative accent Wall Picnic Tables Custom BBQ island with bar seating Pool with ADA Chair Lift Custom BBQ island with bar seating Private Cabanas with Decorative accent Wall Pool with ADA Chair Lift Metal picnic table-ADA accessibleMetal trash receptacle Bike rack Lounge seating Chaise lounge *Images, herein, are conceptual representatives of the proposed elements. *Images, herein, are conceptualrepresentatives of the proposed elements. Project No.: SRI06 Oct. 25, 2019 5th City Submittal_TTMSchematic Open Space Enlargement - Rec. Club KEYMAP (N.T.S.) 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Chaise Lounge Private Cabanas with Decorative accent Wall Picnic Tables Custom BBQ island with bar seating Pool with ADA Chair Lift Custom BBQ island with bar seating Private Cabanas with Decorative accent Wall Pool with ADA Chair Lift Metal picnic table-ADA accessibleMetal trash receptacle Bike rack Lounge seating Chaise lounge *Images, herein, are conceptualrepresentatives of the proposed elements. *Images, herein, are conceptualrepresentatives of the proposed elements. Project No.: SRI06 Oct. 25, 2019 5th City Submittal_TTMSchematic Open Space Enlargement - Rec. Club KEYMAP (N.T.S.) 20' Scale: 1" = 10'-0" 0 10'5' Chaise Lounge Private Cabanas with Decorative accent Wall Picnic Tables Custom BBQ island with bar seating Pool with ADA Chair Lift Custom BBQ island with bar seating Private Cabanas with Decorative accent Wall Pool with ADA Chair Lift Metal picnic table-ADA accessibleMetal trash receptacle Bike rack Lounge seating Chaise lounge *Images, herein, are conceptual representatives of the proposed elements. *Images, herein, are conceptual representatives of the proposed elements. ENTRY CONFIGURATIONLINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM Li m i t o f W o r k W. L I N C O L N A V E. ARCHITECTURE DESIGN THEMELINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM L I N C O L N A N A H E I M , C A A-06A T E U C L I D ELEVATIONS - BUILDING 100 5TH SUBMITTAL Dec 4, 2019 F R O N T E L E V A T I O N L E F T E L E V A T I O N R I G H T E L E V A T I O N R E A R E L E V A T I O N 9' 1 " 9' 1 " 9' 1 " 35 ' 6 " F.F. T.P.F.F. T.P.F.F. T.P. MAX BLDG HEIGHT SINGLE HUNG VINYLWINDOW, BRONZE (TYP) PAINTED METAL RAILING (TYP) STUCCO STUCCO HORIZONTAL SIDING VINYL SLIDING DOOR HORIZONTAL SIDING FIXED PANE VINYL WINDOW, BRONZE (TYP) 0 4 8 16 SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" METAL AWNING TYPRECESSED WINDOWS RECESSED WINDOWS RECESSED WINDOWS RECESSED WINDOWS L I N C O L N A N A H E I M , C A A-06A T E U C L I D ELEVATIONS - BUILDING 100 5TH SUBMITTAL Dec 4, 2019 F R O N T E L E V A T I O N L E F T E L E V A T I O N R I G H T E L E V A T I O N R E A R E L E V A T I O N 9' 1 " 9' 1 " 9' 1 " 35 ' 6 " F.F. T.P.F.F. T.P.F.F. T.P. MAX BLDG HEIGHT SINGLE HUNG VINYL WINDOW, BRONZE (TYP) PAINTED METAL RAILING (TYP) STUCCO STUCCO HORIZONTAL SIDING VINYL SLIDING DOOR HORIZONTAL SIDING FIXED PANE VINYL WINDOW, BRONZE (TYP) 0 4 8 16 SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" METAL AWNING TYPRECESSED WINDOWS RECESSED WINDOWS RECESSED WINDOWS RECESSED WINDOWS L I N C O L N A N A H E I M , C A A-07A T E U C L I D BUILDING SECTIONS - BUILDING 100 5TH SUBMITTAL Dec 4, 2019 BUILDING SECTION A BUILDING SECTION B PLAN 3 THIRD FOOR PLAN 3 ROOF DECK PLAN 3 SECOND FOOR PLAN 3 FIRST FOOR PLAN 3 THIRD FOOR PLAN 3 ROOF DECK PLAN 3 SECOND FOOR PLAN 3 FIRST FOOR DECK PATIO AC GARAGE BUILDING PERSPECTIVE 9' 1" 9' 1" 9' 1" 3' 6" F.F. T.P. F.F. T.P. F.F. T.P. F.F. 35' 6 1/2"+/- 0 4 8 16 SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" LI N E O F S I G H T PLAN 1X THIRD FOOR PLAN 1X ROOF DECK PLAN 1X SECOND FOOR PLAN 1X FIRST FOOR PLAN 1X GARAGE FRONT BUILDING PERSPECTIVE FRONT BUILDING PERSPECTIVE FRONT ELEVATION FRONT ELEVATION REAR ELEVATION REAR ELEVATIONL I N C O L N A N A H E I M , C A A-18A T E U C L I D ELEVATIONS - BUILDING 500 5TH SUBMITTAL Dec 4, 2019 F R O N T E L E V A T I O N L E F T E L E V A T I O N R I G H T E L E V A T I O N R E A R E L E V A T I O N 9' 1 " 9' 1 " 9' 1 " 35 ' 6 " F.F. T.P.F.F. T.P.F.F. T.P. MAX BLDG HEIGHT HORIZONTAL SIDING SINGLE HUNG VINYLWINDOW, BRONZE (TYP)FIXED PANE VINYL WINDOW, BRONZE (TYP) STUCCO HORIZONTAL SIDING HORIZONTAL SIDINGSTUCCO VINYL SLIDING DOOR STUCCO PAINTED METALRAILING (TYP) 0 4 8 16 SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" METAL AWNING TYPRECESSED WINDOWS STUCCORECESSED WINDOWS RECESSED WINDOWSRECESSED WINDOWS L I N C O L N A N A H E I M , C A A-18A T E U C L I D ELEVATIONS - BUILDING 500 5TH SUBMITTAL Dec 4, 2019 F R O N T E L E V A T I O N L E F T E L E V A T I O N R I G H T E L E V A T I O N R E A R E L E V A T I O N 9' 1 " 9' 1 " 9' 1 " 35 ' 6 " F.F. T.P.F.F. T.P.F.F. T.P. MAX BLDG HEIGHT HORIZONTAL SIDING SINGLE HUNG VINYLWINDOW, BRONZE (TYP)FIXED PANE VINYL WINDOW, BRONZE (TYP) STUCCO HORIZONTAL SIDING HORIZONTAL SIDINGSTUCCO VINYL SLIDING DOOR STUCCO PAINTED METALRAILING (TYP) 0 4 8 16 SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" METAL AWNING TYPRECESSED WINDOWS STUCCORECESSED WINDOWS RECESSED WINDOWSRECESSED WINDOWS L I N C O L N A N A H E I M , C A A-19A T E U C L I D BUILDING SECTIONS - BUILDING 500 5TH SUBMITTAL Dec 4, 2019 BUILDING SECTION A BUILDING SECTION B PLAN 2THIRD FOORPLAN 2ROOF DECKPLAN 2 SECOND FOOR PLAN 2 FIRST FOOR PLAN 3THIRD FOORPLAN 3ROOF DECKPLAN 3 SECOND FOOR PLAN 3 FIRST FOOR PLAN 3THIRD FOORPLAN 3ROOF DECKPLAN 3 SECOND FOOR PLAN 3 FIRST FOOR DECK PATIO AC GARAGE BUILDING PERSPECTIVE PLAN 2THIRD FOORPLAN 2ROOF DECKPLAN 2 SECOND FOOR PLAN 2 FIRST FOOR 0 4 8 16 SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" LINE OF SIGHTPLAN 1XTHIRD FOORPLAN 1XROOF DECKPLAN 1X SECOND FOOR PLAN 1X FIRST FOOR PLAN 1X GARAGE9' 1" 9' 1"9' 1"3' 6" F.F. T.P. F.F. T.P.F.F.T.P.F.F.35' 6 1/2"+/- COLORS AND MATERIALSLINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM L I N C O L N A N A H E I M , C A A-30A T E U C L I D COLORS AND MATERIALS 5TH SUBMITTAL Dec 4, 2019 COLOR SCHEME A COLOR SCHEME B COLOR SCHEME C COLOR SCHEME D STUCCO 1 FADED GRAY PAINTED HORIZONTAL SIDING CASTLE GREY STUCCO 2 TARNISHED SILVER PAINTED METAL LUGHTHOUSE ENTRY DOORS GILDED LEMON STUCCO 1 FADED GRAY PAINTED HORIZONTAL SIDING CASTLE GREY STUCCO 2 STORMY BLUE PAINTED METAL LIGHTHOUSE ENTRY DOORS ARIZONA SKY STUCCO 1 WHITE SAND PAINTED HORIZONTAL SIDING HICKORY STUCCO 2 STEELY MOSS PAINTED METAL ANTIQUE WHITE ENTRY DOORS VITAMIN SEA STUCCO 1 WHITE SAND PAINTED HORIZONTAL SIDING HICKORY STUCCO 2 SUBTLE CHERRY PAINTED METAL ANTIQUE WHITE ENTRY DOORS BLUE MONDAY DIVERSITYLINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM L I N C O L N A N A H E I M , C A A-31A T E U C L I D PAINT SCHEME DISTRIBUTION 5TH SUBMITTAL Dec 4, 2019 PAINT SCHEME SUMMARY PAINT SCHEME A B C D BLDG 101 X BLDG 102 X BLDG 103 X BLDG 104 X BLDG 201 X BLDG 202 X BLDG 203 X BLDG 204 X BLDG 205 X BLDG 206 X BLDG 207 X BLDG 208 X BLDG 301 X BLDG 302 X BLDG 303 X BLDG 304 X BLDG 401 X BLDG 402 X BLDG 403 X BLDG 404 X BLDG 501 X BLDG 502 X BLDG 503 X BLDG 504 X BLDG 505 X BLDG 506 X BLDG 507 X BLDG 301 BLDG 101 BLDG 302 BLDG 102 BLDG 103 BLDG 104 BLDG 303 BLDG 201 BLDG 304 BLDG 206BLDG 205 BLDG 501 BLDG 402 BLDG 202 BLDG 504 BLDG 204 BLDG 503 BLDG 505 BLDG 506 BLDG 404 BLDG 507 BLDG 207 BLDG 208 BLDG 401 BLDG 203 BLDG 403 SCHEME A SCHEME B SCHEME C SCHEME D KEY BLDG 502 SCHEME A SCHEME C SCHEME B SCHEME D Legend Garaged Spaces (230) Driveway Spaces (24) Guest Spaces(29) Unassigned Spaces (64) Feb 13, 2019 L I N C O L N A N A H E I M , C A A-01A T E U C L I D SHEET TITLE Scale: 1”=50’-0” 0 25 50 10 0 March 12, 2020 PARKING EXHIBIT LINCOLN AVE EU C L I D S T Total Parking Spaces Required: 323 Spaces Total Parking Spaces Provided: 347 Spaces 24 MORE SPACES THAN REQUIRED PARKING SUMMARYLINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM Total Parking Spaces Required: 323 Spaces Total Parking Spaces Provided: 347 Spaces 24 More Spaces Than Required BEFORE & AFTERLINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM Before After BEFORE & AFTERLINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM Before After BEFORE & AFTERLINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM Before After COMMUNITY OUTREACHLINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM The proposed project would re d e v e l o p approximately 7 acres of land w i t h 1 1 5 n e w , for-sale, townhomes. This com m u n i t y w i l l provide multiple open space a m e n i t i e s including a club room with a po o l , c a b a n a s and a barbeque area, a pet fri e n d l y d o g and game park, and fire pit an d b a r b e q u e areas for gatherings. PROJECT BENEFITS The development will increase property values, reduce crime, attract businesses and improve the neighborhood image. The project assists the beautifi c a t i o n of the block through street trees, landscaping and streetscape up g r a d e s along Lincoln Ave. and Euclid St. The project will provide the City of Anaheim additional supply of attainable housing for move-up buyers. The project will contribute to neighborhood schools and park through developer impact fees totaling approximately $2MM. The project will also include offsite i m p r o v e m e n t s on Lincoln Avenue and Euclid Stre e t c o n s i s t i n g of new sidewalk, landscaping an d m e d i a n improvements. Overall this will e n h a n c e t h e neighborhood by converting dil a p i d a t e d commercial/industrial uses into a t t a i n a b l e residential homes which the City of A n a h e i m can desperately use. View Looking East on N. Euclid S t r e e t View Looking West on W. Linc o l n A v e n u e EXISTING EXISTING PROPOSED PROPOSED LINCOLN AT EUCLID LINCOLN CITY OF ANAHE I M AT EUCLID 5 FREEWAY LINCOLN AVE E U C L I D S T REALTY INVESTMENTS REALTY INVESTMENTS IN SUMMARY : PROJECT BENEFITSLINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM This new community will provide students and fees to the existing public school system and jobs as well. The development will increase property values, reduce crime, attract businesses and improve the neighborhood image. The project assists the beautification of the block through street trees, landscaping and streetscape upgrades along Lincoln Ave. and Euclid St. The project will provide the City of Anaheim additional supply of attainable housing. The project will contribute to neighborhood schools and park through developer impact fees totaling approximately $2MM. PLANNING COMMISSION FEEDBACKLINCOLNAT EUCLID CITY OF ANAHEIM “This area was in need of improvements!” – NATALIE MEEKS “I think this is going to be a boon!” – DAVE VADODARIA “If you are restoring something you do the worst first and this is one of the worst areas we have in Anaheim, so this is going to be huge.” – JOHN ARMSTRONG “This is a blighted area of Anaheim and this is something that will hopefully be a kickstart to improving that area. With it’s location next to the shopping center, it’s going to be a great place for millennials that would like to be walking instead of driving their cars. So I’m definitely 100% behind this.” – KIMBERLY KEYS, Chairperson Pre-Tempore “I love this project! This is a sad state of affairs location and is in dire need of a face lift and I’m just hoping that this is the impetus to take the facelift all the way down to the 5 freeway on Lincoln.” – MICHELLE LIEBERMAN, Chairperson LINCOLN CITY OF ANAHEIM AT EUCLID THANK YOU 1 Public Comment From:buddyfitz Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:30 PM To:Public Comment Cc:mgoodman@aclusocal.org Subject:Public Comment for June 9 Meeting and Each Public Hearings Attachments:Anaheim Comments.pdf Attached is the comment for the June 9 meeting and each public hearing. Please note that you can not have a legal Public Hearing where the Public are not allow to attend and speak by phone or in person. They will not be Public Hearings if the only public comments must be made in writing prior to the Hearings. Anaheim Council Public Comments for June 912020, And Each Public Hearing Comment for Agenda Items # 32,33,34,35, & 36 VIA EMAIL TO: publiccomment@anaheim.net FROM: Home Owners Maintaining our Environment ,l|'* It is outrageous to have Pubtic Hearings without first allowing pubtic speakers the rights to there to listen to the opening hearing presentatironsr glq to their public comments. \ilithout the public allowed to speak by phone o" io person, the Public Hearings would not be legal. Having the Public Hearing Comments made in writing prior to the Anaheim council meeting is ridicules. At the start of a legitimate Public Hearingo the moving party is allowed to give argument before the Public Comments. Based on those opening arguments, if given or not, indications for comments are made if the matter is to benefit the City of Anaheim, or only to benefit the moving parties and the financial wealth* of the council members. At the beginning of a legitimate Public Hearing, each voting council member must disclosed by law to the pubtic if they had prior contact and discussions with the moving party concerning the matter of.the Public Hearing. This state law was made to alert the public of the possibilities of secret future bribes, kickbacks, or other deals being made to entice a favorable vote from a council member. When all the council members are able to state they did not meet with any of the moving parties, the public can be assured that the hearing matter should be taken as a whole to benefit the City of Anaheim. That would make taking the time to speak at a Public Hearing almost unnecessary. Therefore. Comments must be made during the Hearins. not prior in writing. Another indication of corruption is why there were five Pubtic Hearings scheduled all at once for this possible last council meeting where the public are not allowed to speak in person. These five Public Hearings should be continued to the council meeting on June 23,2020 or later, that may be open to the public. *Past Anaheim councilmembers had questionable increases in their personal wealth from serving on the Anaheim City Council. Examples are Tom Tait with his promoting the 1998 $500 million rebate of our tax money to Disneyland for California Adventureo and the current mayor in the 2012 hotel rebate deal of about $156 million for his fellow countryman, Mr. Patel. 1 Jennifer L. Hall From:Joanne Hwang Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 4:18 PM To:Jennifer L. Hall Subject:FW: City Council Meeting - Item 33, June 9 2020 Attachments:BIAOC Comments - Item 33 June 9 2020 Council Meeting .pdf Hello Jennifer, This is a letter submitted for item #33 (Lincoln @ Euclid Townhomes) for 6/9 CC. Thanks! Sincerely, Joanne Hwang, AICP Senior Planner Planning & Building Department | City of Anaheim *I'm currently telecommuting; e-mail is the best way to reach me at this time* California’s current directive to stay at home, except for essential exceptions, is in effect until further notice. Anaheim City Hall and other City facilities are currently closed to the public. The City is following the State’s directive and will continue to provide updates on the public reopening of City Hall, libraries, community centers and other places as they come available. During this closure, Anaheim staff will continue to provide service to our residents and businesses. Please click here or visit https://www.anaheim.net/5464/City-Hall-Services-During-Coronavirus for City Hall services in this unique time. From: Steve La Motte <slamotte@biasc.org> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2020 4:17 PM To: Joanne Hwang <JHwang@anaheim.net> Subject: City Council Meeting - Item 33, June 9 2020 Please see the attached letter for item Number 33 on Tuesday City Council meeting Agenda. Thank you, Steve LaMotte BIAOC Mayor Harry Sidhu City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 Re: Agenda Item #33 - MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2019-00527 Dear Mayor and Council: On behalf of our membership, I write to express our support for the housing proposed at the intersection of Euclid and Lincoln. The Building Industry Association of Southern California, Orange County Chapter (BIA/OC) is a non-profit trade association of over 1,100 member companies employing over 100,000 people affiliated with the home building industry. Long before COVID-19, we in California were suffering from a Housing Supply Crisis. Recent orders to shelter in your homes have highlighted and exacerbated the crushing need for housing to match demand in California. Thus, it is with great optimism we see the City of Anaheim again leading the way through this difficult time with the consideration of a 115-unit subdivision at Lincoln and Euclid. This site is located within an area that consists of a mixture of uses, which includes a variety of commercial uses and a few light industrial uses, along with multi-family residential uses (apartments), which has Medium Residential land use designation with a RM-4 zoning designation. As such, City Staff believes that the requested Mid Density Residential land use designation would be both compatible and complementary to the surrounding land uses. We concur with the findings of Staff and encourage you to support this important addition to Anaheim’s housing supply. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration. Respectfully, Steven C. LaMotte Chapter Executive Officer PRESIDENT SUNTI KUMJIM MBK RENTAL LIVING VICE PRESIDENT ERIC NELSON TRUMARK HOMES TREASURER BROOKE DOI SHEA HOMES SECRETARY NICOLE MURRAY TAYLOR MORRISON IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT RICK WOOD TRADE CONTRACTOR V.P. ALAN BOUDREAU BOUDREAU PIPELINE CORPORATION ASSOCIATE VICE PRESIDENT MARK HIMMELSTEIN NEWMEYER & DILLION, LLP MEMBER-AT-LARGE PETER VANEK INTEGRAL COMMUNITIES MEMBER-AT-LARGE SEAN MATSLER COX CASTLE & NICHOLSON, LLP EXECUTIVE OFFICER STEVE LA MOTTE June 5, 2020 1 Jennifer L. Hall From:Joanne Hwang Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 8:12 AM To:Jennifer L. Hall Subject:FW: SUPPORT for Townhomes Euclid at Lincoln Attachments:Support for Lincoln Euclid Townhomes Anaheim 6-8-20 P4HOC.pdf Hello Jennifer, FYI – this letter was sent to the City Council members for Item #33 on 6/9 CC agenda. Thanks. Sincerely, Joanne Hwang, AICP Senior Planner Planning & Building Department | City of Anaheim *I'm currently telecommuting; e-mail is the best way to reach me at this time* California’s current directive to stay at home, except for essential exceptions, is in effect until further notice. Anaheim City Hall and other City facilities are currently closed to the public. The City is following the State’s directive and will continue to provide updates on the public reopening of City Hall, libraries, community centers and other places as they come available. During this closure, Anaheim staff will continue to provide service to our residents and businesses. Please click here or visit https://www.anaheim.net/5464/City-Hall-Services-During-Coronavirus for City Hall services in this unique time. From: Elizabeth Hansburg P4H <elizabeth@peopleforhousing.org> Sent: Monday, June 08, 2020 8:08 AM To: Jordan Brandman <JBrandman@anaheim.net>; Stephen Faessel <SFaessel@anaheim.net>; Denise Barnes <DBarnes@anaheim.net>; Jose Moreno <JMoreno@anaheim.net>; Lucille Kring <LKring@anaheim.net>; Trevor O'Neil <TONeil@anaheim.net>; Harry Sidhu (Mayor) <HSidhu@anaheim.net> Cc: Joanne Hwang <JHwang@anaheim.net> Subject: SUPPORT for Townhomes Euclid at Lincoln Dear Mayor Sidhu and Members of the City Council, Please find attached our letter of support for the Euclid at Lincoln Townhomes. We were very pleased to support this project in April when the Planning Commission approved it. We continue our support for this project because it will offer homeownership opportunities for middle class families, a housing type that is in short supply in the Orange County market today. In combination with other new, residential development in the vicinity of the Euclid and Lincoln intersection, these townhomes will reimagine an underperforming industrial area of Anaheim into a new community for the city’s growing population. We urge you to approve the Lincoln at Euclid townhomes without delay! Best regards, -- Elizabeth Hansburg Co-Founder & Executive Director 2 c. e. elizabeth@peopleforhousing.org Click here to become a member of People for Housing! June 8, 2020 Mayor Harry Sidhu City of Anaheim 200 South Anaheim Boulevard Anaheim, CA 92805 Re: SUPPORT for Lincoln at Euclid Townhomes Dear Mayor Sidhu and Members of the City Council: We were very pleased to support the Lincoln at Euclid Townhomes project in April when the Planning Commission approved it. We continue our support for this project because it will offer homeownership opportunities for middle class families, a housing type that is in short supply in the Orange County market today. People for Housing - Orange County is a grassroots, non-profit organization dedicated to advocating for more housing in Orange County communities. Our members are deeply concerned about California’s pervasive housing shortage, which has caused home prices to rise much faster than wages and incomes. A recent study released by the Orange County Business Council concluded that the greatest opportunity to provide more housing in Orange County is to repurpose declining commercial property and rezone it for residential use, creating opportunity for infill housing development. In combination with other new residential development in the vicinity of the Euclid and Lincoln intersection, these townhomes will reimagine an underperforming industrial area of Anaheim into a new community for the city’s growing population. There is a thriving anchor retail at the Lincoln/Euclid intersection to support the day-to-day retail needs of new families in this development, and new residents will bring new customers to local businesses as well. These new homes are a win for the neighborhood, local businesses, and aspiring homeowners in Anaheim and Orange County. Anaheim has been a leader in housing production. We urge you to continue your bold leadership and approve the Lincoln at Euclid townhomes without delay. They bring much-needed middle class housing to Orange County. Respectfully yours, Elizabeth Hansburg Co-Founder & Executive Director cc: Joanne Hwang, AICP Senior Planner Planning and Building Department People for Housing OC P.O. Box 6942 Fullerton, CA 92834 PeopleForHousing.org OCYimby.org 1 Public Comment From:James Lott Sent:Monday, June 8, 2020 9:34 AM To:Joanne Hwang; Public Comment Cc:Kianna Woods Subject:SUPPORT for Euclid at Lincoln Townhomes, Agenda Item #33, 9 June 2020 Dear Mayor Sidhu and Members of the City Council, I am writing to express support for the 115 townhome project “Euclid at Lincoln.” These townhomes will provide homehownership opportunities for first-time homebuyers and young families. They will also help transform the declining industrial near the Euclid / Lincoln intersection into a vibrant residential community. There are other new housing developments proposed in the vicinity, and together they will create a new neighborhood for Anaheim’s growing and diverse population. I urge you to approve the Euclid at Lincoln Townhomes without delay! Best regards, James T. Lott II Anaheim, CA -- James T. Lott II Real Estate Professional JTL Real Estate Inc.- Keller Williams Realty DRE #: 01944433 Cell: Fax: 714-426-3801 www.SoldByALott.com 1 Public Comment From:Cassius Rutherford Sent:Tuesday, June 9, 2020 11:40 AM To:Public Comment; Joanne Hwang Subject:Support for More Housing Opportunities with Euclid at Lincoln Project, Agenda Item # 33 (6/9/20) Dear Mayor Sidhu and Hon. City Council Members, I hope this finds you all well during these challenging times for our community. I am writing to express strong support for the City of Anaheim's opportunity to create 115 new townhomes with the project Euclid at Lincoln. The current COVID-19 pandemic has thrown into sharp relief our region's severe housing shortage. These townhomes will create homehownership opportunities for first-time homebuyers at a critical time for the city when new development offers an economic lifeline out of crisis. These townhomes will also help transform the declining industrial area adjacent to the Euclid/Lincoln intersection into a lively, more walkable residential community. Coupled with other new housing developments proposed in the vicinity, you have the potential to create a new neighborhood for Anaheim’s growing and diverse population. Should you approve this project, I commend your efforts to address our region's housing shortage, a shortage that impacts low-income and minority communities most severely. Housing should be available to everyone, and your consideration of this project will further this economic opportunity for local residents. Thanks very much for your consideration, Cash Rutherford Public Comments Distributed to the Anaheim City Council June 9, 2020 Council Meeting Updated 4:00 P.M. – Wednesday, June 10, 2020 1 Public Comment From:buddyfitz Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:30 PM To:Public Comment Cc:mgoodman@aclusocal.org Subject:Public Comment for June 9 Meeting and Each Public Hearings Attachments:Anaheim Comments.pdf Attached is the comment for the June 9 meeting and each public hearing. Please note that you can not have a legal Public Hearing where the Public are not allow to attend and speak by phone or in person. They will not be Public Hearings if the only public comments must be made in writing prior to the Hearings. Anaheim Council Public Comments for June 912020, And Each Public Hearing Comment for Agenda Items # 32,33,34,35, & 36 VIA EMAIL TO: publiccomment@anaheim.net FROM: Home Owners Maintaining our Environment ,l|'* It is outrageous to have Pubtic Hearings without first allowing pubtic speakers the rights to there to listen to the opening hearing presentatironsr glq to their public comments. \ilithout the public allowed to speak by phone o" io person, the Public Hearings would not be legal. Having the Public Hearing Comments made in writing prior to the Anaheim council meeting is ridicules. At the start of a legitimate Public Hearingo the moving party is allowed to give argument before the Public Comments. Based on those opening arguments, if given or not, indications for comments are made if the matter is to benefit the City of Anaheim, or only to benefit the moving parties and the financial wealth* of the council members. At the beginning of a legitimate Public Hearing, each voting council member must disclosed by law to the pubtic if they had prior contact and discussions with the moving party concerning the matter of.the Public Hearing. This state law was made to alert the public of the possibilities of secret future bribes, kickbacks, or other deals being made to entice a favorable vote from a council member. When all the council members are able to state they did not meet with any of the moving parties, the public can be assured that the hearing matter should be taken as a whole to benefit the City of Anaheim. That would make taking the time to speak at a Public Hearing almost unnecessary. Therefore. Comments must be made during the Hearins. not prior in writing. Another indication of corruption is why there were five Pubtic Hearings scheduled all at once for this possible last council meeting where the public are not allowed to speak in person. These five Public Hearings should be continued to the council meeting on June 23,2020 or later, that may be open to the public. *Past Anaheim councilmembers had questionable increases in their personal wealth from serving on the Anaheim City Council. Examples are Tom Tait with his promoting the 1998 $500 million rebate of our tax money to Disneyland for California Adventureo and the current mayor in the 2012 hotel rebate deal of about $156 million for his fellow countryman, Mr. Patel. Public Comments Distributed to the Anaheim City Council June 9, 2020 Council Meeting Updated 4:00 P.M. – Wednesday, June 10, 2020 1 Jennifer L. Hall From:Joanne Hwang Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 11:28 AM To:Jennifer L. Hall Subject:FW: 1600 W Lincoln Ave. Project - Letter of Support Attachments:166 W. Lincoln Ave. Project - Letter of Support.pdf Hello Jennifer, Another letter submitted for 1600 W. Lincoln Apartments project (item #35) for 6/9 CC agenda. Thank you. Sincerely, Joanne Hwang, AICP Senior Planner Planning & Building Department | City of Anaheim *I'm currently telecommuting; e-mail is the best way to reach me at this time* California’s current directive to stay at home, except for essential exceptions, is in effect until further notice. Anaheim City Hall and other City facilities are currently closed to the public. The City is following the State’s directive and will continue to provide updates on the public reopening of City Hall, libraries, community centers and other places as they come available. During this closure, Anaheim staff will continue to provide service to our residents and businesses. Please click here or visit https://www.anaheim.net/5464/City-Hall-Services-During-Coronavirus for City Hall services in this unique time. From: Leticia Balandran <leticia@scdcl.org> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2020 11:25 AM To: Joanne Hwang <JHwang@anaheim.net> Cc: Jon Preciado <jon@scdcl.org> Subject: 1600 W Lincoln Ave. Project - Letter of Support Dear Joanne Hwang, On behalf of Mr. Jon Preciado, attached please find a Letter of Support for the Project referenced above for your use. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Preciado. Thank you. Cordially, Leticia Leticia Balandran Executive Secretary to the Business Manager Southern California District Council of Laborers 4399 Santa Anita Avenue, Suite 205 El Monte, CA 91731 Office: 626.350.6900 Fax: 626.3507583 2 e-mail: Leticia@scdcl.org www.scdcl.org www.liuna.org SOUTHERN CAI.IEORNIA DISTRICT COUNCIL OF LABORERS AFFILATEDWITH I,AB ORERS' II\TTERNATI ONAI UNI ON OF NORTH AMERICA, AFL- C I O SERGIO RASCON JON P. PRECIADO ERNESTO J. ORDONEZ President Busness Manager Secretary-Treasurer 4399 Santa Lnita Ave. . Suite 205 . El Monte, CA 9I?31 . Tel (626) 350-6900 . Fax (626) 350-2583 June 5,2020 Sent via Email : ihwan{Dnnaheim.net Honorable Mayor and City Council Members of the City of Anaheim c/o Joanne Hwang. AICP, Senior Planner Planning & Building Department - City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Boulevard Suite 162 Anaheim CA 92805 Re: 1600 W. Lincoln Avenrle Proiect Dear I\4ayor and Council Members fhe Southem Califbmia District Council of Laborers on behalf of over 30,000 members throughout Southem California ("LiUNA") writes this letter in support of the 1600 W. Lincoln Avenue Project ("Project"). LitINA represents hard working men and women employed on construction projects, many of whom live in and around the City of Anaheim. We believe this Project will lead to increased jobs and economic growth in the City. Importantly, it will provide good paying jobs for skilled construction workers in the area. LitJNA applauds the commitment to use skilled, trained and fairly paid workers on construction projects in the City. Good paying jobs are especially needed during the current economic crisis. We urge the City to approve this Project at its meeting on June 9,2020. Sincerel-v"-. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA DISTRICT' COI]NCIL OF LABORERS Jon P. Preciado Business Manager Feel the Power TiUNA! AITIIATED I.OCAI.S SOUTHERN CAI.ITORNIfi, B1'B.BANK Local 345 HOI,TYWOOD Local724 I,ONG BEACH Local I3O9 LOS ANGELES Local 300 ORANGE COUMTY Locai 652 POMONA tocal I4i4 RTVERSIDE-IMPERIAL COUNTIES Local i 184 SAN BERNARDINO INYO.MONO COTJNTIES Locai 783 SANDIEGO Local 89 VENTURA tocal 585 KERNCOUNTY SANLUIS OBISPO COU}TTY SAI\TTA BARBANA COUMTY Local220 ARIZONA Local II84 NEWMEXICO A.i,BUQUERQUE Locai 16 @@24 wEBsrrEr SCDCL.oRG 1 Jennifer L. Hall From:Joanne Hwang Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 2:36 PM To:Jennifer L. Hall Subject:FW: 1600 W Lincoln Anaheim Avenue Project Support Letter Attachments:1600 W Lincoln Anaheim Support Letter.pdf Importance:High Another one for Item 35 on 6/9 CC.  Thanks! Sincerely, Joanne Hwang, AICP Senior Planner Planning & Building Department | City of Anaheim *I'm currently telecommuting; e-mail is the best way to reach me at this time* California’s current directive to stay at home, except for essential exceptions, is in effect until further notice. Anaheim City Hall and other City facilities are currently closed to the public. The City is following the State’s directive and will continue to provide updates on the public reopening of City Hall, libraries, community centers and other places as they come available. During this closure, Anaheim staff will continue to provide service to our residents and businesses. Please click here or visit https://www.anaheim.net/5464/City-Hall-Services-During-Coronavirus for City Hall services in this unique time. From: Adrian Esparza <adrian@local652.org> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2020 2:26 PM To: Joanne Hwang <JHwang@anaheim.net> Cc: Jon Preciado <jon@scdcl.org> Subject: 1600 W Lincoln Anaheim Avenue Project Support Letter Importance: High Good Afternoon, I am sending you the attached letter on behalf of Laborers Local 652 in support of the 1600 W. Lincoln Anaheim Avenue Project. Fraternally, Adrian A. Esparza Business Manager Laborers’ Local 652 1532 E. Chestnut Ave., Santa Ana, CA 92701 (714) 542-7203 Phone (714) 542-3724 FAX www.local652.com 2 Feel the Power! Jennifer L. Hall From:Joanne Hwang Sent:Friday, June 5, 2020 8:55 AM To:Jennifer L. Hall Cc:Greg McCafferty; Lindsay Ortega (lortega@sagecrestplanning.com) Subject:FW: Public Hearing - June 9, 2020 (Anaheim City Council) Attachments:Letter to City Council June 9, 2020 hearing.pdf Hello Jennifer, Attached is the letter to the City Council, sent by the applicant of 1600 W. Lincoln Avenue Apartments project scheduled on 6/9 CC meeting. Thank you. Sincerely, Joanne Hwang, AICP Senior Planner Planning & Building Department | City of Anaheim *I'm currently telecommuting; e-mail is the best way to reach me at this time* California’s current directive to stay at home, except for essential exceptions, is in effect until further notice. Anaheim City Hall and other City facilities are currently closed to the public. The City is following the State’s directive and will continue to provide updates on the public reopening of City Hall, libraries, community centers and other places as they come available. During this closure, Anaheim staff will continue to provide service to our residents and businesses. Please click here or visit https://www.anaheim.net/5464/City-Hall-Services-During-Coronavirus for City Hall services in this unique time. From: Greg McCafferty <gmccafferty@sagecrestplanning.com> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2020 8:49 AM To: Joanne Hwang <JHwang@anaheim.net> Cc: Lindsay Ortega <lortega@sagecrestplanning.com> Subject: Re: Public Hearing - June 9, 2020 (Anaheim City Council) Good morning Joanne. The attached letter is for City Council. Also, the labor union represented by Richard Drury will also be submitting a letter of support. Thanks Greg McCafferty Sagecrest Planning+Environmental 2400 E. Katella Ave., Suite 800 Anaheim, CA 92806 Office: (714) 783-1863 x701 Mobile: Email: gmccafferty@sagecrestplanning.com Web: www.sagecrestplanning.com June 5, 2020 Honorable Mayor Sidhu and City Council City of Anaheim 200 S. Anaheim Blvd., 7th Floor Anaheim, CA 92805 Re: June 9, 2020 City Council Hearing – Item No. 35 Mills Ford Residential Mixed Use Project 1600 W. Lincoln Ave. Dear Mayor and City Council: Ahead of the upcoming City Council hearing on June 9, 2020, I wanted to provide you with a brief overview of why our project is right for this site and would be a positive addition to Anaheim and the Lincoln Corridor. First, your Planning Department staff recommended approval of the project and the Planning Commission agreed by voting 6-1 (Commissioner White voting no) in favor of the project. Here is why: • The project will serve as a catalyst to beautify the Lincoln Corridor between the I-5 Fwy. and Euclid, with new landscaping and street improvements consistent with the recently approved Shopoff residential project directly across Lincoln Avenue. • The project will be one of the first to implement the City Council’s voluntary Affordable Housing Policy providing $300,000 for the Council’s Senior Safety Net Program or other housing assistance program. The project serves as a creative example of how the public and private sectors can work together outside the framework of government regulation to achieve the City’s affordable housing goals. • Existing commercial businesses in the Downtown Civic Center area and along the Euclid Corridor will benefit from the new residents patronizing their establishments. • The project will provide much needed housing for working families and couples close to the job centers of Downtown Anaheim and the Anaheim Resort. • The project will contribute over $2.5 million in school, park and other city impact fees. • The project will provide ground floor retail/commercial uses for the convenience of project and area residents. We appreciate your thoughtful consideration and respectfully ask the City Council to accept the Planning Commission’s recommendation to approve the project. Sincerely, Greg McCafferty Sagecrest Planning+Environmental 1 Public Comment From:buddyfitz Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:30 PM To:Public Comment Cc:mgoodman@aclusocal.org Subject:Public Comment for June 9 Meeting and Each Public Hearings Attachments:Anaheim Comments.pdf Attached is the comment for the June 9 meeting and each public hearing. Please note that you can not have a legal Public Hearing where the Public are not allow to attend and speak by phone or in person. They will not be Public Hearings if the only public comments must be made in writing prior to the Hearings. Anaheim Council Public Comments for June 912020, And Each Public Hearing Comment for Agenda Items # 32,33,34,35, & 36 VIA EMAIL TO: publiccomment@anaheim.net FROM: Home Owners Maintaining our Environment ,l|'* It is outrageous to have Pubtic Hearings without first allowing pubtic speakers the rights to there to listen to the opening hearing presentatironsr glq to their public comments. \ilithout the public allowed to speak by phone o" io person, the Public Hearings would not be legal. Having the Public Hearing Comments made in writing prior to the Anaheim council meeting is ridicules. At the start of a legitimate Public Hearingo the moving party is allowed to give argument before the Public Comments. Based on those opening arguments, if given or not, indications for comments are made if the matter is to benefit the City of Anaheim, or only to benefit the moving parties and the financial wealth* of the council members. At the beginning of a legitimate Public Hearing, each voting council member must disclosed by law to the pubtic if they had prior contact and discussions with the moving party concerning the matter of.the Public Hearing. This state law was made to alert the public of the possibilities of secret future bribes, kickbacks, or other deals being made to entice a favorable vote from a council member. When all the council members are able to state they did not meet with any of the moving parties, the public can be assured that the hearing matter should be taken as a whole to benefit the City of Anaheim. That would make taking the time to speak at a Public Hearing almost unnecessary. Therefore. Comments must be made during the Hearins. not prior in writing. Another indication of corruption is why there were five Pubtic Hearings scheduled all at once for this possible last council meeting where the public are not allowed to speak in person. These five Public Hearings should be continued to the council meeting on June 23,2020 or later, that may be open to the public. *Past Anaheim councilmembers had questionable increases in their personal wealth from serving on the Anaheim City Council. Examples are Tom Tait with his promoting the 1998 $500 million rebate of our tax money to Disneyland for California Adventureo and the current mayor in the 2012 hotel rebate deal of about $156 million for his fellow countryman, Mr. Patel. P: (626) 381-9248 F: (626) 389-5414 E: mitch@mitchtsailaw.com Mitchell M. Tsai Attorney At Law 155 South El Molino Avenue Suite 104 Pasadena, California 91101 VIA E-MAIL June 9, 2020 City of Anaheim City Council 200 South Anaheim Blvd. Anaheim, CA 92805 Em: publiccomments@anaheim.net Joanne Hwang, Senior Planner Planning & Building Department, Planning Services Division 200 South Anaheim Blvd. 1st Floor, Suite 162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Em: jhwang@anaheim.net RE: Comments to the 1600 West Lincoln Mixed-Use Development Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2019-00527, RECLASSIFICATION NO. 2019-00320, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2019-06009, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 19017 (DEV2019-00037) Dear Mayor Sidhu, Council Members, and Ms. Hwang, On behalf of Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters (Collectively “Commenters” or “Southwest Carpenters”), my Office is submitting these comments on the City of Anaheim’s (“City” or “Lead Agency”) Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (“IS/MND”) for the 1600 West Lincoln Project (“Project”). The Project proposes a mixed-use development with residential and commercial uses on a 5.25 acre site, which is currently developed with automobile related uses. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing structures and construct a four-story mixed-use development consisting of 315 residential units, a 2,031 square foot leasing office, 3,413 square feet of commercial space, and a parking structure. City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 2 of 18 The Southwest Carpenters is a labor union representing 50,000 union carpenters in six states, including in southern California, and has a strong interest in well ordered land use planning and addressing the environmental impacts of development projects. Commenters expressly reserve the right to supplement these comments at or prior to hearings on the Project, and at any later hearings and proceedings related to this Project. Cal. Gov. Code § 65009(b); Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21177(a); Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. Bakersfield (2004) 124 Cal. App. 4th 1184, 1199-1203; see Galante Vineyards v. Monterey Water Dist. (1997) 60 Cal. App. 4th 1109, 1121. Commenters incorporates by reference all comments raising issues regarding the IS/MND submitted prior to certification of the IS/MND for the Project. Citizens for Clean Energy v City of Woodland (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 173, 191 (finding that any party who has objected to the Project’s environmental documentation may assert any issue timely raised by other parties). Moreover, Commenter requests that the Lead Agency provide notice for any and all notices referring or related to the Project issued under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Cal Public Resources Code (“PRC”) § 21000 et seq, and the California Planning and Zoning Law (“Planning and Zoning Law”), Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 65000–65010. California Public Resources Code Sections 21092.2, and 21167(f) and Government Code Section 65092 require agencies to mail such notices to any person who has filed a written request for them with the clerk of the agency’s governing body. The City must seriously consider proposing that the Applicant provide additional community benefits such as requiring local hire and paying prevailing wages to benefit the City. Moreover, it would be beneficial for the City to require the Applicant to hire workers: (1) who have graduated from a Joint Labor Management apprenticeship training program approved by the State of California, or have at least as many hours of on-the-job experience in the applicable craft which would be required to graduate from such a state approved apprenticeship training program and; (2) who are registered apprentices in an apprenticeship training program approved by the State of California. City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 3 of 18 I. THE CITY SHOULD CONTINUE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE CITY COUNCIL HEARS COMMENTS We ask the City to continue consideration of the Project until the City is able to adopt teleconferencing procedures that allow the public to participate and speak on items directly to the City Council during City Council meetings. The Brown Act already contains provisions for conducting public meetings by teleconferencing and video conferencing. Under the Brown Act, “[T]he legislative body of a local agency may use teleconferencing for the benefit of the public and the legislative body of a local agency in connection with any meeting or proceeding authorized by law.”(Gov. Code § 54953(b)(1).) The Brown Act defines “teleconference” as “a meeting of a legislative body, the members of which are in different locations, connected by electronic means, through either audio or video, or both.” (Gov. Code § 54953(b)(4).) When a local agency uses teleconferencing, the Brown Act requires that the teleconference information be available in the meeting agenda and that the teleconference be accessible to the public. (Gov. Code § 54953(b)(3).) Importantly, the Brown Act further requires that the agenda “provide an opportunity for members of the public to address the legislative body directly pursuant to Section 54954.3 at each teleconference location.” (Gov. Code § 54953(b)(3).) The above requirement of section 54953(b)(3) of the Brown Act allows for the use of teleconferencing to satisfy the requirements of section 54954.3 that members of the public have the opportunity to comment on an agenda item either before or during a meeting. (Gov. Code § 54954.3(a) [“Every agenda for regular meetings shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the legislative body on any item of interest to the public, before or during the legislative body’s consideration of the item.”].) As such, any public meeting conducted by teleconference but does not allow for public comment during the meeting is in violation of the Brown Act. The Brown Act does contain emergency provisions—however, none of these provisions provide for prohibiting public comment during a meeting. First, the Brown Act allows public meetings in certain emergency circumstances with limited (one-hour) or no prior notice. (Gov. Code § 54956.5.) Second, the Brown Act contains authority allowing action on items not included on a posted regular agenda in certain emergency situations. (Gov. Code § 54954.2(b)(2).) Lastly, in City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 4 of 18 certain emergency situations, the Brown Act allows for a public meeting location to change without notice as long as local media is notified “by the most rapid means of communication available at the time.” (Gov. Code § 54954(e).) The Terraces Project does not qualify as an “emergency” within the meaning of the Brown Act. Notably, the emergency provisions above in the Brown Act pertain only to notice, location, and agency action. No provision of the Brown Act contemplates abrogating the public’s right to provide comment during a public meeting either in-person or, if necessary, by teleconferencing or video conferencing. (see Gov. Code §§ 54953(b)(1), (b)(3), (b)(4). ) Even if Governor Newsom’s March 17 EO and March 21 EO were valid under the California Constitution as to the Brown Act, a local agency which does not permit public comment during a public meeting fails to comply with those orders. The March 17 EO explicitly states: All state and local bodies are urged to use sound discretion and to make reasonable efforts to adhere as closely as reasonably possible to the provisions of the Bagley-Keene Act and the Brown Act, and other applicable local laws regulating the conduct of public meetings, in order to maximize transparency and provide the public access to their meetings. (March 17 EO, p. 4.) Many municipalities are making public comment during teleconferenced meetings possible, which shows that adherence to the Brown Act provisions discussed above is possible during the COVID-19 state of emergency. For example, the Cities of San Francisco, Los Angeles, and other cities allow members of the public to directly address the decision-making body through Zoom or other teleconference service during the virtual meeting. Thus, any local agency which does not provide for public comment during a public meeting—teleconferenced or otherwise—is in violation of the California Constitution, article I, section 3(b)(7) and the Brown Act as well as in violation of Governor Newsom’s executive orders. For the above reasons, we request that the City continue consideration of the Project until after the lifting of the COVID-19 State of Emergency to allow full public participation and full compliance with the Brown Act and the California Constitution. City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 5 of 18 II. THE PROJECT WOULD BE APPROVED IN VIOLATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT A. Background Concerning the California Environmental Quality Act CEQA has two basic purposes. First, CEQA is designed to inform decision makers and the public about the potential, significant environmental effects of a project. 14 California Code of Regulations (“CCR” or “CEQA Guidelines”) § 15002(a)(1). “Its purpose is to inform the public and its responsible officials of the environmental consequences of their decisions before they are made. Thus, the EIR ‘protects not only the environment but also informed self-government.’ [Citation.]” Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal. 3d 553, 564. The EIR has been described as “an environmental ‘alarm bell’ whose purpose it is to alert the public and its responsible officials to environmental changes before they have reached ecological points of no return.” Berkeley Keep Jets Over the Bay v. Bd. of Port Comm’rs. (2001) 91 Cal. App. 4th 1344, 1354 (“Berkeley Jets”); County of Inyo v. Yorty (1973) 32 Cal.App.3d 795, 810. Second, CEQA directs public agencies to avoid or reduce environmental damage when possible by requiring alternatives or mitigation measures. CEQA Guidelines § 15002(a)(2) and (3). See also, Berkeley Jets, 91 Cal. App. 4th 1344, 1354; Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553; Laurel Heights Improvement Ass’n v. Regents of the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 400. The EIR serves to provide public agencies and the public in general with information about the effect that a proposed project is likely to have on the environment and to “identify ways that environmental damage can be avoided or significantly reduced.” CEQA Guidelines § 15002(a)(2). If the project has a significant effect on the environment, the agency may approve the project only upon finding that it has “eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible” and that any unavoidable significant effects on the environment are “acceptable due to overriding concerns” specified in CEQA section 21081. CEQA Guidelines § 15092(b)(2)(A–B). B. The City Should Prepare an EIR for the Project A strong presumption in favor of requiring preparation of an EIR is built into CEQA. This presumption is reflected in what is known as the "fair argument" standard, under which an agency must prepare an EIR whenever substantial evidence in the record supports a fair argument that a project may have a significant effect on the City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 6 of 18 environment. Quail Botanical Gardens Found., Inc. v City of Encinitas (1994) 29 CA4th 1597, 1602; Friends of "B" St. v City of Hayward (1980) 106 CA3d 988, 1002. The fair argument test stems from the statutory mandate that an EIR be prepared for any project that "may have a significant effect on the environment." PRC § 21151; No Oil, Inc. v City of Los Angeles (1974) 13 C3d 68, 75; Jensen v City of Santa Rosa (2018) 23 CA5th 877, 884. Under this test, if a proposed project is not exempt and may cause a significant effect on the environment, the lead agency must prepare an EIR. PRC §§ 21100(a), 21151; CEQA Guidelines § 15064(a)(1), (f)(1). An EIR may be dispensed with only if the lead agency finds no substantial evidence in the initial study or elsewhere in the record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. Parker Shattuck Neighbors v Berkeley City Council (2013) 222 CA4th 768, 785. In such a situation, the agency must adopt a negative declaration. PRC § 21080(c)(1); CEQA Guidelines §§ 15063(b)(2), 15064(f)(3). "Significant effect upon the environment" is defined as "a substantial or potentially substantial adverse change in the environment." PRC § 21068; CEQA Guidelines § 15382. A project "may" have a significant effect on the environment if there is a "reasonable probability" that it will result in a significant impact. No Oil, Inc. v City of Los Angeles, 13 Cal. 3d at 83 fn. 16; Sundstrom v County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal. App. 3d 296, 309. If any aspect of the project may result in a significant impact on the environment, an EIR must be prepared even if the overall effect of the project is beneficial. CEQA Guidelines § 15063(b)(1). See County Sanitation Dist. No. 2 v County of Kern (2005) 127 Cal. App. 4th 1544, 1580. This standard sets a "low threshold" for preparation of an EIR. Consolidated Irrig. Dist. v City of Selma (2012) 204 Cal. App. 4th 187, 207; Nelson v County of Kern (2010) 190 Cal. App. 4th 252; Pocket Protectors v City of Sacramento (2004) 124 Cal. App. 4th 903, 928; Bowman v City of Berkeley (2004) 122 Cal. App. 4th 572, 580; Citizen Action to Serve All Students v Thornley (1990) 222 Cal. App. 3d 748, 754; Sundstrom v County of Mendocino (1988) 202 Cal. App. 3d 296, 310. If substantial evidence in the record supports a fair argument that the project may have a significant environmental effect, the lead agency must prepare an EIR even if other substantial evidence before it indicates the project will have no significant effect. See Jensen v City of Santa Rosa (2018) 23 Cal. App. 5th 877, 886; Clews Land & Livestock v City of San Diego (2017) 19 Cal. App. 5th 161, 183; Stanislaus Audubon Soc'y, Inc. v County of Stanislaus (1995) 33 Cal. App. 4th 144, 150; Brentwood Ass'n for No Drilling, Inc. v City of Los Angeles (1982) 134 Cal. App. 3d 491; City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 7 of 18 Friends of "B" St. v City of Hayward (1980) 106 Cal. App. 3d 988; CEQA Guidelines § 15064(f)(1). As explained in full below, there is a fair argument that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment. As a result, the “low threshold” for preparation of an EIR has been met and the City must prepare an EIR. C. CEQA Requires Revision and Recirculation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration When Substantial Changes or New Information Comes to Light Once a negative declaration has been circulated, it may need to be recirculated for another round of review and comment if it is “substantially revised” after the public notice of the first circulation period has been given. CEQA Guidelines § 15073.5(a). A substantial revision includes two situations. As CEQA Guidelines section 15073.5(b) states: ● A new, avoidable significant effect is identified, and to reduce that effect to a level of insignificance, mitigation measures or project revisions must be added. ● The lead agency finds that the mitigation measures or project revisions originally included in the negative declaration will not reduce potentially significant impacts to a level of insignificance, and new mitigation measures or project revisions are required. New information will require recirculation when it amounts to a substantial revision of the negative declaration, which is defined to mean the identification of new significant environmental impacts or the addition of new mitigation that is required to avoid a significant environmental impact. 14 Cal Code Regs §15073.5(b). If the new information reveals a new significant impact that cannot be mitigated or avoided, then the lead agency must prepare an EIR before approving the project. 14 Cal Code Regs §15073.5(d). Revisions to a project to mitigate potentially significant environmental effects must be included in the negative declaration that is circulated for public review. Pub Res C §21080(c)(2); 14 Cal Code Regs §§15070(b), 15071(e). Based on the arguments set forth below, in the alternative, Commenter requests that the City recirculate the IS/MND upon making any revisions. City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 8 of 18 D. The IS/MND Fails to Adequately Disclose, Analyze and Mitigate the Project’s Significant Noise Impacts The IS/MND discloses that the Project will have significant construction noise impacts and proposes mitigation measures. However, the IS/MND improperly defers mitigation of the Project’s noise impacts. The IS/MND fails to adequately mitigate the Project’s significant noise impacts by deferring the formulation of Mitigation Measure MM NOI-1. Section 15126.4(a)(1)(B) of the CEQA Guidelines states “[f]ormulation of mitigation measures shall not be deferred until some future time.” While specific details of mitigation measure may be deferred, an agency is required to (1) commit itself to mitigation, (2) adopt specific performance standards the mitigation will achieve, and (3) identify the type(s) of potential action(s) that can feasibly achieve that performance standard and that will be considered, analyzed, and potentially incorporated in the mitigation measure. See Preserve Wild Santee v. City of Santee (2012) 210 Cal.App.4th 260, 281; San Joaquin Raptor Rescue Center v. County of Merced (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 645, 671. The IS/MND proposes MM NOI-1 to mitigate the Project’s construction noise impacts. However, the IS/MND allows the deferral of the formulation of its mitigation measure, and fails to adopt any performance standard the mitigation will achieve, because MM NOI-1 merely suggests the Project will adopt one of three mitigation measures (see IS/MND, p. 115) but fails to specify how it will choose among those options or by what performance standard each option will achieve adequate noise mitigation. The IS/MND utilizes Caltrans guidelines to analyze effectiveness of a sound wall, but the Project may adopt another strategy for which it provides no analysis or performance standard. As a result, MM NOI-1 fails to provide sufficiently specific performance criteria to determine whether the mitigation measure could actually and effectively mitigate the Project’s significant construction noise impacts to a less than significant level, leaving “a fair argument” that the Project will have a significant impact on the environment. C. The DEIR Fails to Support Its Findings with Substantial Evidence When new information is brought to light showing that an impact previously discussed in the DEIR but found to be insignificant with or without mitigation in the DEIR’s analysis has the potential for a significant environmental impact supported by City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 9 of 18 substantial evidence, the EIR must consider and resolve the conflict in the evidence. (See Visalia Retail, L.P. v. City of Visalia (2018) 20 Cal. App. 5th 1, 13, 17; see also Protect the Historic Amador Waterways v. Amador Water Agency (2004) 116 Cal. App. 4th 1099, 1109.) While a lead agency has discretion to formulate standards for determining significance and the need for mitigation measures—the choice of any standards or thresholds of significance must be “based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data and an exercise of reasoned judgment based on substantial evidence. (CEQA Guidelines § 15064(b); Cleveland Nat'l Forest Found. v. San Diego Ass'n of Gov'ts (2017) 3 Cal. App. 5th 497, 515; Mission Bay Alliance v. Office of Community Inv. & Infrastructure (2016) 6 Cal. App. 5th 160, 206.) And when there is evidence that an impact could be significant, an EIR cannot adopt a contrary finding without providing an adequate explanation along with supporting evidence. (East Sacramento Partnership for a Livable City v. City of Sacramento (2016) 5 Cal. App. 5th 281, 302.) In addition, a determination that regulatory compliance will be sufficient to prevent significant adverse impacts must be based on a project-specific analysis of potential impacts and the effect of regulatory compliance. In Californians for Alternatives to Toxics v. Department of Food & Agric. (2005) 136 Cal. App. 4th 1, the court set aside an EIR for a statewide crop disease control plan because it did not include an evaluation of the risks to the environment and human health from the proposed program but simply presumed that no adverse impacts would occur from use of pesticides in accordance with the registration and labeling program of the California Department of Pesticide Regulation. See also Ebbetts Pass Forest Watch v Department of Forestry & Fire Protection (2008) 43 Cal. App. 4th 936, 956 (fact that Department of Pesticide Regulation had assessed environmental effects of certain herbicides in general did not excuse failure to assess effects of their use for specific timber harvesting project). 1. The IS/MND Fails to Supports its Land Use Analysis with Substantial Evidence. The IS/MND claims that the Project is consistent with the City’s General Plan through the analysis of three discrete goals and objectives of that plan, and that the Project will result in no significant environmental impacts as a result of a conflict with any applicable plan or policy. IS/MND, pp. 108-110. The IS/MND’s shortcut land use analysis is not adequate. See, e.g., Friends of Lagoon Valley v. City of Vacaville (2007) 154 Cal. App. 4th 807, 815 (upholding overall consistency finding even though project deviated from some plan provisions because plan allowed for balancing of competing City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 10 of 18 policies). A clear and direct conflict with a mandatory provision of a general or specific plan usually amounts to an inconsistency that will preclude project approval. See Families Unafraid v. County of El Dorado (1998) 62 Cal. App. 4th 1332, 1341 (project must satisfy mandatory general plan policy that is fundamental and unambiguous and does not allow discretion in interpretation and application). It is unclear why the IS/MND chooses three discrete goals or objectives of the General Plan to analyze, but this analysis fails to demonstrate overall consistency with the General Plan such that no significant impacts would result that require mitigation. The General Plan’s Land Use Element includes 16 separate goals, each with numerous policies that attach. And some of the General Plan’s goals are divided by Community Policy Areas and specifically apply to specific sections of the City of Anaheim—is the Project compatible with those goals?1 The IS/MND does not include sufficient analysis to allow for this determination. The IS/MND should be revised to include a broader analysis of consistency to support its land use conclusion. 2. The IS/MND Fails to Supports its Findings on Greenhouse Gas Impacts with Substantial Evidence. CEQA Guidelines § 15064.4 allow a lead agency to determine the significance of a project’s GHG impact via a qualitative analysis (e.g., extent to which a project complies with regulations or requirements of state/regional/local GHG plans), and/or a quantitative analysis (e.g., using model or methodology to estimate project emissions and compare it to a numeric threshold). So too, CEQA Guidelines allow lead agencies to select what model or methodology to estimate GHG emissions so long as the selection is supported with substantial evidence, and the lead agency “should explain the limitations of the particular model or methodology selected for use.” CEQA Guidelines § 15064.4(c). Here, the IS/MND included both qualitative and quantitative analyses. However, the IS/MND does not rely on any quantitative analysis to determine compliance with any numerical thresholds and instead relies solely on consistency with the City of 1 City of Anaheim General Plan – Land Use Element, http://www.anaheim.net/DocumentCenter/ View/9522/E-Land-Use-Element?bidId=. City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 11 of 18 Anaheim’s “GHG Reduction Plan” in making a determination that the Project’s GHG impacts are less than significant. IS/MND, pp. 92-93. CEQA Guidelines sections 15064.4(b)(3) and 15183.5(b) allow a lead agency to consider a project’s consistency with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions. CEQA Guidelines §§ 15064.4(b)(3) and 15183.5(b)(1) make clear qualified GHG reduction plans or CAP should include the following features: (1) Inventory: Quantify GHG emissions, both existing and projected over a specified time period, resulting from activities (e.g., projects) within a defined geographic area (e.g., lead agency jurisdiction); (2) Establish GHG Reduction Goal: Establish a level, based on substantial evidence, below which the contribution to GHG emissions from activities covered by the plan would not be cumulatively considerable; (3) Analyze Project Types: Identify and analyze the GHG emissions resulting from specific actions or categories of actions anticipated within the geographic area; (4) Craft Performance Based Mitigation Measures: Specify measures or a group of measures, including performance standards, that substantial evidence demonstrates, if implemented on a project-by- project basis, would collectively achieve the specified emissions level; (5) Monitoring: Establish a mechanism to monitor the CAP progress toward achieving said level and to require amendment if the plan is not achieving specified levels; Collectively, the above-listed features tie qualitative measures to quantitative results, which in turn become binding via proper monitoring and enforcement by the jurisdiction—all resulting in real GHG reductions for the jurisdiction as a whole, and the substantial evidence that the incremental contribution of an individual project is not cumulatively considerable. Second, it is not enough for an environmental document to conclude there is no significant GHG emissions impacts based upon a determination of consistency with a GHG Reduction Plan, without also making a determination based upon substantial City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 12 of 18 evidence of the project’s actual cumulative contributions to GHG emissions. In other words, a determination of consistency is only a starting point.2 Compliance or non- compliance is merely one factor to be considered. The lead agency must explain how reliance on any particular plan or regulation addresses a potential impact. Here, however, the IS/MND fails to demonstrate that the GHG Reduction Plan includes the above-listed requirements to be considered a qualified CAP or GHG Reduction Plan for the City. As such, the IS/MND leaves an analytical gap showing that compliance with said plans can be used for a project-level significance determination for the Project. Second, the IS/MND fails to explain how compliance with the GHG Reduction Plan leads to a less than significant impact. i. The GHG Reduction Plan is Not a Qualified CAP or GHG Reduction Plan. First, there is no evidence that the 2015 Anaheim GHG Reduction Plan meets any of the five goals listed above as a qualified CAP or GHG Reduction Plan under CEQA Guidelines §§ 15064.4(b)(3) and 15183.5(b)(1). In fact, even though the 2015 Plan is not available on the City’s website for review, it was not intended to be used to evaluate mixed-use residential project impacts and “was prepared to assist the City’s power supplies in conforming to the GHG emissions reductions as mandated under AB 32.” IS/MND, p. 92. The IS/MND or EIR should explain how the GHG Reduction Plan qualifies for consistency analysis under CEQA Guidelines §§ 15064.4(b)(3) and 15183.5(b)(1) and provide a copy that plan for public review. ii. The IS/MND Fails to Demonstrate Compliance Will Lead to a Less than Significant Impact. Second, the IS/MND fails to explain or analyze how compliance with the 2015 GHG Reduction Plan, even if it qualified for a consistency evaluation, will lead to a less than significant impact. The lead agency should explain how implementing the particular requirements in the plan, regulation or program ensure that the project’s incremental 2 Cal. Nat. Res. Agency, Final Statement of Reasons for Regulatory Action, Amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines, OAL Notice File No. Z-2018-0116-12 (Nov. 2018), at p. 95; see also Lighthouse Field Beach Rescue v. City of Santa Cruz (2005) 131 Cal. App. 4th 1170, 1207 (“”[A]n inconsistency between a project and other land use controls does not in itself mandate a finding of significance. [Citations.] City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 13 of 18 contribution to the cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable” (emphasis added).3 Here, the IS/MND merely concludes that the “Proposed Project would meet the targets outlined in the GHG Reduction Plan. The Proposed Project would comply with the GHG Reduction Plan reduction targets and would not conflict with the applicable plan…” IS/MND, p. 93. This is the extant of the analysis. This fails to demonstrate how compliance will in fact lead to a less than significant impact. It is not enough to state some goals or policies and then state the Project will comply with those goals or policies. For example, how would a handful of EV parking spaces and an unspecified PV rooftop installation help this Project achieve a less than significant 3 Natural Resources Agency (Nov. 2018) Final Statement of Reasons For Regulatory Action: Amendments To The State CEQA Guidelines (“2018 Final Statement of Reason”), p. 19 (adding reference to section 15183.5 to section 15064.4(b)(3) because it was “needed to clarify that lead agencies may rely on plans prepared pursuant to section 15183.5 in evaluating a project’s greenhouse gas emissions[,] … [which] is consistent with the Agency’s Final Statement of Reasons for the addition of section 15064.4, which states that ‘proposed section 15064.4 is intended to be read in conjunction with . . . proposed section 15183.5. Those sections each indicate that local and regional plans may be developed to reduce GHG emissions.’”), http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/docs/ 2018_CEQA_Final_Statement_of%20Reasons_111218.pdf; see also Natural Resources Agency (Dec. 2009) Final Statement of Reasons for Regulatory Action (“2009 Final Statement of Reason”), p. 27 (“Those sections each indicate that local and regional plans may be developed to reduce GHG emissions. If such plans reduce community-wide emissions to a level that is less than significant, a later project that complies with the requirements in such a plan may be found to have a less than significant impact.”), http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/docs/Final_Statement_of_ Reasons.pdf.; 2009 Final Statement of Reason, pp. 14-17 (To qualify, the plan “must … include binding requirements to address a cumulative problem[;] … such plans contain specific requirements with respect to resources that are within the agency‘s jurisdiction to avoid or substantially lessen the agency‘s contributions to GHG emissions … consistency with plans that are purely aspirational (i.e., those that include only unenforceable goals without mandatory reduction measures), and provide no assurance that emissions within the area governed by the plan will actually address the cumulative problem[;] … by requiring that lead agencies draw a link between the project and the specific provisions of a binding plan or regulation, section 15064(h)(3) would ensure that cumulative effects of the project are actually addressed by the plan or regulation in question.”) 35 SCAG (Dec. 2015) 2016 RTP/SCS Program EIR (“PEIR”), p. 3.8-12 – 3.8-13 (“SB 375 provides that the SCS developed as part of the RTP does not regulate the use of land or dictate local land use policies, and further expressly provides that a city’s or county’s land use policies and regulations, including its general plan, are not required to be consistent with the SCS. Rather, SB 375 is intended to provide a regional policy foundation that local government may build upon, if they so choose.” Emphasis added), http://scagrtpscs.net/Documents/2016/peir/draft/2016dPEIR_3_8_ GreenhouseGases.pdf. City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 14 of 18 impact? The IS/MND does not conduct this analysis and relies wholly on compliance statements with an unverified or non-compliant GHG Reduction Plan. iii. The IS/MND Fails to Evaluate Cumulative Project GHG Impacts. An EIR must discuss cumulative impacts when they are significant and the project's incremental contribution is "cumulatively considerable." CEQA Guidelines §15130(a). A project's incremental contribution is cumulatively considerable if the incremental effects of the project are significant "when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects." CEQA Guidelines § 15065(a)(3). Here, there is no evidence that the IS/MND’s Air Quality, Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Health Risk Assessment Impact Analysis evaluated the Project’s cumulative project GHG emissions. See IS/MND, Appendix A. For instance, on p. 76 of Appendix A, the IS/MND states that the total projected GHG emissions for the Project is 2,408.47 MTCO2e/year, yet there is no analysis of a potential cumulative impact anywhere in the Appendix. The IS/MND needs to conduct a cumulative GHG impacts analysis, and if there is a potentially significant impact, impose adequate and all feasible measures. 3. The IS/MND Fails to Analyze Cumulative Project Air Quality Impacts. The IS/MND indicates a potentially significant impact for air quality that is mitigated to less than significant levels with Mitigation Measures 1 and 2 identified as such in Appendix A (low-VOC applications and Tier 4 Final construction equipment)—yet, as with the IS/MND GHG analysis, there is no evidence in Appendix A that any cumulative impacts analysis was conducted that included other projects. Thus, there is no substantial evidence upon which to base the IS/MND’s conclusion of no significant cumulative impacts with the aforementioned mitigation measures. The IS/MND needs to conduct a cumulative air quality impacts analysis, and if there is a potentially significant impact, impose adequate and all feasible measures. City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 15 of 18 III. THE PROJECT VIOLATES THE STATE PLANNING AND ZONING LAW AS WELL AS THE CITY’S GENERAL PLAN A. Background Regarding the State Planning and Zoning Law An EIR must identify, fully analyze and mitigate any inconsistencies between a proposed project and the general, specific, regional, and other plans that apply to the project. CEQA Guidelines § 15125(d); Pfeiffer v. City of Sunnyvale City Council (2011) 200 Cal.App.4th 1552, 1566; Friends of the Eel River v. Sonoma County Water Agency (2003) 108 Cal.App.4th 859, 881. There does not need to be a direct conflict to trigger this requirement; even if a project is “incompatible” with the “goals and policies” of a land use plan, the EIR must assess the divergence between the project and the plan, and mitigate any adverse effects of the inconsistencies. Napa Citizens for Honest Government v. Napa County Bd. of Supervisors (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 342, 378-79; see also Pocket Protectors v. City of Sacramento (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 903 (holding under CEQA that a significant impact exists where project conflicts with local land use policies); Friends of “B” Street v. City of Hayward (1980) 106 Cal.App.3d 988, 998 (held county development and infrastructure improvements must be consistent with adopted general plans) (citing Gov. Code 65302). A. The Project is Inconsistent with the State’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment Allocations for the City of Anaheim and the City’s Resolution No. 2018-106 The Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) is mandated by State Housing Law as part of the periodic process of updating local housing elements of the General Plan. The RHNA quantifies the need for housing within each jurisdiction during specified planning periods. The City Council’s March 19, 2019 Agenda Report, Annual Housing Element Progress Report for the 2018 Reporting Period indicates that the City is woefully behind schedule in constructing affordable housing units.4 Anaheim’s RHNA assessment allocation is 5,702 affordable units, of which 2,933 units had yet to be constructed as of March 19, 2019. The requirement to construct 5,702 affordable units is a state-required component of the City’s General Plan. 4March 19, 2019 City Council Agenda Report, http://local.anaheim.net/docs_agend/questys_pub/ 20865/20895/20896/21055/21056/Staff%20Report21056.pdf. City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 16 of 18 The City had also adopted a resolution, Resolution No. 2018-106, making it a priority to create affordable housing in Anaheim, explicitly noting that the City was well- behind its RHNA allocation to create housing for moderate, low, and very-low income residents.5 Section 1 of the Resolution requires that developers “will engage earnestly and objectively in discussions with City staff as projects are contemplated and proposed that result in the consideration of viable options for the creation of affordable housing to the extent feasible.” The simple fact is that the Project will not include any affordable housing units as part of the Project; and there is no evidence that the developer ever attempted to work with the City to provide these units. What was the rationale for not including affordable housing units? Was it not feasible? The IS/MND includes no discussion and excludes affordable units by fiat without earnestly attempting to include them in the Project. The Project opts to, instead, make an unspecified contribution to the City’s affordable housing “programs (i.e. Senior Safety Net Program).” This is unacceptable. The City cannot and will not meet its RHNA obligations for construction through 2021 if every developer excludes affordable units in their residential projects, as the developer proposes here. And the City’s Resolution requires some analysis or discussion on this issue. The City should require inclusion of affordable housing units on this Project so that it may assist the City to reach its RHNA assessment allocation. B. The Proposed Land Use Amendments and Entitlements Conflict with SB 375 and SCAG’s 2016 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy In 2008, Senate Bill 375 amended CEQA and empowered metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to enact regional plans to reduce GHG emissions from passenger vehicles. MPOs are required to prepare regional transportation plans (RTP) and sustainable community strategies (SCS) in an effort to meet CARB’s GHG reduction goals under SB 375. (Gov. Code § 65080(b)(2)(B).) SB 375 specifically targets GHG emissions from passenger vehicles by linking land use decisions to 5 A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Anaheim Adopting an Affordable Housing Policy that Affordable Housing is a Priority in the City of Anaheim, https://www.anaheim.net/ DocumentCenter/View/23785/RES-2018-106-Affordable-Housing-Policy---Signed-and-Replaced- Scans. City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 17 of 18 transportation planning. (Id.) If the regional SCS/RTP plan does not achieve CARB’s GHG reduction targets, then the MPO is required to create an alternative planning strategy (APS) that shows how the targets can be achieved through other mechanism such as alternative development patterns, infrastructure decisions, or other alternative transportation measures or policies that can still achieve CARB’s reduction targets. (Gov. Code § 65080(b)(2)(I).) For this Project, the applicable plan is SCAG’s 2016 RTP/SCS plan adopted in April 2016. The IS/MND fails to analyze the Project’s consistency with SCAG’s RTP/SCS plan, and is inconsistent in many respects. For example, SCAG’s 2016 RTP/SCS requires or suggests the following that the Project fails to consider or adopt in the IS/MND: ● Land Use Policies: pursuing affordable housing or providing more transportation options for short trips;6 ● Transportation Network Strategies: providing transit fare discounts; providing transit integration strategies such as integration of active transportation and transit by improving pedestrian access and bicyclist access;7 ● Transportation Demand Management Strategies: encourage use and implementation of TDM strategies such as rideshare incentives, parking management, parking subsidies for carpoolers, incentives for telecommuting, integrated mobility hubs, or additional investments in active transportation infrastructure;8 and ● Clean Vehicle Technology Strategies: use of neighborhood electric vehicles (NEVs), and anticipating shared mobility platforms, car- to-car communication or automated vehicle technologies.9 The IS/MND fails to demonstrate consistency with SCAG’s 2016 RTP/SCS Plan and should be revised to meet its goals and policies. 6 SCAG (Apr. 2016) 2016 RTP/SCS, pp. 75-114. 7 Id. 8 Id. 9 Id. City of Anaheim – Agenda Item Nos. 33 and 34, 1600 West Lincoln Project June 9, 2020 Page 18 of 18 IV. CONCLUSION Commenters request that the City revise and recirculate the Project’s Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, or submit an environmental impact report, to address the aforementioned concerns. If the City has any questions or concerns, feel free to contact my Office. Sincerely, ______________________ Mitchell M. Tsai Attorneys for Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters Attachments: City of Anaheim General Plan – Land Use Element (Exhibit A); City of Anaheim City Council Agenda Report (March 19, 2019), Annual Housing Element Progress Report for the 2018 Reporting Period (Exhibit B); City of Anaheim City Council Resolution No. 2018-106, A Resolution of the City of Anaheim Adopting an Affordable Housing Policy Affirming that Affordable Housing is a Priority in the City of Anaheim (Exhibit C); and SCAG 2016-2040 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (April 2016) (Exhibit D). EXHIBIT A LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-i Land Use Element INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 Relationship to Other Elements .................................................................................... 1 Relationship to Other Planning Tools ............................................................................ 1 Achieving the Vision ................................................................................................... 5 Setting ...................................................................................................................... 6 Existing Land Uses ...................................................................................................... 6 LAND USE PLAN ............................................................................................................ 11 Land Use Designation System .................................................................................... 11 Plan Objectives ......................................................................................................... 33 Land Use Buildout Analysis ........................................................................................ 37 GOALS & POLICIES ....................................................................................................... 41 Citywide Goals and Policies ....................................................................................... 41 Neighborhoods .................................................................................................. 41 Housing Opportunities ........................................................................................ 42 Corridors........................................................................................................... 43 Compatibility ..................................................................................................... 44 Creating Identifiable Places .................................................................................. 45 Redevelopment and Revitalization ........................................................................ 46 Jobs-Housing Relationship ................................................................................... 47 Community Policy Areas ............................................................................................ 49 The Hill and Canyon Area ................................................................................... 49 West Anaheim ................................................................................................... 50 North Euclid Street ............................................................................................. 51 East Anaheim ..................................................................................................... 53 North Central Industrial Area ............................................................................... 54 The Colony and Downtown ................................................................................. 55 South Anaheim Boulevard ................................................................................... 57 The Platinum Triangle ......................................................................................... 58 Anaheim Canyon ................................................................................................ 59 CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-ii | Revised March 2020 List of Figures Figure LU-1 Specific Plan Map ............................................................................ 3 Figure LU-2 Regional Vicinity Map ...................................................................... 9 Figure LU-3 Floor Area Ratio Example ............................................................... 12 Figure LU-4 Land Use Plan............................................................................... 13 Figure LU-5 Areas of the City with Special Density Limitations ............................. 17 List of Tables Table LU-1: City Of Anaheim Approved Specific Plans .............................................. 2 Table LU-2: Residential Land Use Designations ...................................................... 15 Table LU-3: Non-Residential Land Use Designations .............................................. 15 Table LU-4: General Plan Density Provisions for Specific Areas of the City ................ 19 Table LU-5: Residential Buildout Estimates ............................................................ 39 Table LU-6: Non-Residential Buildout Estimates ..................................................... 40 LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-1 Introduction he Land Use Element is a guide, or “blueprint,” for Anaheim’s future development. It designates the distribution and general location of land uses, such as residential, retail, industrial, open space, recreation, and public uses. The Land Use Element also addresses the permitted density and intensity of the various land use designations as reflected on the City’s General Plan Land Use Map (Figure LU-4). RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER ELEMENTS The Land Use Element and its associated General Plan Land Use Map are intended to capture and communicate Anaheim’s long-term vision for future development. Of all the General Plan elements required by State law, the Land Use Element has the broadest scope. Since it governs how land is to be utilized, virtually all of the issues and policies contained in other Elements relate in some degree to this Element. For example, the Circulation Element defines policies for the accommodation of vehicular trips generated by the population and employment associated with the various land uses permitted by the Land Use Element. Similarly, the location and intensity of uses prescribed by this Element are influenced by policies for the protection of environmental and recreational resources in the Green Element. The Land Use Element also furthers the goals and policies of the Housing Element by identifying opportunities for new residential development that include a wide range of densities. The Community Design Element complements the Land Use Element by providing policies that promote quality development and enhance community character. Specific redevelopment and revitalization goals and policies that further the direction of the Land Use Element are included in the Economic Development Element. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANNING TOOLS Although the General Plan serves as the blueprint for future development, several other planning tools help the City implement its Vision. T CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-2 | Revised March 2020 Zoning The City’s Zoning Code is the primary tool for implementing the General Plan, providing development standards, identifying allowable land uses, and specifying other regulations. The Zoning Code guides the use patterns, design, and improvements for development projects. By establishing rules regarding the use of property and site development standards (e.g., building heights and setbacks, parking standards, etc.), the Zoning Code provides detailed guidance for development based on, and consistent with, the land use policies established within the General Plan. Specific Plans Specific plans are customized regulatory documents that provide more focused guidance and regulation, for particular areas. They generally include a land use plan, circulation plan, infrastructure plan, development standards, design guidelines, phasing plan, financing plan, and implementation plan. Anaheim has 11 approved specific plans governing land use development in designated areas. The specific plans listed below are depicted on Figure LU-1, and can be viewed at the City’s Planning Department. Table LU-1: City Of Anaheim Approved Specific Plans Number Plan Name 87-1 The Highlands at Anaheim Hills 88-1 Sycamore Canyon 88-2 The Summit of Anaheim Hills 90-1 The Anaheim Hills Festival 90-2 East Center Street Development 90-4 Mountain Park 92-1 The Disneyland Resort 92-2 The Anaheim Resort 93-1 Hotel Circle 2015-1 Anaheim Canyon 2017-1 Beach Boulevard Specific Plan Ho l d e r S t Kn o t t A v e We s t e r n A v e Be a c h B l v d Da l e S t Ma g n o l i a A v e Gi l b e r t S t Br o o k h u r s t S t Mu l l e r S t La Palma Ave Crescent Ave Lincoln Ave Broadway Orange Ave Ball Rd Cerritos Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Chapman Ave Eu c l i d S t Nu t w o o d S t 9t h S t Wa l n u t S t Di s n e y l a n d D r Ha r b o r B l v d Le w i s S t Lo a r a S t St a t e C o l l e g e B l v d Do u g l a s s R d S H a s t e r S t Disney Way Gene Autry Way W e s t S t H a r b o r B l v d A n a h e i m B l v d O l i v e S t E a s t S t S o u t h S t V e r m o n t A v e S a n t a A n a S tBroadwayLincolnAve S y c a m o r e S tNorthSt Ball Rd Wagner Ave South St La Palma Ave Romneya Dr Orangethorpe Ave Eu c l i d S t Le m o n S t Ra y m o n d A v e Ha r b o r B l v d Ac a c i a A v e St a t e C o l l e g e B l v d P l a c e n t i a A v e Su n k i s t S t Ri o V i s t a S t Crowther Ave O r a n g e t h o r p e A v e M i r a l o m a A v e L a P a l m a A v e R e d G u m S t K r a e m e r B l v d M i l l e r S t T ustin A ve Va n B u r e n S t N L a k e v i e w A v e Ke l l o g g D r Esper an z a R d OrangethorpeAve La Palma Ave ImperialHwy S a n t i a g o B l M e a t s A v e Im p e r i a l H w y NohlRanch R d Santa Ana Canyon Rd F air m o nt Blvd C a n y on RimRd S e r r a n o A v e W eir C a n y onRd O a k C a nyon D r M e t r o l i n k B l u e G u m S t Cerritos A v e |ÿ241 |ÿ91 |ÿ90 |ÿ55 |ÿ57 |ÿ91 §¨¦5 Romneya Dr A n a h e i m H i l l s R d Specific Plan Map City of Anaheim Figure LU-1 Page LU-3 General Plan Program 0 1 20.5 Miles Anaheim Resort Hotel CircleDisneyland Resort East Center Street The Highlands The Summit Sycamore CanyonAnaheim Hills Festival Note: See Specific Plans for further description of land uses and density. *See Table LU-4 for density information. City Boundary Sphere-of-Influence Adopted: May 25, 2004 Revised: November 20, 2018 Mountain Park Anaheim Canyon SP 2017-1 Beach Boulevard Specific Plan SP 87-1 The Highlands at Anaheim Hills SP 88-1 Sycamore Canyon SP 88-2 The Summit of Anaheim Hills SP 90-1 Anaheim Hills Festival SP 90-2 East Center Street Development SP 92-1 The Disneyland Resort* SP 92-2 The Anaheim Resort* SP 93-1 Hotel Circle* SP 2015-1 Anaheim Canyon SP 90-4 Mountain Park Beach Boulevard CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-4 | Revised March 2020 This page intentionally left blank. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-5 Redevelopment Plans The City of Anaheim has maintained an active redevelopment program since the 1970s when it first began efforts to revitalize its Downtown core. The City’s redevelopment efforts have since greatly expanded, encompassing six major project areas as of 2003. As these project areas have progressed and property values increased, the Redevelopment Agency, headed by the City Council and staffed by the Community Development Department, has used the resulting increases in tax revenue for a variety of public purposes, including funding for the provision of affordable housing. The Agency coordinates several on-going efforts associated with industrial, retail, office and residential development within redevelopment project areas including the provision of off-site public improvements, project financing, site evaluation and infrastructure analysis. Locations of each project area and a more thorough discussion of redevelopment in Anaheim is addressed in the Economic Development Element. ACHIEVING THE VISION The Land Use Element is an important tool in achieving Anaheim’s Vision. The Vision was developed to guide the City to its preferred future by identifying important desired community characteristics. A “visioning” process consisting of several focused workshops held throughout the community, a community-wide Planning Rally at Angel Stadium of Anaheim, and a community survey of Anaheim residents was completed as a means to identify such characteristics. During the visioning process a number of community values were articulated. Those related to land use included: • A balance of jobs, housing, open space and recreational opportunities; • The need for quality development; • Attractive neighborhoods (both new and existing) that offer a wide variety of residential product types appealing to the broad spectrum of people who want to live in Anaheim; • Protection of the integrity of single-family neighborhoods; • Recognizable gathering places where residents, employees and visitors can interact, socialize and recreate; • Revitalized corridors offering a mix of land uses as an alternative to underutilized strip commercial development; • First-class shopping and dining opportunities; and, • A pedestrian friendly, active Downtown that reflects the historic character of the Anaheim Colony. The guidance provided by the community has directly shaped the content of this Element and the balance of the General Plan.  The complete text of the Vision Statement is provided in Appendix A. A more detailed description of the public outreach program undertaken as part of the General Plan Update is provided in the General Plan Introduction. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-6 | Revised March 2020 SETTING Located in northwestern Orange County, the City of Anaheim lies approximately 35 miles southeast of downtown Los Angeles and 7 miles northwest of Santa Ana (see Figure LU-1). At the time of its incorporation in 1876, Anaheim covered just over 1,660 acres. Today, the City encompasses over 28,000 acres of land, stretching nearly 20 miles along the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway, and includes another 2,431 acres of unincorporated land within its sphere-of-influence. In addition to SR-91, regional access to and from Anaheim is provided by the Santa Ana (I-5), Orange (SR-57) and Costa Mesa (SR-55) freeways; the Eastern Transportation Corridor (SR-241); and Amtrak and Metrolink passenger train services. The City of Anaheim is a geographically diverse community. The western and central portions of the City are characterized by relatively flat ground that slopes gently to the southwest. This portion of the City is also characterized by a mix of suburban and urban development and is relatively built out. The area is home to Downtown and the Anaheim Colony Historic District, which are located within the City’s original 1.8 square mile boundary and contains a vast majority of Anaheim’s valued historic structures. The eastern portion of the City extends generally along the Santa Ana River to the Riverside County line. This part of the City includes hillside terrain and an abundance of natural resources. Residential development in the eastern portion of Anaheim largely consists of the various hillside communities on the south side of the Riverside Freeway that extend to the Eastern Transportation Corridor (SR-241). Other relatively flat residential neighborhoods are located north of the Santa Ana River and east of Imperial Highway, and generally south of the Santa Ana River at the intersection of the Riverside (SR-91) and Costa Mesa (SR-55) Freeways. Anaheim Canyon, a regional employment center consisting of office, industrial and commercial uses that generally spans the north side of the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway between the Orange (SR-57) Freeway and Imperial Highway, is also located in the eastern part of the City. EXISTING LAND USES Anaheim is well known for its various world-class tourist destinations, including The Anaheim Resort, which includes The Disneyland Resort and the Anaheim Convention Center, and its professional sports franchises/venues. However, it is also home to over 330,000 residents, 11,000 businesses, and 1,500 acres of passive and active parks and open space areas. Sphere-of-Influence: Established by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), spheres-of-influence are intended to reflect “the probable physical boundaries and service area” of cities. LAFCO is directed by State law (the Cortese/Knox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985, as amended) to establish and periodically review the spheres-of-influence for each agency under its jurisdiction. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-7 Various types of existing land uses are found throughout Anaheim and are categorized by uses that can be grouped into nine broad categories: Residential, Quasi-Public/ Governmental, Industrial/Manufacturing, Commercial/Office, Entertainment/Lodging, Parks/Open Space, Water Uses/Waterways, Agriculture/Vacant, and Other. Residential Residential land uses account for nearly half of the total land area in the City, most of which are devoted to single-family residential uses. Residential uses are found in nearly all areas of the City. A wide variety of housing types and affordability can be found throughout the City making it possible to provide for a diverse population both in age and income. Housing types range from large hillside estates to historic single-family homes, to duplexes and four-plexes, to multiple-family apartments and townhomes, and mixed-use developments. Commercial/Office Retail and service commercial uses in Anaheim follow the same basic pattern as most cities in North Orange County – that is, they are located primarily along arterial corridors. Two regional shopping areas are also located in the City, the Anaheim Plaza in West-Central Anaheim and The Festival in the Hill and Canyon Area. Office uses are generally dispersed throughout the City along arterial corridors and adjacent to its freeways, with small concentrations of larger-scale office buildings found in The Platinum Triangle and Downtown areas. Entertainment/Lodging Anaheim is known worldwide for its tourist attractions and sports/entertainment venues. These uses are concentrated in two adjacent areas separated by the Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway: The Anaheim Resort, comprised of the Anaheim Convention Center, the Disneyland Theme Park, Disney’s California Adventure Theme Park, Downtown Disney, and numerous hotels; and The Platinum Triangle, which includes the Arrowhead Pond and Angel Stadium of Anaheim. The Platinum Triangle is also home to a variety of restaurants, hotels and the Grove of Anaheim. Industrial/Manufacturing A critical component of Anaheim’s economic base, manufacturing and industrial uses comprise a significant portion of Anaheim’s land area. Much of Anaheim’s manufacturing and lighter industrial uses are concentrated in The Anaheim Canyon and in areas north of Angel Stadium of Anaheim. Some of the City’s older and heavier industrial uses are concentrated in the North Central Industrial Area, generally located south of the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway between Lemon Street and Raymond Avenue, and in the southeastern portion of Downtown along the Metrolink railway. Consistent CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-8 | Revised March 2020 with the Anaheim Vision and General Plan Land Use Map, many of the Downtown industrial areas are transitioning to residential uses. Additional industrial uses are found in other areas of the City, particularly along freeways and railroads. Quasi-Public/Governmental Quasi-public and governmental uses include a wide range of uses: governmental office buildings, fire and police stations, hospitals, utility buildings and substations, community centers, assembly areas and libraries and schools, among others. Their locations are found throughout the City in order to effectively serve the public. Quasi-public and governmental uses account for a relatively small portion of the City’s total land area. Parks/Open Space Anaheim’s parks and open space account for approximately 6% or just over 1,500 acres of the City’s total land area. These areas include sports fields, playgrounds, nature preserves, golf courses, and other passive and active recreational uses. A more thorough discussion of Anaheim’s existing and planned park and open space resources can be found in the Green Element. Water Uses/Waterways The Santa Ana River is the most prominent water feature in Anaheim. It runs through the Hill and Canyon Area and Anaheim Canyon alongside the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway and along the eastern edge of The Platinum Triangle. The river provides a scenic and recreational resource for the entire region. It also serves as the City’s primary drainage and flood control facility as well as the primary source for groundwater recharge in the City. Two smaller, yet important drainage and flood control facilities in western Anaheim are the Carbon Creek Channel and the Anaheim/Barber City Channel. Another major water-related facility includes the 920-million gallon Walnut Canyon Reservoir, located in the Hill and Canyon Area. Flood control facilities and related goals and policies are discussed in the Safety Element; water and drainage systems and related goals and policies are discussed in the Public Services and Facilities Element; and water conservation and quality are addressed in the Green Element. Agriculture/Vacant Lands Although nearly 3,400 acres of land in Anaheim is utilized for agricultural purposes or is vacant, very little remains that is not already entitled for future development. The primary exceptions are the many utility easements that are envisioned to serve as trail connections, passive open space or low intensity commercial uses. The largest portion of vacant land is found in the Mountain Park Specific Plan area on the eastern edge of the City. The area includes 3,169 acres and is planned for a mix of residential uses, a park, a school, a fire station and open space. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-10 | Revised March 2020 This page intentionally left blank. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-11 Land Use Plan As required by State law, the General Plan must identify land use designations and permitted development intensities. General Plans are also required to include a diagram of the location of these uses. These components, as well as a series of planning objectives that serve as the foundation for the Land Use Plan (Figure LU-4), are included in this section of the Land Use Element. LAND USE DESIGNATION SYSTEM Land use designations are provided in order to define the amount, type, and nature of future development that is allowed in a given location of the City. The following section defines each of the land use designations shown on the Land Use Plan, as well as the density and intensity standards required in accordance with State law. Tables LU-2 and LU-3 provide a summary of the land use designations in terms of density, intensity and typical implementation zones. Figure LU-5 and Table LU-4 provide more detailed information for those areas of the City subject to special density provisions. Each of the General Plan land use designations is typically implemented by a defined set of zoning designations included in the City’s Zoning Code. The Zoning Code contains the detailed regulations pertaining to permitted and conditional uses, site development standards, and performance criteria that serve to implement many goals and policies of the General Plan. Each of the residential use designations includes a range of allowable densities. The maximum density defines the maximum number of dwelling units per gross acre at which development can occur within a given residentially-designated area. Any portion of a residential lot designated on the Land Use Map as Open Space or any other non- residential designation should not be included in calculating density. The determination of precise density is also influenced by site location, topography, the development standards contained in the Zoning Code, and other City policies, regulations and ordinances. These other considerations may mean that the maximum density established CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-12 | Revised March 2020 by the General Plan land use designation may not be achievable on each potential development site. Building intensities for non-residential land uses are measured by floor area ratio (FAR). An FAR is the ratio of total net floor area of a building to the total lot area. An FAR describes the intensity of the use on a site and not necessarily the building height or site coverage. It does not include the area within parking structures used for parking and circulation or open outdoor storage areas. Figure LU-3 illustrates the concept of the FAR calculation. Figure LU-3 Floor Area Ratio Example (FAR = 0.50) Example: On a one-acre parcel (43,560 sq. ft.), a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.50 equates to a total building area of 21,780 sq. ft., in either a 1, 2, or 3 story configuration (43,560 sq. ft. multiplied by 0.50 equals 21,780 sq. ft.). Note how low coverage (building footprint) varies significantly as the building height changes to yield an identical FAR. Building covers 50% (21,780 sq. ft.) of parcel and is only one story high. Building covers 25% (10,890 sq. ft.) of parcel, but is two stories high. Building covers 16.6% (7,260 sq. ft.) of parcel and is now three stories high. Ho l d e r S t Kn o t t A v e We s t e r n A v e Be a c h B l v d Da l e S t Ma g n o l i a A v e Gi l b e r t S t Br o o k h u r s t S t Mu l l e r S t La Palma Ave Crescent Ave Lincoln Ave Broadway Orange Ave Ball Rd Cerritos Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Chapman Ave Eu c l i d S t Nu t w o o d S t 9t h S t Wa l n u t S t Di s n e y l a n d D r Ha r b o r B l v d Le w i s S t Lo a r a S t St a t e C o l l e g e B l v d Do u g l a s s R d S H a s t e r S t Disney Way Gene Autry Way W e s t S t H a r b o r B l v d A n a h e i m B l v d O l i v e S t E a s t S t S o u t h S t V e r m o n t A v e S a n t a A n a S tBroadwayLincolnAve S y c a m o r e S tNorthSt Ball Rd Wagner Ave South St La Palma Ave Romneya Dr Orangethorpe Ave Eu c l i d S t Le m o n S t Ra y m o n d A v e Ha r b o r B l v d Ac a c i a A v e St a t e C o l l e g e B l v d P l a c e n t i a A v e Su n k i s t S t Ri o V i s t a S t Crowther Ave O r a n g e t h o r p e A v e M i r a l o m a A v e L a P a l m a A v e R e d G u m S t K r a e m e r B l v d M i l l e r S t T u stin A ve Va n B u r e n S t N L a k e v i e w A v e Ke l l o g g D r Esper an z a R d OrangethorpeAve La Palma Ave ImperialHwy S a n ti a g o B l M e a t s A v e I m p e r i a l H w y NohlRanch R d Santa Ana C anyon Rd F air m o nt Blvd C a n y o n RimRd S e r r a n o A v e W eir C a n y onRd O a k C a nyon D r M e t r o l i n k B l u e G u m S t Cerritos A v e |ÿ241 |ÿ91 |ÿ90 |ÿ55 |ÿ57 |ÿ91 §¨¦5 Romneya Dr A n a h e i m H i ll s R d R R R R R R R k ")!(S P Land Use Plan Figure LU-4 Page LU-13 City of Anaheim General Plan Program Adopted: May 25, 2004 Revised: March 10, 2020 0 1 20.5 Miles Note: Land Use Map includes Anaheim's Sphere of Influence. Public/Quasi - Public Industrial Industrial Institutional School Open Space Water Open Space Parks Office High Low Non-Residential Commercial Commercial Recreation Neighborhood Center General RegionalR Railroad General Park Location General School Location") !(P S City Boundary Intermodal Transportation Centerk Sphere-of-Influence Medium Density Corridor Mid Density Residential Low Medium Density Low Medium Hillside Density Estate Low Density Mixed-Use Mixed-Use Urban Core Non-Residential Mixed-Use Mixed-Use High Mixed-Use Medium Mixed-Use Mid CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-14 | Revised March 2020 This page intentionally left blank. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-15 TABLE LU-3 Non-Residential Land Use Designations Commercial Office Industrial Mixed-Use Neighborhood General Regional Commercial Recreation Low High Industrial Mixed-Use Mid Mixed-Use Medium Mixed-Use High Mixed-Used Urban Core Non-Residential Mixed-Use Probable to Maximum Intensity 0.35 - 0.45 FAR 0.25 - 0.50 FAR 0.30 - 0.50 FAR Refer to Table LU-4 0.40 - 0.50 FAR (Refer to Table LU-4 for Office Low areas in the Platinum Triangle) 0.50 - 2.00 FAR (Refer to Table LU-4 for Office High areas in the Platinum Triangle) 0.35 - 0.50 FAR 0.00 - 0.10 FAR 0.10 - 0.35 FAR 0.10 - 0.35 FAR 0.00 - 3.00 FAR 1.50 - 3.00 FAR Typical Implementing Zoning C-NC C-G C-R Specific Plan O-L O-H I MU MU MU DMU PTMU Specific Plan TABLE LU-3 CONTINUED Non-Residential Land Use Designations Public / Quasi - Public Open Space Institutional Schools Open Space Parks Water Probable to Maximum Intensity 0.10 - 3.00 FAR N/A 0 - 0.10 FAR 0 - 0.10 FAR 0 - 0.10 FAR Typical Implementing Zoning SP SP OS PR SP OS PR SP Table LU-2 & LU-3 Notes Table LU-2 & LU-3 Definitions In addition to the typical zoning designations listed above, other zones may be substituted for the typical implementation zones, provided that the overall density ranges established by the General Plan are not exceeded. Additionally, other Specific Plans or Overlay Zones may apply, which could further restrict maximum densities. For allowable densities within Specific Plan areas, please refer to the applicable Specific Plan. RH: Single-Family Hillside Residential RS: Single-Family Residential RM: Multiple-Family Residential MU: Mixed Use Overlay Zone DMU: Downtown Mixed Use Overlay Zone PTMU: Platinum Triangle Mixed Use Overlay Zone Since allowable uses within the Institutional land use designation vary significantly (e.g., offices, transportation facilities, libraries, community centers, fire stations, etc.), the FAR for the Institutional designation also varies significantly. du/ac: dwelling units per gross acre C-NC: Neighborhood Center Commercial C-G: General Commercial C-R: Regional Commercial O-L: Low Intensity Office Zone O-H: High Intensity Office Zone I: Industrial FAR: Floor Area Ratio SP: Semi-Public Zone OS: Open Space Zone PR: Public Recreation Zone (SC): Scenic Corridor Overlay Zone T: Transition Zone* *Can be implemented in any general plan designation TABLE LU-2 Residential Land Use Designations Residential Mixed-Use Estate Low Density Low-Medium Hillside Density Low-Medium Density Mid Density Medium Density Corridor Mixed-Use Mid Mixed-Use Medium Mixed-Use High Mixed-Used Urban Core Minimum to Maximum Density (dwelling units/acre) 0 - 1.5 du/ac 0 - 6.5 du/ac 0 - 6.0 du/ac 0 - 18.0 du/ac 0 - 27.0 du/ac 0 - 36.0 du/ac 0 - 13.0 du/ac 0 - 27 du/ac 0.10 FAR 0 - 36 du/ac 0.35 FAR 0 - 60 du/ac 0.35 FAR 0 - 100 du/ac 3.00 FAR Typical Implementing Zoning RH-1 RH-2 RH-3 RS-1 RS-2 RS-3 RS-3 (SC) RS-4 (SC) RM-2 (SC) RS-4 RM-1 RM-2 RM-3 RM-3 RM-3.5 RM-3 RM-3.5 RM-4 RM-1 MU MU MU DMU PTMU CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-16 | Revised March 2020 This page intentionally left blank H ol d e r St K no t t Av e We s t er n A v e B ea c h B l v d D al e S t Ma g n o l i a Av e Gi l be r t St B r oo k h u r s t S t Mu l l er S t La Palma Ave Crescent Ave Lincoln Ave Broadway Orange Ave Ball Rd Cerritos Ave Katella Ave Orangewood Ave Chapman Ave E uc l id S t N ut wo o d S t 9t h S t Wa l n u t S t D is n e y l a n d D r H ar bo r Bl vd Le w is S t Lo a r a S t S t at e Co l le g e B l v d D ou g l a s s Rd S Ha s t e r S t Disney Way Gene Autry Way W e s t S t H a r b o r B l v d A n a h e i m B l v d O l i v e S t E a s t S t S o u t h S t V e r m o n t A v e S a n t a A n a S tBroadwayLincoln A v e S y c a m o r e S tNorth S t Ball Rd Wagner Ave South St La Palma Ave Romneya Dr Orangethorpe Ave E uc l id S t Le m o n St R ay m on d A v e H ar bo r Bl vd A ca ci a Av e S t at e Co l le g e B lv d P l a c e n t i a A v e S un k i st S t R io V i s t a S t Crowther Ave O r a n g e t h o r p e A v e M i r a l o m a A v e L a P a l m a A v e R e d G u m S t K r a e m e r B l v d M i l l e r S t T ustin A ve V an Bu r e n St N La k e v i e w A v e K el l o g g D r Esperan z a R d Orangethorpe Ave La Palma Ave Imperial Hwy Sa n t i a g o B l M e a t s A v e Im p e r i a l H w y Nohl Ranch R d Santa Ana Canyon Rd F air m o nt Blvd C a n y on Rim Rd S e r r a n o A v e W e ir C a n y on Rd O a k C a nyon D r M e t r o l i n k B l u e G u m S t Cerritos A v e |ÿ241 |ÿ91 |ÿ90 |ÿ55 |ÿ57 |ÿ91 §¨¦5 Romneya Dr A n a h e i m H i l l s R d Areas of the City with Special Density Limitations City of Anaheim Figure LU-5 Page LU-17 General Plan Program 0 1 20.5 Miles The Anaheim Resort Hotel CircleDisneyland Resort Mountain Park The Mountain Park Specific Plan Area (SP 90-4) Area A The Disneyland Resort (SP 92-1) The Anaheim Resort (SP 92-2) Hotel Circle (SP 93-1) The Platinum Triangle Area City Boundary Sphere-of-Influence The Platinum Triangle Stonegate CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-18 | Revised March 2020 This page intentionally left blank. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-19 TABLE LU-4: GENERAL PLAN DENSITY PROVISIONS FOR SPECIFIC AREAS OF THE CITY Location General Plan Land Use Designations Permitted Density The Mountain Park Area Low Medium Hillside Density Residential (Up to 6 du/ac) Low Medium Density Residential (Up to 16 du/ac) 485 2,015 (Up to 2,500 dwelling units) Area “A” (Parcel Map 94-205) Low-Medium Density Residential Up to 140 dwelling units The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan (SP 92-1) Area Commercial Recreation See Note No. 1 on next page. The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (SP 92-2) Area Commercial Recreation See Note No. 2 on next page. Hotel Circle Specific Plan (SP 93-1) Area Commercial Recreation The Hotel Circle Specific Plan allows for a master planned hotel project including up to 969 hotel rooms and integrated guest oriented amenities including full-service restaurants, conference room/banquet facilities, pool and spa areas, tour bus/shuttle facilities, and pedestrian promenades and plaza areas with comprehensive landscaping. The Platinum Triangle Area Mixed-Use Residential Commercial Office Institutional Office High and Office Low Institutional Industrial Open Space 17,501dwelling units 4,782,243 square feet 9,180,747square feet 1,500,000 square feet 4,309,486 square feet* 3.0 FAR 0.5 FAR 0.1 FAR * The maximum FAR for properties designated Office-Low is 0.5; the maximum FAR for properties designated Office-High is 2.0. The Stonegate Development Area Low Density Residential Up to 35 dwelling units CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-20 | Revised March 2020 TABLE LU-4: GENERAL PLAN DENSITY PROVISIONS FOR SPECIFIC AREAS OF THE CITY (CONTINUED) Note No. 1: The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan provides for the development of an approximate 489.7 acre international multi-day vacation designation resort including ongoing modifications to the Disneyland theme park, the development of a new theme park, additional hotels and entertainment areas, administrative office facilities, new public and private parking facilities, and an internal transportation system. This development is within five planning Districts (Theme Park, Hotel, Parking, Future Expansion and District A) and a C-R Overlay, which allows development within the Overlay to either be consistent with the underlying Resort District or subject to the same land uses as in the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan No. 92-2 Zone. The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan also identifies maximum development density designations for hotel/motel development in the Hotel District (up to 5,600 hotel rooms for the entire District with up to 1,000 hotel rooms transferable to the Theme Park District), in District A (the maximum number of units permitted would be 75 hotel/motel rooms per gross acre or 75 hotel/motel rooms per parcel existing on June 29, 1993, whichever is greater) and the C-R Overlay (the maximum number of units permitted on a parcel would be the following: 1) for parcels designated Low Density – up to 50 hotel rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms, whichever is greater; and 2) for parcels designated Medium Density – up to 75 hotel rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms, whichever is greater; provided that for those parcels that are developed with hotel/motel rooms which exceeded the maximum density designation, the number of rooms existing on the date of adoption of The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan Ordinance may be rebuilt or modified at their existing density.) It should be noted that accessory uses may be developed as well as other visitor-serving commercial/retail and restaurant uses along with these hotel/motel uses. The Disneyland Resort Specific Plan also provides for the development of the Anaheim GardenWalk project pursuant to the Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay at the following density and subject to the approval of Conditional Use Permit No. 4078, as amended, to permit the following: up to 590,265 square feet of specialty retail, restaurants, and entertainment uses, including movie theaters; 1,628 hotel rooms/suites (including up to 500 vacation ownership units) and 278,817 square feet of hotel accessory uses; a transportation center, and 4,800 parking spaces. The Anaheim GardenWalk Overlay encompasses District A and the portion of the Parking District (East Parking Area)/CR Overlay south of Disney Way. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-21 TABLE LU-4: GENERAL PLAN DENSITY PROVISIONS FOR SPECIFIC AREAS OF THE CITY (CONTINUED) Note No. 2: The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan (ARSP) provides for the development of approximately 581.3 acres within The Anaheim Resort. The ARSP is divided into two development areas. Development Area No. 1 is referred to as the C-R (Commercial Recreation) District which allows for hotels, motels, convention and conference facilities, as well as restaurants, retail shops and entertainment facilities. Development Area No. 2 is referred to as the PR (Public Recreation) District which encompasses the Anaheim Convention Center and associated parking facilities and provides for the orderly use of City-owned property as well as the existing Anaheim Hilton Hotel. The C-R District includes two overlays. The Mobilehome Park (MHP) Overlay, which encompasses existing mobilehome parks within the C-R District, provides development standards for mobilehome parks and regulations and procedures to mitigate relocation concerns and adverse effects of displacement upon mobilehome owners when a park is converted to another land use. The Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay, which applies to focused areas of the Specific Plan, provides for the incorporation of residential uses into hotel developments when such uses are fully integrated into a minimum 300-room full-service hotel. The Anaheim Resort Specific Plan also identifies maximum development density designations in the C-R District. These designations are based upon hotel/motel development and allow up to 20% of each hotel/motel project gross square footage, excluding parking facilities, to be developed with integrated (i.e., included within the main hotel/motel complex) accessory uses. These accessory uses will reduce the otherwise maximum permitted hotel/motel density at the rate of one hotel/motel room per six hundred (600) gross square feet of accessory use. For properties proposed to be developed with permitted and conditionally permitted uses other than hotels/motels with accessory uses, the traffic generation characteristics of said uses shall not exceed those associated with the otherwise permitted hotel/motel (including accessory uses) density as determined by the City Traffic and Transportation Manager prior to Final Site Plan review and approval. The maximum development density for each of the designations are as follows: • Low Density: up to 50 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel, whichever is greater; • Low-Medium Density: up to 75 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel, whichever is greater; • Low-Medium Density (Modified): up to 252 rooms and 75,593 square feet of accessory uses; • Medium Density: up to 100 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel, whichever is greater; and • Medium Density (Modified): up to 345 rooms; and • Convention Center (CC) Medium Density: up to 125 rooms per gross acre with trip generation characteristics mitigated to the equivalent of 100 rooms per gross acre or 75 rooms per lot or parcel, whichever is greater. For those parcels that are developed with hotel/motel rooms which exceed the maximum density designation, the number of rooms existing on the date of adoption of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan Ordinance may be rebuilt or modified at their existing density. For projects that are developed in accordance with the Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay, the maximum number of dwelling units allowed shall be less than the number of hotel rooms proposed and such projects shall not create infrastructure impacts greater than the subject property’s permitted hotel/motel density, as permitted by the property’s underlying C-R District density designation unless otherwise mitigated through subsequent environmental analysis. The maximum development density for the PR District is up to: • 2,158,363 square feet of convention center/meeting space • 100,000 square feet of outdoor programmable space • 2,500 hotel rooms • 180,000 square feet of commercial space CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-22 | Revised March 2020 This page intentionally left blank. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-23 Residential Designations Anaheim offers a wide range of housing densities and products to meet the demand of current and future residents with varying lifestyles. In addition to the characteristics described below, it should be noted that other uses may also be allowed in residential areas such as schools, parks, child care facilities, and other public/institutional uses that are determined to be compatible with and oriented towards the needs of the immediate neighborhood. Estate (0-1.5 dwelling units per acre) The Estate Density Residential designation provides for the development of large-lot single-family residences with a custom character. This category is typically implemented by the RH-1(SC) and RH-2(SC) zones. Typical development consists of single-family lots of 22,000 to 43,560 square feet. The permitted density range is from zero up to 1.5 dwelling units per gross acre. This land use designation is limited to the Hill and Canyon Area. Low Density (0-6.5 dwelling units per acre) The Low Density Residential designation provides for the development of conventional single-family detached houses. It is implemented by the RS-1, RS-2, RS-3 and RH-3 zones. Typical development consists of single-family lots of 5,000 to 10,000 square-feet. The permitted density range is from zero up to 6.5 dwelling units per gross acre. Over half of all residential land in Anaheim is designated as Low Density Residential. Low-Medium Hillside (0-6.0 dwelling units per acre) The Low-Medium Hillside Density Residential designation provides for the development of both attached and detached single-family homes in hillside areas. The permitted density range is from zero up to 6 dwelling units per gross acre. Although the maximum density is similar to the Low Density Residential designation, the character of development can vary significantly. Lot sizes in these areas are typically smaller, having typical minimum lot sizes of less than 5,000 square-feet, due to the sloping topography and associated reduction in developable area. Development within this designation is often “clustered” in This home in the Hill and Canyon Area is a typical example of the Estate Density Residential Land Use Designation. This single-family home is reflective of the Low Density Residential Land Use Designation. This group of single-family homes is reflective of the Low Medium Hillside Density Residential Land Use Designation. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-24 | Revised March 2020 order to reduce site grading while maximizing the preservation of open space. The Low- Medium Hillside Density Residential designation is implemented by the RS-3(SC), RS- 4(SC) and RM-2(SC) zones. Low-Medium Density (0-18.0 dwelling units per acre) The Low-Medium Density Residential designation provides for a wide range of residential uses, including detached, small-lot single-family homes, attached single-family homes, patio homes, zero lot line homes, duplexes, townhouses, and mobile home parks. This category is implemented by the RS-4, RM-1, RM-2, and RM-3 zones. The permitted density range is from zero up to 18 dwelling units per gross acre. Mid Density (0-27.0 dwelling units per acre) The Mid Density Residential designation provides for a wide range of residential uses, including detached, small-lot single-family homes, attached single-family homes, patio homes, zero lot line homes, duplexes, and townhouses. This category is implemented by the RM-1, RM-2, RM-3, and RM-3.5 zones. The permitted density range is from zero up to 27 dwelling units per gross acre. Medium Density (0-36.0 dwelling units per acre) The Medium Density Residential designation is intended to provide a quality multiple-family living environment with design amenities, such as private open space or recreation areas, business services, swimming pools, etc. This category is typically implemented by the RM-3, RM-3.5, and RM-4 zones. The permitted density range is from zero up to 36 dwelling units per gross acre. Typical development includes apartment complexes. These townhomes in the Anaheim Colony are one example of the many varieties of residential types that can be built in the Low- Medium Density designation. The Medium Density designation is intended for the development of quality, multiple-family housing that is attractively designed and scaled to contribute to the neighborhood. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-25 Corridor Residential (0-13.0 dwelling units per acre) The Corridor Residential designation is intended to provide for single-family attached housing fronting on arterial highways and incorporating a rear access drive or service alley. For projects with sufficient depth, this designation may also incorporate single- family detached housing located behind the attached product. This designation is intended to provide for housing opportunities along the City’s arterial corridors. This category is implemented by the RM- 1 zone. The permitted density range for Corridor Residential is from zero up to 13.0 dwelling units per gross acre. The Corridor Residential designation provides for single-family housing opportunities along Anaheim’s arterial corridors. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-26 | Revised March 2020 Commercial Designations Neighborhood Center (0.35 - 0.45 FAR) The Neighborhood Center designation is intended to serve the surrounding residential neighborhood or cluster of surrounding residential neighborhoods. For those serving the surrounding neighborhood, Neighborhood Center uses could provide uses such as neighborhood- serving food markets, drug stores, restaurants, small hardware stores, child care centers, health clubs, and other retail and professional uses. Neighborhood Center areas that serve a cluster of neighborhoods could incorporate a mix of commercial uses including the uses identified above plus large grocery stores, appliance stores, neighborhood-serving restaurants, bakeries, banks, specialty shops, and some low intensity civic uses. Neighborhood Center projects should be compatible in scale and design with adjacent residential areas, and should be designed to encourage pedestrian usage. The Neighborhood Center designation is not intended to encourage strip commercial development or large, regionally-serving, retail uses. Regional Commercial (0.30 - 0.50 FAR) Regional Commercial areas serve a larger area than Neighborhood Centers and include regional-serving commercial uses. Allowable uses could include large department stores, specialty stores, theaters, and restaurants. The Regional Commercial designation also allows for limited professional offices. The Anaheim Plaza and Anaheim Festival shopping centers are examples of such uses. General Commercial (0.25 - 0.50 FAR) General Commercial land uses include a variety of land uses, including those identified in the Neighborhood Center designation. Areas designated as General Commercial may, but do not necessarily, serve the adjacent neighborhood or surrounding clusters of neighborhoods. In addition to some of the uses described in the commercial centers, they typically include highway-serving uses such as fast food The General Commercial designation provides for a wide variety of commercial uses, including automobile sales. The Festival, located in the Hill and Anaheim Canyon Area, is one of Anaheim’s prominent Regional Commercial centers. This commercial development, located at the southwest corner of Lincoln Avenue and Gilbert Street, provides an example of a Neighborhood Commercial center. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-27 restaurants, auto-oriented uses such as tire stores, service stations, auto parts stores, and other stand-alone retail uses. Commercial Recreation The Commercial Recreation land use designation applies to The Anaheim Resort. The designation is intended to provide for tourist and entertainment-related industries, such as theme parks, hotels, tourist-oriented retail, movie theaters, and other visitor-serving facilities. Due to the importance of maintaining the Anaheim Resort area for visitor-serving uses, residential uses are only conditionally permitted in limited areas of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area as provided by and in accordance with the Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay (Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.116.125) in effect as of March 19, 2007 (relating to residential uses fully integrated into full-service hotels having at least 300 hotel rooms), and are also permitted as provided by and in accordance with the Mobile Home Park Overlay (Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 18.26) in effect as of March 19, 2007. The Commercial Recreation designation is implemented by various Specific Plan Zones in The Anaheim Resort, which further define the maximum development activity. Recognizing that the presence of non visitor-serving uses such as residential uses, in the Anaheim Resort would be incompatible with the overall goals relating to the Anaheim Resort and the Commercial Recreation designation, no residential uses other than (i) those permitted in limited areas of the Anaheim Resort Specific Plan area as provided by and in accordance with the Anaheim Resort Residential Overlay (Anaheim Municipal Code Section 18.116.125) in effect as of March 19, 2007 (relating to residential uses fully integrated into full-service hotels having at least 300 hotel rooms), and (ii) those permitted as provided by and in accordance with the Mobile Home Park Overlay (Anaheim Municipal Code Chapter 18.26) in effect as of March 19, 2007, shall be permitted in the Anaheim Resort area without (i) completion of an Environmental Impact Report prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (ii) completion of a long-term economic impact analysis of the proposed change by an independent financial advisor retained by the City, (iii) approval by the City Council, and (iv) approval by a majority of voters of the City of Anaheim at a regularly- scheduled municipal election. Downtown Disney in The Anaheim Resort provides dining and shopping opportunities for visitors. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-28 | Revised March 2020 Office Designations Office-Low (0.40 – 0.50 FAR) The Office-Low land use designation allows for a variety of small-scale office uses, including local branches of financial institutions, legal services, insurance services, real estate, and medical or dental offices and support services. The Office-Low designation is intended to facilitate office development of up to three stories in height. Areas designated as Office-Low can develop as stand-alone projects or within a business park setting. Office-High (0.50 – 2.00 FAR) The Office-High designation is intended for higher density office uses that have at least four stories. Office-High uses are focused in areas planned for more concentrated urban development such as The Platinum Triangle, key locations along transit routes, major intersections, or in close proximity to significant activity centers. Typical uses would include national or regional offices for financial institutions, Fortune 500 companies, and medical-related office complexes. Industrial Designations Industrial (0.35-0.50 FAR) The Industrial land use designation allows for a wide variety of industrial-related uses, including research and development uses, technology centers, corporate and support office uses; business parks, assembly and light manufacturing, repair and other service facilities; warehousing and distribution centers; and, limited, employee-serving retail uses. The Office Low designation provides for a variety of low-intensity office uses up to three stories. This Office-High designation is intended to be applied in areas planned for more concentrated urban uses such as the Anaheim Platinum Triangle. The Industrial designation provides for a variety of uses, including research and development, repair services, wholesale activities, distribution centers, and manufacturing. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-29 Mixed-Use Designations Areas designated as Mixed-Use are designed to function differently from the typical patterns of individual, segregated land uses. Uses and activities are designed together in an integrated fashion to create a dynamic urban environment that serves as the center of activity for the surrounding area. The designation provides opportunities for an integrated mix of residential, retail, service, entertainment and office opportunities in a pedestrian-friendly environment. Because of their more intense, compact nature of development, Mixed-Use areas encourage the use of transit service and other forms of transportation, including pedestrian and bicycle travel. Continuous commercial street frontage on the first and, perhaps, second floors, supported by residential and/or office uses above, is the typical pattern of vertically mixed land use. Uses may also be mixed in a horizontal, or multi-use, pattern. For example, freestanding structures may consist of a single use adjacent to structures with different uses on the same or adjacent parcel. Stand-alone uses within a multi-use project need to be integrated into an overall project design and connected to other adjoining uses by plazas, promenades, and landscaped corridors, and should include common architectural themes and signage. Typical residential uses could include apartments, live-work units, town homes, flats and artist-style lofts. Residential development in these areas emphasizes quality and offers a variety of amenities. Structured parking is an essential component in most-mixed-use developments. The scale, size and mixture of uses in the mixed-use areas vary based upon the character of the surrounding area. Depending upon a project’s location, the Mixed-Use designations are implemented by one of three Zoning Code districts: the Downtown Mixed-Use Overlay; The Platinum Triangle Mixed-Use Overlay; and, for areas outside of The Platinum Triangle or Downtown areas, the Mixed-Use Overlay Zone. Mixed-Use Mid The Mixed-Use Mid designation is intended to allow flexibility for parcels that could transition from strip commercial uses to residential or a mix of residential, commercial, and office development. They allow residential in either a stand-alone or mixed-use configuration at a density of up to 27 dwelling units per acre and could include live-work units, duplexes and townhouses in a horizontal or vertical mixed-use pattern. Residential development in these areas emphasizes quality and offers a variety of amenities. A mix of commercial uses would continue to allow for a range of community-serving retail, office, and service commercial uses. The non-residential component of mixed-use development is permitted at a maximum floor area ratio of 0.10. The implementing zones are The The adaptive reuse of the historic Kraemer Building is an example of a vertically mixed-use development, with two floors of office space and four floors of residential lofts above. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-30 | Revised March 2020 Downtown Mixed-Use Overlay; The Platinum Triangle Mixed-Use Overlay; and, for areas outside of The Platinum Triangle or Downtown areas, the Mixed-Use Overlay Zone. Mixed-Use Medium The Mixed-Use Medium designation is intended to allow flexibility for parcels that could transition from strip commercial uses to residential or a mix of residential, commercial, and office development. They allow residential in either a stand-alone or mixed-use configuration at a density of up to 36 dwelling units per acre. Residential development in these areas emphasizes quality and offers a variety of amenities. A mix of commercial uses would continue to allow for a range of community-serving retail, office, and service commercial uses. The non-residential component of mixed-use development is permitted at a maximum floor area ratio of 0.35. The implementing zones are The Downtown Mixed-Use Overlay; The Platinum Triangle Mixed-Use Overlay; and, for areas outside of The Platinum Triangle or Downtown areas, the Mixed-Use Overlay Zone. Mixed-Use High The Mixed-Use High designation is intended to allow a mix of uses including residential, commercial, services, hotel, and professional office uses in a high-quality environment. The focus of this designation is on creating a pedestrian-friendly environment, including increased connectivity and community gathering spaces. Uses and activities are designed together in an integrated fashion to create a dynamic urban environment. Continuous commercial street frontage on the first and, perhaps, second floors, supported by residential and/or office uses above, is the typical pattern of vertically mixed land use. Uses may also be mixed in a horizontal or multi-use pattern. Stand-alone uses within a multi-use project need to be integrated into an overall project design and connected to other adjoining uses by plazas, promenades, and landscaped corridors, and should include common architectural themes and signage. Typical residential uses could include stacked flats, live-work units, townhouses, and artist-style lofts. Residential development in these areas emphasizes quality and offers a variety of amenities. The residential component of mixed-use development is permitted at a density of up to 60 dwelling units per acre. The non-residential component of mixed-use development is permitted at a maximum floor area ratio of 0.35. The implementing zones are The Downtown Mixed- Use Overlay; The Platinum Triangle Mixed-Use Overlay; and, for areas outside of The Platinum Triangle or Downtown areas, the Mixed-Use Overlay Zone. Mixed-Use Urban Core The Mixed-Use Urban Core designation is intended to allow a mix of uses including residential, commercial, services, hotel, and professional office uses in a high-quality environment. The focus of this designation is on creating a pedestrian-friendly environment, including increased connectivity and community gathering spaces. Uses and activities are designed together in an integrated fashion to create a dynamic urban LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-31 environment. Continuous commercial street frontage on the first and, perhaps, second floors, supported by residential and/or office uses above, is the typical pattern of vertically mixed land use. Uses may also be mixed in a horizontal or multi-use pattern. Stand-alone uses within a multi-use project need to be integrated into an overall project design and connected to other adjoining uses by plazas, promenades, and landscaped corridors, and should include common architectural themes and signage. Typical residential uses could include stacked flats, live-work units, and artist-style lofts. Residential development in these areas emphasizes quality and offers a variety of amenities. The residential component of mixed-use development is permitted at a density of up to 100 dwelling units per acre. The non-residential component of mixed-use development is permitted at a maximum floor area ratio of 3.00. The implementing zones are The Downtown Mixed-Use Overlay; The Platinum Triangle Mixed-Use Overlay; and, for areas outside of The Platinum Triangle or Downtown areas, the Mixed- Use Overlay Zone. Non-Residential Mixed-Use The purpose of the Non-Residential Mixed-Use designation is to encourage a mix of commercial and office uses, but prohibit residential uses in certain areas, where residential uses are not compatible with surrounding land uses. This designation is limited to Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan area. All uses, densities and intensities, other than residential uses, that are permitted by the Mixed-Use designation are allowed within the Non-Residential Mixed-Use designation. Zoning provisions for this designation are included in the Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan (SP-2015-1). Public and Quasi-Public Facilities Designations Schools The Schools designation identifies existing public and larger, established private schools, including elementary, junior and high schools. Schools designated on the Land Use Plan are either existing facilities or known planned facilities. Future schools may be developed in other land use designations through procedures established in the Zoning Code. Trade schools or other job training facilities may be developed in various non-residential land use areas under the procedures established in the Zoning Code. Institutional (Up to 3.00 FAR) The Institutional designation includes a wide range of public and quasi-public uses, including government offices, transportation facilities, public or private colleges and universities, public utilities, hospitals, large assisted living facilities, community centers, museums and public libraries. To the extent possible, institutional facilities should be clustered in activity centers to support other similar uses and benefit from access to various modes of transportation. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-32 | Revised March 2020 Institutional uses designated on the Land Use Plan are either existing facilities or known planned facilities. Additional uses, including assembly areas and day care facilities, may be developed in other land use designations under the procedures established in the Zoning Code. The maximum floor area ratio reflects the potential for high-rise offices used by governmental or quasi-public agencies. Additional intensity provisions are addressed in the Zoning Code. Railroad Two types of railroad operations serve travelers in Anaheim – passenger rail and commuter rail. The Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA) and the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) provide commuter rail service via Metrolink while Amtrak provides passenger rail service. In addition, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) and the Southern Pacific Transportation Company (SPTC) provide freight rail service. Railroads are identified on the Land Use Map because of their relationship with adjacent uses. While railroads provide a valuable service by transporting people and goods, they can also impact residential neighborhoods and other sensitive land uses due to the noise and vibration associated with rail activity. Strategies to improve access to these facilities and minimize their potentially negative effects on sensitive uses are addressed in the Circulation and Noise Elements. Intermodal Transportation Center Anaheim is pursuing a major intermodal transportation center in The Platinum Triangle. The intermodal transportation center would fit into the urban, mixed-use environment planned for The Platinum Triangle, providing a multitude of transportation options for residents, employees and visitors of The Platinum Triangle and nearby Anaheim Resort area. The transportation center would be one of three major transportation centers located in Southern California, along with Union Station in Los Angeles and the Ontario International Airport in Ontario. The center would expand existing transportation infrastructure for Amtrak intercity rail, Metrolink commuter rail, Anaheim Resort Transit shuttle service, and vehicular and bicycle modes. Five planned rail and bus services would be added into the hub, providing seamless intermodal access via the planned California-Nevada Super Speed Train, California High Speed Rail, Express Bus and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems. The Institutional designation covers a wide variety of public and quasi-public land uses, such as government offices, hospitals, libraries, museums and the like. Metrolink railroad running through the industrial area of Downtown. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-33 Open Space and Recreation Designations The following open space and recreation land use designations identify Anaheim’s major scenic, wildlife and recreational features on the Land Use Map. Standards for ancillary development within these areas are detailed in the Zoning Code and relevant Specific Plans. A comprehensive set of policies regarding the creation, protection and enhancement of these areas is provided in the Green Element. Open Space The Open Space land use designation includes those areas intended to remain in natural open space; utility easements that will provide recreational and trail access to Anaheim’s residents; heavily landscaped freeway remnant parcels, and land areas surrounding major water features. Parks The Parks designation allows for active and passive recreational uses such as parks, trails, athletic fields, interpretive centers and golf courses. Water Uses The Water Uses designation applies to water bodies, such as the Santa Ana River, lakes, and reservoirs, and other water-related uses such as flood control channels and drainage basins. PLAN OBJECTIVES Several objectives have been developed to guide the future development of Anaheim, including those pertaining to several Community Policy Areas within the City. The following objectives summarize the general land use objectives that guide the development of the Land Use Plan and set the foundation for the Goals and Policies section of this Element. Discussion of Community Policy Areas and their respective goals and policies is found at the end of the Goals and Policies section. It is important to note that many other important and related objectives, such as beautifying Anaheim, keeping Anaheim a safe place, and maintaining high levels of City services, are addressed throughout other Elements of the General Plan. Objective: Plan for and accommodate projected growth The ability to plan for and accommodate the City’s projected growth is key to maintaining a stable, diversified economy, ensuring an adequate transportation system, and enhancing the quality of life for residents. The City uses a wide array of tools, including socioeconomic data, market analysis, infrastructure and transportation impact analyses and other data to help plan for Anaheim’s Future. The use of such tools was an important component in the preparation of this Element. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-34 | Revised March 2020 Objective: Clarify land use designations The Geographic Information System (GIS) based format of the Land Use Plan provides specificity in terms of identifying and understanding the land use designation established for individual properties and gives the City an increased ability to analyze land use patterns and acreage, estimate development projections, and understand potential traffic, infrastructure, environmental and fiscal impacts. The objective is to provide the public with a reliable estimate of the type and intensity of land uses allowed on their property and on surrounding properties and to provide them with a general image of how an area is intended to develop. It is important to note that, in addition to the location and types of density and intensity described in the Land Use Element, policies regarding the quality of future development will be addressed through the Community Design Element and the Anaheim Colony Vision, Principles and Design Guidelines, and the Zoning Code. Objective: Implement the Anaheim Vision through the Land Use Plan In preparing this General Plan, the City, through extensive community input, developed the “Anaheim Vision” which provides the framework for the General Plan. Its introductory statement describes the City’s vision as “… a mosaic of diverse people and thriving unified neighborhoods joined together by beautiful, accessible open spaces and well-landscaped roadways offering enhanced mobility for people and goods; safe place to live, work and play; quality educational opportunities; engaging gathering places; world class entertainment; recreational, spiritual, and cultural amenities available for all; and a variety of economic opportunities for its workforce.” The Land Use Element, together with the other General Plan Elements, strives to implement this vision by: • Providing and enhancing the City’s image by encouraging new residential development along underutilized commercial corridors, concentrating and enhancing commercial uses at strategic intersections; creating new recognizable mixed-use areas, including the Downtown and The Platinum Triangle areas; protecting historic areas and residential neighborhoods from incompatible land uses; and protecting natural and open space resources; • Providing a variety of residential land uses that offer diverse housing opportunities for Anaheim’s equally diverse population; • Providing open space and recreational opportunities in close proximity to neighborhoods; • Reducing traffic impacts and encouraging alternative means of transportation by identifying land uses that are conducive to transit use or that minimize distances LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-35 between residential, shopping and employment centers thereby encouraging pedestrian or bicycle travel; • Promoting economic development by intensifying development potential in economic centers, identifying new residential development in proximity to these centers, and by ensuring a well-balanced mix of employment related land uses; and • Preserving the historic character of the Anaheim Colony by limiting higher density land uses in historical, single-family residential neighborhoods. Objective: Preserve the integrity of existing single-family neighborhoods As housing demand and land values continue to rise in Orange County, it is anticipated there will be increasing trends toward higher density residential development. Planning for these trends can be seen as challenging given the objective of preserving the integrity of single-family neighborhoods, the staple of Anaheim’s character. To address these potentially competing objectives, however, the Land Use Plan identifies new areas for infill residential development that can be developed without compromising the integrity of Anaheim’s established single-family neighborhoods. By strategically locating future multiple-family development in appropriate areas coupled with additional guidance provided by the Community Design Element aimed at enhancing the character of single-family neighborhoods and ensuring quality multiple-family development, the Land Use Plan addresses this objective. Objective: Revitalize neighborhood edges Strip malls and stand-alone retail uses line many of the City’s arterial corridors and form the edges of many neighborhoods, particularly in the western half of the City. A number of these neighborhood edges, however, are adjacent to underutilized commercial developments that detract from the image and character of surrounding neighborhoods. The Land Use Element strives to revitalize neighborhood edges by introducing a residential designation, Corridor Residential, to facilitate the conversion of the City’s underutilized commercial areas into housing opportunity sites. Concurrently, specific goals and policies focus commercial uses at key intersections to take advantage of the exposure and accessibility offered by such locations. Objective: Plan land uses that preserve and enhance Anaheim’s economic assets Anaheim enjoys a diversified economic base offering economic opportunities through tourism, entertainment, retail, office and industrial activity. The City is also home to a number of major economic centers, including The Anaheim Resort, The Platinum Triangle, and Anaheim Canyon. These areas represent key economic assets that must be CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-36 | Revised March 2020 preserved and enhanced for the long-term economic health of the City. The Land Use Element offers a variety of employment generating land uses in these areas to ensure their vitality. In The Anaheim Resort, the Commercial Recreation land use designation reflects the visitor-oriented nature of the area. The plan also extends this designation along Harbor Boulevard, south of Orangewood Avenue, to create a visible, unified entry from the City’s southern border. In The Platinum Triangle, a vibrant mix of higher intensity office, retail and residential land use designations is intended to create an extremely dynamic urban place with well- integrated opportunities for housing, employment, shopping, entertainment and social interaction. The Platinum Triangle is envisioned to become the economic center of the region with a unique urban appeal and identity. The Land Use Plan enhances Anaheim Canyon’s industrial base with limited, strategically located office and mixed uses that take advantage of the area’s location, visibility and access. Objective: Ensure compatibility between adjacent land uses One of the primary purposes of land use planning is to ensure compatibility between adjacent land uses. A number of uses, including industrial and commercial, are strategically located in order to reduce the potential for conflict between these uses and residential neighborhoods. Also, as infill development intensifies and the potential for land use conflict arise, the need for strategic land use planning and impact mitigation increases in importance. The Land Use Element distributes land uses to minimize these impacts and, combined with the other General Plan elements and the Zoning Code, the potential for conflict is minimized. Objective: Create dynamic, identifiable places Residents and visitors enjoy communities they consider special, communities that provide a unique identity, create a “sense of place,” enhance social interaction, and foster civic pride. The growing popularity of revitalized downtowns, new mixed-use urban villages and walkable neighborhoods provide ample testimony to this growing desire to create and define special places. The Land Use Plan provides for the creation or enhancement of many such special places. It lays the land use foundation for making Downtown the cultural, historic and civic center of Anaheim and creating an extremely dynamic urban place in The Platinum Triangle, with well-integrated opportunities for housing, employment, shopping, entertainment and social interaction on a scale never before seen in Anaheim. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-37 The Land Use Plan alone, however, will not create these dynamic, identifiable places. Special policies related to land use and design are essential to ensuring a high level of quality as these places develop. The Community Policy Areas section of the Element focuses on individual areas of Anaheim, identifies the unique places within each area, and provides policies that foster their development. Furthermore, the Community Design Element provides more detailed goals, policies and guidelines that will help create and enhance the special character of these places. Objective: Take advantage of existing and proposed transit corridors while minimizing traffic impacts Anaheim’s freeway and transportation corridors move thousands of residents, employees and visitors past homes and businesses every day. Accordingly, lands adjacent to these corridors offer improved commercial and employment opportunities due to their visibility and accessibility. The City has recognized these opportunities in the past as evidenced by Anaheim’s established land use pattern. The Land Use Plan continues this trend and seeks to maximize opportunities along these corridors. The Platinum Triangle is a prime example of an area that takes advantage of its multiple transportation opportunities. With excellent freeway access provided by the Santa Ana (I-5) and Orange (SR-57) Freeways and the nearby Garden Grove (SR-22) Freeway, a well-developed circulation network of arterial highways and Metrolink access adjacent to the Angel Stadium of Anaheim, the area is well-served by various modes of transportation. Taking advantage of these transportation opportunities, as well as the area’s proximity to The Anaheim Resort, the Land Use Plan identifies the area as a major economic center that brings people together in an integrated mix of office, retail, entertainment and residential opportunities. Another example of an area that capitalizes on its transportation opportunities is Anaheim Canyon. The Anaheim Canyon Specific Plan recognizes the area’s history as an important industrial corridor, but it also provides for additional uses that take advantage of its current transportation options. The Plan provides for mixed-use development adjacent to Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station and identifies office uses in strategic locations along La Palma Avenue. These locations also take advantage of the visibility and access to the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway. LAND USE BUILDOUT ANALYSIS Providing a blueprint for the future development of Anaheim is one of the primary purposes of the General Plan. The Land Use Plan, which includes areas within Anaheim’s sphere-of-influence, identifies 16,519 acres of residential land uses, 659 acres of residential mixed-use land uses, and 5,619 acres of other employment- generating land uses. Assuming a probable intensity for each of the land use designations, the land use plan provides for 137,954 dwelling units (see Table LU-5). CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-38 | Revised March 2020 Based on a factor of 3.3 persons per household (1.5 per household in mixed-use areas), the estimated build-out population of the Land Use Plan would be 407,463 persons. Of the employment-generating land uses, the land use plan provides for a total of 1,121 acres of Neighborhood, Regional and General Commercial uses, 532 acres of office uses, and 2,684 acres of industrial uses and 707 acres of residential and non-residential mixed mixed-use. Combined these land use designations would generate approximately 228,470 jobs using the probable intensity factors (FARs) for each non-residential land use designation (see Table LU-6). Additional employment opportunities will also be provided by the implementation of the Commercial Recreation land use designation through the Anaheim Resort, Disneyland Resort and Hotel Circle Plans. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-39 Table LU-5: RESIDENTIAL BUILDOUT ESTIMATES Land Use Designation Probable Density Acres Dwelling Units Persons per Household Population RESIDENTIAL Estate (0-1.5 du/ac) 1.0 1,246 1,548 3.3 5,108 Low Density (0-6.5 du/ac) 4.0 9,905 38,909 3.3 128,400 Hillside Low-Medium Density (0-6.0 du/ac) 5.0 456 1,589 3.3 5,244 Low-Medium Density (0-18.0 du/ac) 13.0 1,530 17,266 3.3 56,978 Medium Density (0-36.0 du/ac) 24.0 1,960 47,040 3.3 155,232 Corridor Residential (0-13.0 du/ac) 13.0 183 2,379 3.3 7,851 Areas of the City with Special Density Limitations N/a 3,050 2,675 3.3 8,828 Subtotal 18,330 111,406 367,641 MIXED USE Mixed Use (0-100) 40.0 189 7,560 1.5 11,340 Mixed Use – Platinum Triangle N/a 470 18,988 1.5 28,482 Subtotal 659 26,548 39,822 TOTALS 18,989 137,954 407,463 Notes: The number of dwelling units for each designation is calculated by adding the number of existing dwelling units in areas of the City that are not anticipated to change to the number of units that are calculated by multiplying the gross acres of areas that are most likely to change by the probable residential densities. Dwelling units in areas not anticipated to change are the number of dwelling units in areas that are not likely to be further subdivided or areas that have a fixed buildout capacity through a specific plan. These are determined by: 1) adding the number of parcels in areas that are not likely to further subdivide; or 2) by referencing the number of units expected at buildout for areas addressed through specific plans (see Table LU-1 for a list of the City’s specific plans). The Areas of the City with Special Density Limitations, as shown on Figure LU-5 and described in Table LU-4, that are planned for residential development are shown as a separate category on the table and include the following: Area Acres Dwelling Units Low Density Hillside Low-Medium Density Low-Medium Density Mountain Park 3,00 1 485 2,015 Area A 16 140 Stonegate 33 35 Total 3,05 0 35 485 2,155 Residential units in the Platinum Triangle, a mixed use area of the City which is also included in the “Areas of the City with Special Density Limitations,” are shown separately in the Mixed Use calculations. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-40 | Revised March 2020 TABLE LU-6: NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDOUT ESTIMATES Land Use Designation Probable FAR Acres Square Footage Square Feet per Employee Estimated Employees COMMERCIAL Neighborhood Center (0.35-0.45 FAR) 0.35 229 2,610,878 400 6,527 Regional Commercial (0.30-0.50 FAR) 0.40 231 3,023,064 400 7,558 General Commercial (0.25-0.50 FAR) 0.30 661 6,396,786 400 15,992 Office-Low (0.40-0.50 FAR) 0.40 402 5,366,539 285 18,830 Office-High (0.50-2.00 FAR) 1.00 9 392,040 285 1,376 Subtotal 1,532 17,789,307 50,283 INDUSTRIAL Industrial (0.35-0.50 FAR) 0.35 2,550 28,654,857 364-700 53,863 Subtotal 2,550 28,654,857 53,863 MIXED USE Mixed Use (1.5-3.0 FAR) 1.50 237 15,485,580 285-400 45,279 Subtotal 237 15,485,580 45,279 PLATINUM TRIANGLE Mixed Use – Commercial N/a 470 4,795,111 400 11,988 Mixed Use – Office N/a 9,652,747 285 33,869 Mixed Use - Institutional N/a 1,500,000 Varies -- Office High 2.0 50 4,478,356 285 15,714 Office Low 0.5 71 5,486 Industrial 0.5 134 2,918,520 364-700 11,988 Subtotal 812 23,344,734 79,045 THE ANAHEIM RESORT Commercial Recreation 1,078 Subtotal 1,078 OPEN SPACE/RECREATION Parks (golf courses) -- 293 -- -- -- Parks -- 1,133 -- -- -- Open Space -- 1,836 -- -- -- Platinum Triangle Open Space 84 -- -- -- Water Uses -- 1,208 -- -- -- Subtotal 7,617 -- -- -- INSTITUTIONAL Institutional (0-3.00) -- 211 -- Varies -- Platinum Triangle Institutional (0-3.00) -- 3 -- Varies -- Subtotal 211 -- -- -- SCHOOLS Schools -- 1,010 -- -- -- Subtotal 1,010 -- -- -- Notes: The estimated square feet for each designation is calculated by adding the existing building square feet in areas of the City that are not anticipated to change to the gross acres of areas that are most likely to change multiplied by the probable Floor Area Ratios (FAR). For The Anaheim Resort/Commercial Recreation land use designation, please refer to the Disneyland Resort, Anaheim Resort and Hotel Circle Specific Plans. Build-out intensities for the Platinum Triangle are based on the maximum intensities described in Table LU-4. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-41 Goals & Policies The following section describes land use goals and policies that, in conjunction with the Land Use Plan and accompanying density and intensity standards, guide future land development of the City. Goals and policies are divided into two subsections: those that apply Citywide and those that apply to specific Community Policy Areas. In addition to these goals and policies, it is important to note that additional land use direction is provided through other General Plan Elements, the zoning code, and redevelopment plans. CITYWIDE GOALS AND POLICIES Neighborhoods Neighborhoods in Anaheim are a major source of pride for residents and are defined by the quality of their homes, the diversity of their residents, the beauty of their streetscapes, and the availability of and access to, open space and recreation opportunities. Most of the City’s neighborhoods provide a high quality living environment for their residents. As neighborhoods age, however, it is important for the City to proactively create partnerships with residents, apartment owners and other “neighborhood stakeholders” to implement ongoing efforts in preserving the quality of life within neighborhoods. As stated in the Anaheim Vision, “Anaheim is a mosaic comprised of a variety of unique neighborhoods with distinguishable character that, when viewed as a whole, create a strong, positive image.” It is the intent of the Land Use Element and Land Use Plan to supplement on-going land use-related programs, Zoning Code development standards, and other General Plan policies to ensure that existing and future neighborhoods are consistent with the Vision. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-42 | Revised March 2020 GOAL 1.1: Preserve and enhance the quality and character of Anaheim’s mosaic of unique neighborhoods. Policies: 1) Actively pursue development standards and design policies to preserve and enhance the quality and character of Anaheim’s many neighborhoods. 2) Ensure that new development is designed in a manner that preserves the quality of life in existing neighborhoods. 3) Encourage future development to provide functional public spaces that foster social interaction. 4) Continue to implement the City’s interdepartmental neighborhood improvement efforts in working with neighborhood stakeholders to create and implement long term plans for the most physically and socio- economically “challenged” neighborhoods. Housing Opportunities Growth projections indicate that Anaheim will grow from a population of over 330,000 in 2004 to a population of nearly 400,000 by the year 2030. As the City continues to mature, there will be a need to continue to offer a wide variety of housing opportunities for Anaheim’s increasingly diverse community. Through the General Plan, Anaheim offers a wide variety of housing, including estate homes in the Hill and Canyon Area, suburban single-family neighborhoods throughout the City, as well as a diversity of multiple-family housing neighborhoods. Most of the General Plan policies regarding housing are addressed in the Housing Element. The purpose of the Housing Element is to maintain, preserve, improve and develop a proper balance of housing. The following Land Use Element policies identified in Goal 2.1 are intended to support the goals and policies of the Housing Element and are reflected in the Land Use Plan. GOAL 2.1: Continue to provide a variety of quality housing opportunities to address the City’s diverse housing needs. Policies: 1) Facilitate new residential development on vacant or underutilized infill parcels. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-43 2) Facilitate new residential development in The Platinum Triangle and Downtown. 3) Facilitate the conversion of the City’s underutilized strip commercial areas into new housing opportunity sites. 4) Encourage the development and integration of residential land uses into mixed-use development where appropriate. 5) Encourage a mix of quality housing opportunities in employment-rich and transit accessible locations. 6) Ensure quality development through appropriate development standards and by adherence to related Community Design Element policies and guidelines. Corridors Public perception of a community is often times influenced by the quality and character of a City’s streetscape. While the City continues to pursue a variety of programs aimed at enhancing the appearance of its corridors (e.g. utility undergrounding, landscape improvements, entry monumentation, etc.), additional policies can serve to supplement these efforts. The following goals and policies are not an exhaustive guide to shaping the future of Anaheim’s corridors. Rather, they focus on land use strategies only. Strategies to improve their appearance are found in the Community Design Element; strategies to improve their economic performance are discussed in the Economic Development Element, and policies related to the landscaping of corridors are found in the Green Element. GOAL 3.1: Pursue land uses along major corridors that enhance the City’s image and stimulate appropriate development at strategic locations. Policies: 1) Designate existing underutilized mid-block commercial uses for residential development or other alternate land uses, where appropriate. 2) Concentrate commercial uses at key intersections. 3) Ensure quality development along corridors through adherence to established development standards and Community Design Element goals, policies and guidelines. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-44 | Revised March 2020 4) Continue to pursue additional open space, recreation, and landscaping amenities along major transportation routes. GOAL 3.2: Maximize development opportunities along transportation routes. Policies: 1) Where appropriate, designate land adjacent to freeways, proposed Bus Rapid Transit stops and Metrolink stations for employment intensive land uses. 2) Support the development of a Bus Rapid Transit System in the City that provides transit access to commercial and office development opportunities. 3) Encourage and provide incentives for the consolidation of parcels to create development sites that are large enough to support quality development. Compatibility In a diverse City such as Anaheim, with its mix of residential, industrial, office and commercial land uses, achieving land use compatibility can be a delicate process. For instance, unless properly designed and mitigated, a number of uses, including industrial, commercial, and transportation facilities, can have potentially adverse effects upon adjacent residential neighborhoods or sensitive habitat areas. Potential impacts of commercial and industrial development, so important to Anaheim’s economy, must be balanced with the needs of residential neighborhoods. Site planning, orientation of uses on site and buffering between adjacent properties will all be necessary to continue to achieve land use compatibility in Anaheim. Furthermore, the utility easements and roadways that traverse the City can serve as a buffer between otherwise conflicting land uses, and can be used to link areas of the community together. In addition, Anaheim’s multi-modal transportation system, with its obvious benefit of moving people and goods, will need to be carefully managed in order to minimize impacts upon adjacent development. It should be noted that policies related to the integration and buffering of land uses are also incorporated into the Community Design Element. GOAL 4.1: Promote development that integrates with and minimizes impacts to surrounding land uses. Policies: 1) Ensure that land uses develop in accordance with the Land Use Plan and Zoning Code in an effort to attain land use compatibility. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-45 2) Promote compatible development through adherence to Community Design Element policies and guidelines. 3) Ensure that developers consider and address project impacts upon surrounding neighborhoods during the design and development process. 4) Require new or expanded uses to provide mitigation or buffers between existing uses where potential adverse impacts could occur. 5) Discourage additional multiple-family development in existing single-family neighborhoods. 6) Require landscape and/or open space buffers to maintain a natural edge for proposed private development directly adjacent to natural, public open space areas. Creating Identifiable Places Creating identifiable places where people can gather, shop, socialize and “people watch” is an important ingredient in achieving the Anaheim Vision. Fortunately, identifiable places are emerging throughout the City and will continue into the future. Downtown has witnessed revitalization as the historic, artistic, cultural and civic center of Anaheim; The Anaheim Resort is known throughout the United States and the world for its tourist- related development and convention center; and it is envisioned that The Platinum Triangle will become a thriving live, work and play destination. Land use policies for specific places are addressed in the Community Policy Areas section of this Element. In addition to the Land Use Element policies, the Community Design Element and the Vision, Principles and Guidelines for The Platinum Triangle and the Colony provide extensive policies and guidelines for creating special places. GOAL 5.1: Create and enhance dynamic, identifiable places for the benefit of Anaheim residents, employees and visitors. Policies: 1) Encourage mixed-use and commercial development that provides: a) Safe, protected places for pedestrians to walk; b) Attractive surroundings; c) Opportunities for social interaction; d) Comfortable places to sit and relax; and CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-46 | Revised March 2020 e) Interplay between the interior uses of buildings and outdoor activities, such as sidewalk cafes or tastefully designed outdoor merchandise displays. 2) Facilitate the development of residential land uses into mixed-use areas to provide a consumer and employment base for commercial and office uses. 3) Mixed-use and commercial centers should be physically linked with adjacent residential neighborhoods. 4) Promote development that is efficient, pedestrian-friendly, and served by a variety of transportation options. Redevelopment and Revitalization As the City continues to mature and approach build-out, vacant land for new development will be limited and developed areas will continue to mature. Protecting and building upon Anaheim’s assets to capitalize on current and future growth dynamics will require redevelopment and revitalization strategies to enhance existing uses and bring new development to Anaheim. A more thorough discussion of redevelopment as an economic development strategy is addressed in the Economic Development Element. The following goal and policies are focused on land use. GOAL 6.1: Enhance the quality of life and economic vitality in Anaheim through strategic infill development and revitalization of existing development. Policies: 1) Continue to provide special incentives and improvement programs (e.g., density bonuses, parking requirement reductions, low interest home improvements loans, Neighborhood Improvement Program, etc.) to revitalize residential neighborhoods, major business corridors and employment centers. 2) Promote the assembly of parcels to allow for more efficient development patterns wherever adjacent neighborhoods are not adversely impacted. 3) Continue on-going code enforcement efforts to ensure acceptable property maintenance standards. 4) Continue collaboration with the County of Orange to achieve acceptable development quality within unincorporated land located in Anaheim’s sphere-of-influence. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-47 5) Maintain on-going relationships with businesses, property owners and residents to facilitate quality infill development. Jobs-Housing Relationship Due to the strength of the City’s economic activity centers, Anaheim has become an increasingly “job rich” city. According to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), a jurisdiction that will achieve a jobs-housing ratio of over 1.35 by the year 2025 will generally be considered “job-rich.” Orange County is projected to have a jobs-to-housing ratio of 1.90 in 2025, becoming the greatest job rich subregion. Consistent with that ratio, Anaheim will achieve a projected jobs-to-housing ratio of 1.94 based on the Land Use Plan. The estimated ratio is generally consistent with Orange County Projections-2000 (Center for Demographic Research at California State University at Fullerton), which projects a jobs-to-housing ratio of 2.18 for Anaheim in the year 2030. To address the balance between jobs and housing, the Land Use Plan identifies several strategies, many of which are discussed previously in the Housing Opportunities section and others that are addressed in the Housing Element, to provide more housing opportunities. It is important to note that, given the “built-out” nature of the City, opportunities to address jobs-housing balance are somewhat limited. The Land Use Plan identifies the following areas where opportunities for increased residential development do exist: • The Platinum Triangle. This area, as described later in the Community Policy Areas section of the Land Use Element, is intended to become a dynamic, integrated mix of land uses in an urban, pedestrian-friendly environment. Previous plans for the area also called for a mix of uses, but prohibited residential uses. The General Plan Land Use Plan calls for the inclusion of high-quality, high-density residential uses, in a mixed-use setting, to provide housing opportunities for this core employment area. • Downtown. The Land Use Plan introduces residential uses in a mixed-use setting to the Downtown core area. Residential uses will provide new opportunities for people who are looking to live in a new, safe, pedestrian friendly urban environment where they can gather, recreate and socialize. • Corridor Residential Uses. The Land Use Plan designates several mid-block areas along the City’s arterial streets for residential uses. These are intended to provide new residential opportunities to East and West Anaheim in lieu of underutilized mid-block commercial uses. Residential uses will be carefully designed to integrate with surrounding communities and adjacent commercial areas.  For a comprehensive discussion of design policies and guidelines relating to The Platinum Triangle, Downtown, Corridor Residential Uses and other mixed-use areas, please refer to the Community Design Element. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-48 | Revised March 2020 • Other Mixed-Use Areas. In addition to the Downtown and Platinum Triangle, the Land Use Plan identifies a handful of other mixed-use areas (e.g., North Euclid Street adjacent to the North Orange County Community College, adjacent to the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station, and at the intersection of State College Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue) located along some of the City’s major transportation corridors. These areas will provide for new residential uses in close proximity to employment, retail and/or entertainment opportunities. GOAL 7.1: Address the jobs-housing relationship by developing housing near job centers and transportation facilities. Policies: 1) Address the jobs-housing balance through the development of housing in proximity to local job centers. 2) Develop housing that addresses the need of the City’s diverse employment base. 3) Promote new residential development within Downtown, The Platinum Triangle, and other mixed-use districts, in accordance with the Land Use Plan. 4) Continue to pursue infill residential development opportunities at mid-block locations along the City’s arterial streets as an alternative to underutilized commercial land uses. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-49 COMMUNITY POLICY AREAS As stated in the Anaheim Vision, Anaheim is “a mosaic of diverse people and thriving unified neighborhoods.” This section of the Land Use Element provides goals and policies focused towards individual neighborhoods or areas of the City. As part of the Land Use Element, these policies focus on land use issues. Together with the other Elements of the General Plan and the Zoning Code, and ongoing neighborhood and capital improvement programs, these goals and policies will help create, preserve and enhance these community policy areas. The Hill and Canyon Area Since the 1960s, the Hill and Canyon Area has become home to thousands of hillside residents and one of Orange County’s most desired communities. Scenic views, well- planned residential development, access to a variety of natural, scenic and recreational resources like the Santa Ana River, Deer Canyon Park Preserve and the Anaheim Hills Golf Course, all contribute to the sense of pride felt by area residents. The General Plan seeks to preserve those characteristics that make the Hill and Canyon Area a special place and to provide current and future residents with adequate community services and facilities. It is further intended to encourage and maintain living areas which preserve the amenities of hillside living and retain the overall lower density, semi-rural, uncongested character of the Santa Ana Canyon Area. The area is also home to the Mountain Park Specific Plan area, located in Gypsum Canyon south of the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway. This development will provide a mix of residential uses; one school site; one neighborhood park site; and approximately 2,100 acres of open space. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-50 | Revised March 2020 GOAL 8.1: Preserve natural, scenic and recreational resources; continue to ensure residential neighborhoods are safe, well-maintained, places to live; and continue to provide necessary community services and facilities. Policies: 1) Encourage the preservation of scenic vistas and views through Green Element Policies and Zoning Code development standards. 2) Use existing utility line easements for open space and/or trail connections (enhance with landscaping where feasible). 3) Provide adequate passive and active park and recreational resources through the goals and policies of the Green Element. 4) Ensure quality development through the policies and guidelines of the Community Design Element and Zoning Code development standards. 5) Maintain and upgrade conditions of existing commercial areas to ensure that they remain competitive with commercial facilities located outside the City. 6) Continue to work with Caltrans and OCTA to protect residential neighborhoods from bypass traffic impacts associated with congested conditions on the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway. West Anaheim Generally encompassing all of the areas located west of Euclid Street, West Anaheim is home to a variety of residential neighborhoods and commercial areas. Many of the residential neighborhoods continue to thrive as evidenced by their upkeep and strong resident pride. As the area’s housing stock and commercial areas continue to age, the need to revitalize portions of West Anaheim has grown. In response, the City has designated much of West Anaheim, particularly along its commercial corridors, as a redevelopment project area. Efforts to improve West LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-51 Anaheim have included City-initiated commercial and residential redevelopment projects, extensive outreach with West Anaheim stakeholders, detailed market studies, corridor landscape programs, and neighborhood improvement programs, among others. The General Plan and Land Use Plan recognize these efforts and provide comprehensive policies to strengthen the character and image of West Anaheim. GOAL 9.1: Establish and maintain a uniquely identifiable well-balanced community that is an attractive and safe place to live, work, visit, learn and retire, supported by quality, family- oriented neighborhoods and businesses. Policies: 1) Revitalize neighborhoods targeted through the City’s Neighborhood Improvement Program consistent with approved improvement plans. 2) Consolidate retail development into premium locations and replace declining mid-block commercial areas with residential and community-serving civic uses. 3) Develop the former Lincoln Landfill into a vibrant commercial center. 4) Provide recreation, bicycle and pedestrian circulation opportunities on powerline easements (e.g., the easement running north-south between Magnolia Avenue and Dale Street). 5) Maintain and enforce development standards and Community Design Element policies and guidelines that promote high quality development. 6) Continue to improve the local streetscape to enhance economic viability of the area, including the implementation of the Lincoln Avenue Master Landscape Plan. 7) Preserve single-family neighborhoods and encourage residential development that promotes home ownership. North Euclid Street Generally located on both sides of Euclid Street between the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway to the north and the Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway to the south, the north Euclid Street area serves as a major gateway into the City. Euclid Street and La Palma Avenue serve as the primary transportation spine and frame several multiple-family and single-family neighborhoods. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-52 | Revised March 2020 Established in 2002, the North Orange County Community College District’s Anaheim Campus is located here, just north of La Palma Avenue and west of Euclid Street. The College provides a variety of educational opportunities for Anaheim’s residents and workforce. As Anaheim’s only public college, the campus draws a variety of the City’s residents and employees, as well as those from surrounding communities, and serves as a potential catalyst for future development. GOAL 10.1: Create new development opportunities that work synergistically with the North Orange County Community College and that enhance the area’s image as a City gateway. Policies: 1) Promote uses around the North Orange County Community College site that maximize the school’s potential as an activity center that draws students and employees to the area. 2) Intensify professional office uses and commercial uses near the intersection of Euclid Street and La Palma Avenue. 3) Encourage mid-block residential development along Euclid Street and La Palma Avenue as an alternative to aging strip commercial development. 4) Pursue the development of a new park site in the North Euclid Street area near the community college site to provide a recreational amenity for surrounding neighborhood residents, future students and faculty, and the employees generated by the intensification of commercial and office uses at the intersection of La Palma Avenue and Euclid Street. 5) Ensure quality development and enhance the image of the North Euclid Street area through Zoning Code development standards and implementation of Community Design Element policies and guidelines. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-53 East Anaheim East Anaheim is home to several single- and multiple-family neighborhoods. Like West Anaheim, many neighborhoods continue to thrive, but some neighborhoods and commercial areas have experienced a decline in vitality and appearance. The Land Use Plan encourages a mix of residential uses along State College Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue to stimulate quality residential development at mid-block locations and retail opportunities at key intersections. In addition, the Land Use Plan provides for a new, pedestrian-friendly, mixed-use neighborhood at the northwest corner of State College Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue, as an alternative to existing land uses. GOAL 11.1: Preserve and enhance the character of East Anaheim neighborhoods and revitalize aging multiple-family residential neighborhoods and commercial areas. Policies: 1) Revitalize multiple-family neighborhoods targeted through the Neighborhood Improvement Program. 2) Ensure quality development and enhance the area’s image through Zoning Code standards and Community Design Element policies and guidelines. 3) Convert underutilized commercial development along Lincoln Avenue and State College Boulevard to a mix of residential land uses. 4) Expand the City park adjacent to Lincoln School to create an enhanced open space amenity along Lincoln Avenue. 5) Pursue landscaping and entryway treatments along Lincoln Avenue between East Street and the eastern City limits. 6) Convert oil well sites along Jackson Avenue into infill housing sites. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-54 | Revised March 2020 7) Develop strategies to improve the commercial center at the northeast corner of Rio Vista Street and Lincoln Avenue. 8) Develop land assembly and circulation improvement strategies and incentives to facilitate mixed-use development at the intersection of State College Boulevard and Lincoln Avenue pursuant to the Land Use Plan. North Central Industrial Area Generally located between Harbor Boulevard and Raymond Avenue, straddling the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway, the North Central Industrial Area is an older, established industrial area and is adjacent to a residential neighborhood located north of La Palma Avenue, west of Olive Street. In an effort to improve the area, the City adopted the North Central Industrial Area Redevelopment Plan in. Older heavy industrial uses in the area have gradually transitioned to lighter, cleaner industrial uses. Addressing compatibility issues between established residential and industrial uses will remain a priority for the area. The potential for the continued expansion of La Palma Park will provide the City with an opportunity to provide surrounding residential neighborhoods with added park and recreational facilities. The Land Use Plan also identifies a mixed-use area along La Palma Avenue to take advantage of future transit opportunities. GOAL 12.1: Encourage the on-going transition of the North Central Industrial Area into a high- quality light industrial area that is sensitive to adjacent residential neighborhoods. Policies: 1) Pursue various neighborhood improvements (e.g., continued undergrounding of utility lines, continuous sidewalks and links to nearby retail centers and transit stops, additional landscaping along arterial streets, enhanced entryways into neighborhoods, etc.) to improve the livability of existing residential areas. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-55 2) Encourage the on-going transition of heavy industrial uses to “cleaner” light industrial uses pursuant to the Zoning Code and General Plan land use designations. 3) Require development standards that provide adequate physical buffers between existing residential uses and expanded or future industrial uses. 4) Support OCTA’s efforts to provide enhanced bus service along La Palma Avenue and intensify land uses in close proximity to Bus Rapid Transit stop(s). 5) Preserve the industrial integrity of the area from encroachment of non- industrial uses in areas designated for industrial uses. 6) Explore opportunities to improve pedestrian access to La Palma Park from the adjacent residential community to the east. 7) Continue on-going City efforts to expand La Palma Park. 8) Continue beautification efforts along the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway to reflect the vision for this area as a high-quality light industrial area. The Colony and Downtown Bordered by the original boundaries of the City (North, South, East and West Streets), the Anaheim Colony is home to most of Anaheim’s historic resources, including the original Mother Colony House and a large number of State and nationally designated historic structures. It is also home to the City’s Downtown and Civic Center. As stated in the Anaheim Colony Vision, Principles and Design Guidelines, the Colony and Downtown area serve as the cultural, artistic, historic and civic center of the City. The Land Use Plan encourages the development of Downtown as a mixed-use core that will become one of the most recognizable downtowns in Orange County. Land use CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-56 | Revised March 2020 strategies include the introduction of mixed-use development into the Downtown core and the transition of older industrial areas to residential neighborhoods (e.g., the Santa Ana Street corridor). Downtown will be a place where Anaheim residents can gather, shop, work, socialize and recreate. A comprehensive approach to ensuring quality development in the area is provided in the Community Design Element. GOAL 13.1: Continue to enhance Downtown as the cultural, artistic and civic center of Anaheim. Policies: 1) Encourage adherence to the Anaheim Colony Vision, Principles and Design Guidelines for new development in the Colony and Downtown areas. 2) Ensure that Downtown maintains a mix of uses attractive to broad segments of Anaheim’s population and that stimulate activity during day and evening hours, every day of the week. 3) Downtown shall be accessible and connected by multiple modes of transportation including pedestrian, bicycle, transit and automobile. 4) Encourage the preservation and protection of buildings of historical significance. 5) Intensify and revitalize strategically located commercial sites in keeping with the Anaheim Colony Vision, Principles and Design Guidelines. 6) Protect the integrity of historic single-family neighborhoods from incompatible development. 7) Work with homeowners to utilize the Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan to assist with future home improvements. 8) Replace declining strip commercial areas with residential uses, per the General Plan and Anaheim Colony Vision, Principles and Design Guidelines. 9) Convert Santa Ana Street into a pedestrian-friendly residential neighborhood, including the removal of existing railroad tracks (if feasible). 10) Connect Downtown with The Platinum Triangle using the Olive Street railroad right-of-way for pedestrian, bicycle, and/or transit use. 11) Continue to improve aging multiple-family neighborhoods through the Neighborhood Improvement Program.  The Anaheim Colony Historic District Preservation Plan, with basic guidelines, encourages property owners to take special care in preserving, protecting, or enhancing historic buildings. Homeowners are encouraged to undertake any alterations in accordance with these guidelines, and seek financial assistance, incentives, or preservation resources made available by the City, preservations, and neighbors within the District. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-57 12) Explore opportunities to preserve the orange grove on Santa Ana Street near Harbor Boulevard as a community amenity. 13) Encourage the transition of older industrial areas to residential neighborhoods containing a variety of high quality housing. South Anaheim Boulevard South Anaheim Boulevard serves as the major link between Downtown, The Platinum Triangle and The Anaheim Resort. The City has undertaken a series of beautification efforts to visually enhance the area. Current land uses in the area include a variety of residential, commercial and industrial uses as well as some office uses that complement the adjacent Western Medical Center Hospital. In order to address the area’s revitalization needs, the City adopted a redevelopment plan and the South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor Code Overlay Zone. The Land Use Plan for this area is consistent with the goals of these plans. GOAL 14.1: Establish the South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor as a revitalized commercial and residential area that serves as a link between Downtown, The Platinum Triangle and The Anaheim Resort. Policies: 1) Encourage “Boulevard Housing” and neighborhood residential uses north of Ball Road with neighborhood commercial uses at intersections, pursuant to redevelopment plan and South Anaheim Boulevard Corridor Overlay Zone. 2) Ensure that new development does not compromise the livability of existing residential neighborhoods. 3) Promote land uses that build upon and enhance the nucleus created by Western Medical Center. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-58 | Revised March 2020 4) Promote commercial uses between Ball Road and the Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway that take advantage of freeway accessibility and visibility and proximity to The Anaheim Resort and The Platinum Triangle. 5) Ensure quality development through adherence to applicable Zoning Code development standards and the Community Design Element policies and guidelines. The Platinum Triangle The Platinum Triangle represents an opportunity for the City to create a vibrant, mixed- use regional center unique to Orange County. Served by a multitude of transportation options and home to major regional entertainment facilities like Angel Stadium of Anaheim and the Arrowhead Pond of Anaheim, the area has tremendous visibility and development potential. The vision for The Platinum Triangle includes a dynamic mix of uses and high-density urban housing - integrated by a carefully planned network of pedestrian walkways, streetscape improvements and public spaces - that will create an urban environment of a scale unique to Orange County. The combined attraction of shopping, entertainment, office, residential and recreational uses will provide residents, workers and visitors with one of the most vibrant and exciting urban places in the region. The land use designations assigned to properties within The Platinum Triangle are intended to afford property owners an additional layer of land use options beyond those provided by a property’s underlying zone designation. For example, a property which is zoned and utilized for industrial use but designated “Mixed Use” on the Land Use Plan shall not be restricted from operating, expanding or subdividing in conformance with its underlying industrial zone designation. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-59 GOAL 15.1: Establish The Platinum Triangle as a thriving economic center that provides residents, visitors and employees with a variety of housing, employment, shopping and entertainment opportunities that are accessed by arterial highways, transit systems and pedestrian promenades. Policies: 1) Continue more detailed planning efforts to guide the future development of The Platinum Triangle. 2) Encourage a regional inter-modal transportation hub in proximity to Angel Stadium of Anaheim. 3) Encourage mixed-use projects integrating retail, office and higher density residential land uses. 4) Maximize and capitalize upon the view corridor from the Santa Ana (I-5) and Orange (SR-57) Freeways. 5) Maximize views and recreational and development opportunities afforded by the area’s proximity to the Santa Ana River. Anaheim Canyon This 2,450-acre business center borders the north side of the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway between Imperial Highway to the east and the Orange (57) Freeway to the west, and is considered a major regional employment center. Its highly visible location and accessibility to both the Inland Empire and Los Angeles County give it an added advantage. The Land Use Plan maintains the industrial/office emphasis throughout the area. The Plan enhances these uses by identifying more intense office uses in close proximity to major transportation facilities and to take advantage of views and access to the Riverside (SR-91) Freeway. The Plan also identifies a major transit-oriented mixed- use node adjacent to the Anaheim Canyon Metrolink Station. CITY OF ANAHEIM Page LU-60 | Revised March 2020 As an ongoing effort to improve the image of the area and stimulate economic development, the City will continue to work with the Orange County Water District to explore opportunities to improve the aesthetics of, and consider alternative uses for, areas along the Santa Ana River and settling/percolation basins. GOAL 16.1: Preserve and project the image of Anaheim Canyon as one of the most prominent business centers in Orange County. Policies: 1) Intensify land uses in close proximity to the Metrolink Station. 2) Facilitate a dynamic mix of uses and create a distinctive employment setting through adherence to policies in the Community Design Element related to Anaheim Canyon. 3) Intensify uses in close proximity to bus stops along La Palma Avenue, a future enhanced bus system route. 4) Improve pedestrian mobility through the addition of sidewalks (e.g., on La Palma Avenue near the Metrolink Station). 5) Take advantage of freeway accessibility and visibility by intensifying office uses along the south side of La Palma Avenue, pursuant to the Land Use Plan. 6) Protect and enhance the integrity and desirability of industrial sites from non-industrial uses. 7) Improve landscaping along the edge of the Santa Ana River and settling basins in cooperation with the Orange County Water District. 8) Work with the Orange County Water District to expand upon the development potential of the water percolation basins located in the area. 9) Ensure quality development through Zoning Code development standards and the Community Design Element policies and guidelines. LAND USE ELEMENT Revised March 2020 City of Anaheim General Plan | Page LU-61 This page intentionally left blank. EXHIBIT B 200 S. Anaheim Blvd. Suite #162 Anaheim, CA 92805 Tel: (714) 765-5139 Fax: (714) 765-5280 www.anaheim.net CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT City of Anaheim PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE: MARCH 19, 2019 FROM: PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT:ANNUAL HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRESS REPORT FOR THE 2018 REPORTING PERIOD ATTACHMENTS (Y/N):YES ITEM # 04 RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council review the 2018 Annual Housing Element Progress Report and direct the Planning and Building Director to submit the report to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) and the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR). EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This is the fifth report that the City will submit to HCD for the 2014-2021 Housing Element, which identifies Anaheim’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation, the City’s self-stated housing production goals (Quantified Objective) and the progress made towards meeting these goals. The City’s total RHNA allocation is 5,702 units, of which 2,933 units remain to be constructed. All of the remaining units fall into the unmet income categories of very low, low and moderate-income. The City has met and surpassed the above moderate-income category by 3,733 units. HCD is also requiring additional information this reporting year including, but limited to, the total number of housing units proposed, entitled and certificates of occupancy received. The State Legislature has adopted a number of housing bills over the last few years that provide funding for affordable housing, but also continue to place increased pressure on local governments to facilitate the development of affordable housing and achieve their RHNA allocations. In 2018, the City Council adopted an affordable housing policy statement to encourage a dialogue between the City and all developers of rental and for-sale housing to consider options and approaches for addressing the City’s affordable housing needs. In conjunction with the policy statement, the Council also adopted an action plan that outlines several action items aimed at increasing the supply of affordable housing in Anaheim. Staff is working to implement all facets of the plan. Annual Housing Element Progress Report March 19, 2019 Page 2 of 7 DISCUSSION: In 2014, the City Council adopted and HCD certified the City of Anaheim’s 2014-2021 General Plan Housing Element. The Housing Element is one of the many chapters of the City’s General Plan. The General Plan is a State-mandated comprehensive, long-term planning document that addresses a multitude of land use-related issues designed to provide policy guidance. The General Plan represents the community’s view of its future; it is a blueprint for a city or county’s growth and development. City councils, boards of supervisors, and planning commissions use the goals and policies of the General Plan as a basis on which to make their land use decisions. The General Plan consists of several topic specific elements, such as the Land Use, Circulation, and Safety Elements. The City’s General Plan is available on the City’s website at https://www.anaheim.net/712/General-Plan. The Housing Element is a State-required component of the General Plan that addresses present and future (through 2021) housing opportunities for Anaheim residents. The Housing Element provides the primary policy guidance for local decision-making related to housing. The Housing Element is the only General Plan Element that requires review and certification by HCD. Additionally, State law requires local jurisdictions to update the Housing Element every eight years and to file a Housing Element progress report to HCD and OPR by April 1 of each year. State law also requires the City Council to consider these progress reports during a public meeting so that members of the public may provide oral testimony or written comments. This is the fifth reporting year for the 2014-2021 Housing Element. The report (submitted on forms provided by HCD) identifies Anaheim’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation, the City’s self-stated housing production goals (referred to as the “Quantified Objective”) and the progress made towards meeting these goals, quantified by the total number of building permits issued for new housing units during the reporting year. For the 2018 reporting year (January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018), the City issued 949 building permits for new housing units. Recently, Governor Newsom recognized the City of Anaheim at the 2019 State of the State as a local government that “does the right thing” with respect to housing production. The report also describes the status of other action items outlined in the Housing Element’s Implementation Program. Because of the State’s efforts to boost the production of housing units, the City may now count accessory dwelling units towards its RHNA allocation. In addition, HCD has revised the reporting forms (Attachment 1) to require additional information in an effort to track the City’s housing production activities. Specifically, HCD is requesting the information in Table 1 for this reporting year. Annual Housing Element Progress Report March 19, 2019 Page 3 of 7 Table 1: New Reporting Forms Requirements for Reporting Year 2018 New Requirement Reporting Forms Table Units Reported New units proposed A 806 New units entitled A2 521 New certificates of occupancy issued for housing units A2 1,757 Sites identified or rezoned to accommodate shortfall housing needs C 0 Commercial development applications that received development bonuses in exchange for providing affordable housing E 0 In addition to the total number of housing units proposed, entitled and certificates of occupancy received, HCD is requesting information on sites that the City has identified or rezoned to accommodate any shortfalls from the projected unit yields of the current Housing Element cycle, as required under the “no net loss” State law. The City has nothing to report with respect to this requirement. HCD is also requesting information on development bonuses granted for commercial development in exchange for providing housing, as permitted by State law. The City did not receive any such applications in the reporting year. RHNA Allocation: The City’s RHNA allocation represents the number of housing units that the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) estimates will be necessary to accommodate the City’s projected population growth for the 2014-2021 planning period. SCAG establishes the RHNA allocation for cities and counties during each Housing Element cycle. Additionally, SCAG divides each jurisdiction’s RHNA allocation into four income categories. Table 2 below lists the income categories and the qualifying income ranges for a family of four. Table 2: RHNA Income Categories Income Category Income Range for a Family of Four Very Low-Income (up to 50% of MFI)*$32,800 – $54,650 Low-Income (51% to 80% of MFI)$54,650 – $87,450 Moderate-Income (81% to 120% of MFI)$87,450 – $111,250 Above Moderate-Income (more than 120% of MFI)$111,250 and above *Orange County’s current Median Family Income (MFI) for a family of four is $92,700 SCAG has recently started efforts to determine the RHNA allocation for the 2021-2029 planning period and staff is closely monitoring this process to advocate for the allocation to be equitable and reasonable. HCD requires SCAG to submit its final allocation plan to HCD by October 31, 2020; local jurisdictions are subsequently required to submit updated Housing Elements that reflect these allocations to HCD by October 31, 2021. Annual Housing Element Progress Report March 19, 2019 Page 4 of 7 As described above, SCAG considers the City’s anticipated population growth in its RHNA allocation. In 2014, the City’s population was 348,305. The RHNA allocation anticipated that the City’s population would increase by 21,878 residents, to a population of 370,183 by 2021. According to the State Department of Finance, the City’s population in January 2018 was 357,084 residents, indicating a population growth of 8,779 residents since 2014.To accommodate the City’s estimated population growth of 21,878 residents, SCAG allocated or assigned the development of 5,702 residential units to Anaheim during the 2014-2021 planning cycle. SCAG further divides this allocation into goals for the income categories in Table 2. Table 3 below provides the RHNA income categories, respective RHNA allocation, permits issued, and remaining RHNA allocation. As of December 2018, the City had issued permits to construct 6,503 residential units, 801 units more than the City’s total RHNA allocation. However, the vast majority of the units (6,235 units) qualify as above moderate-income housing. Based on the City’s RHNA allocation, the City can count no more than 2,501 of these units towards the RHNA allocation for above-moderate income housing. Therefore, the City’s remaining RHNA allocation is 2,933 units, including 1,158 units for very low-income residents, 792 units for low- income residents and 983 units for moderate-income residents. In addition to reporting progress made towards meeting Anaheim’s RHNA allocation, the report illustrates the City’s progress towards achieving its Quantified Objective, an important component of the Housing Element. The Quantified Objective represents what the City has determined to be a reasonable number of housing units that it anticipates during the planning period, when taking into consideration factors such as available funding, infrastructure, and current market conditions. HCD reviews the City’s Quantified Objective as part of its Housing Element certification process. Table 3 below includes the City’s Quantified Objectives by income category and the progress made towards meeting these objectives. Table 3: Building Permits Issued Income Category RHNA Allocation for 8-Year Planning Period Quantified Objective for 8-Year Planning Period Permits Issued 2014-2018 (5 years) Remaining RHNA Allocation (3 years to complete) Remaining Quantified Objective (3 years to complete) Very Low-Income 1,256 83 98 1,158 (15) Low-Income 907 367 115 792 252 Moderate-Income 1,038 36 55 983 (19) Above Moderate-Income 2,501 3,872 6,234 (3,734)(2,363) TOTAL 5,702 units 4,358 units 6,502 units 2,933 units*252 units *This figure excludes 3,734 above moderate-income units that cannot be counted towards the RHNA allocation because this income category has been satisfied. In addition to new construction, during the first five years of the eight-year reporting period, the City rehabilitated 863 income-restricted residential units that property owners may have otherwise converted to market rate units, referred to in the affordable housing profession as “at- risk” units. Annual Housing Element Progress Report March 19, 2019 Page 5 of 7 The figures provided in the Table 3 above exclude 563 of these units because HCD only allows the City to count substantially rehabilitated units that meet certain State-established criteria towards its RHNA allocation or Quantified Objective. Of the 863 “at-risk” units, only 300 meet these criteria. Nonetheless, the rehabilitation of at-risk units is an important component of the Housing Element’s Implementation Program. Recognizing that the State of California is experiencing an affordable housing crisis, the State Legislature adopted a number of housing bills over the last few years. One of these bills is Senate Bill 35 (SB 35), which requires local governments that have not met their RHNA allocations to expedite and approve “by-right” (streamline) affordable housing development projects that provide a prescribed amount of affordable units on an infill site and comply with existing residential and mixed-use zoning. SB 35 requires Anaheim to streamline the approval process for housing development projects that designate 50 percent of units available for households with incomes below 80 percent of the Area Medium Income (AMI); however, without significant subsidy, this is not likely to occur based on current market conditions. Senate Bill 3 (SB 3), approved by California voters in November 2018, is a bond measure that its proponents estimate would generate up to $4 billion for affordable housing purposes. California voters also approved Propositions 1 and 2. Proposition 1 authorized $4 billion statewide in funding for existing affordable housing programs for low-income residents, veterans, farmworkers, manufactured and mobile homes, infill, and transit-oriented housing. Proposition 2 provides $2 billion statewide to fund housing for homeless individuals with mental health issues. The State legislature also adopted a number of administrative bills in 2018 that became effective on January 1, 2019. These new bills continue to place increased pressure on local governments to facilitate the development of affordable housing and achieve their RHNA allocations. One of these bills is Senate Bill 1333, which requires that charter cities follow the same Planning and Zoning provisions of State law as general law cities regarding general plans, specific plans and the adoption of housing elements. This bill, in essence, requires the City to ensure that its zoning, specific plans and development agreements are consistent with its housing element, which is the case for Anaheim. Housing Policy Program: In addition to housing production targets, the Housing Element includes a Housing Policy Program that identifies a variety of policy actions necessary to ensure that the City meets its present and future housing needs. The emphasis of the Policy Program is on actions relating to housing policies, including those related to fees and programs, which affect the City’s ability to produce housing. Table D of the report forms (Attachment 1) illustrates the progress towards achieving various policies and programs. The following list highlights key housing accomplishments achieved in 2018, and summarizes efforts currently underway that the City anticipates completing by 2020: The Anaheim Housing Authority approved the issuance of bonds for several existing affordable housing projects to assist with the rehabilitation of the properties and extending the term of affordability to 55 years for 452 very low and low-income units completed in 2018. The projects are as follows: o Hermosa Village Phase I Apartments: 297-unit family rental apartment project o Cobblestone Apartments: 64-unit family rental apartment project Annual Housing Element Progress Report March 19, 2019 Page 6 of 7 o Sea Wind Apartments: 91-unit family rental apartment project Development of the former Sandman Motel located at 1248 E. Lincoln Avenue is progressing to be ready to begin construction of a 54-unit senior housing project targeting extremely low, very low and low-income residents. The project sets aside 50% of the units for homeless seniors. The developer, who received a Tax Credit Award from the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee, anticipates commencing construction in March 2019. The City continues its efforts to revitalize the Avon Dakota Neighborhood, involving the acquisition of market-rate apartments for the purposes of rehabilitating and converting to long term affordable housing. The developer completed the Phase I Rehabilitation project consisting of 16 units in 2013. The Phase II rehabilitation project consisting of 21 extremely low, very low and low-income units was complete in December 2018. On January 29, 2019, the Anaheim Housing Authority (Authority) entered into a Preliminary Funding Award with Jamboree Housing Corporation to construct a 102-unit rental housing project on a 2.86-acre Authority-owned site located at the northwest corner of Orangewood and Manchester Avenues. The project will be 100% affordable, with rents set at levels that are deemed affordable to families with incomes that fall within the extremely low, very low and low-income households categories as set forth by State and Federal funding sources. 20 of the units at the project will be set aside for homeless households. Jamboree Housing submitted a funding application to the State of California Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program (AHSC) in February 2019. If the State awards funding to this project, construction is expected to commence in December 2019. The City is currently in escrow to acquire the properties located at 100 – 130 S. Beach Boulevard and 2970 W. Lincoln Avenue for a potential future mixed-use housing development that will include opportunities for new affordable housing. The overall development site consists of 5.7 acres, including an adjacent Housing Authority-owned vacant parcel. The Housing Authority expects to close escrow on the site in December 2019. Affordable Housing Policy On August 14, 2018, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2018-106 (Attachment 2) with a policy statement affirming that affordable housing is a priority in the City of Anaheim. The policy encourages a dialogue between the City and all developers of rental and for-sale housing proposed in Anaheim to consider options and approaches for addressing the City’s affordable housing needs. This policy statement is not an absolute requirement to produce affordable housing units; however, the purpose is to encourage developers to engage earnestly and objectively in discussion with City staff that result in the consideration of viable options for the creation of affordable housing to the extent feasible. Annual Housing Element Progress Report March 19, 2019 Page 7 of 7 Since the adoption of the policy statement, staff has met with several housing developers to discuss potential development opportunities. However, the only housing application with more than five units submitted to the City since the adoption of the policy statement is the Jamboree Housing Corporation project described above to construct a 100% affordable rental housing project with 102 units at the northwest corner of Orangewood and Manchester Avenues. The Planning Commission approved this project on January 23, 2019. The Housing Authority subsequently approved a preliminary funding award for the project on January 29, 2019. In conjunction with the policy statement, the Council also adopted an action plan that outlines several action items aimed at increasing the supply of affordable housing in Anaheim. These include facilitating creative housing solutions, regulatory relief efforts, process improvements and incentives, programs to increase middle-income housing, and identifying funding sources. Staff is working to implement all facets of the plan. IMPACT ON BUDGET: There is no budgetary impact. Funding for the preparation of the Housing Element Annual Status Update and associated reporting activities is included in the Planning and Building and Community and Economic Development Departments’ FY 2018/19 Budgets. Respectfully submitted,Concurred by, David Belmer John E. Woodhead IV Deputy City Manager Community and Economic Development Director Attachments: 1. HCD Reporting Forms 2. Resolution No. 2018-106 (Affordable Housing Policy and Action Plan) EXHIBIT C August 14, 2018 Resolution No. 2018-106 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM ADOPTING AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICY AFFIRMING THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS A PRIORITY IN THE CITY OF ANAHEIM WHEREAS, the State of California has a statewide housing affordability crisis, which also manifests at the regional and local level. Based on data recently produced by the Southern California Association of Governments and California Housing Partnership Corporation, from 2000 to 2015, median rents in California have increased 25%, while median household income has declined 4%. Statewide, more than 60% of very low-income families spend upwards of 50% of household income on housing; and WHEREAS, Orange County, California is among the top 10 least affordable metropolitan markets in the nation, with 55% of Orange County renters spending more than 30% of income on rent. The most recent Regional Housing Needs Allocation numbers indicate that 37,966 units are needed to meet current housing needs in Orange County; and WHEREAS, the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the City of Anaheim for the period of 2014-2021 indicates that the City has a total housing need of 5,702 units. From this allocation, the RHNA designates: a) 1,256 units for very low-income families, with incomes at or below 50% of Average Median Income (AMI), or $52,150 for a family of four; b) 907 units for low-income families with an AMI ranging from 51% to 80%, not to exceed $83,450; c) 1,038 units for moderate-income families with an AMI ranging from 81% to 120%, not to exceed $105,600; and d) 2,501 units for above moderate-income families with an AMI above 120% WHEREAS, the housing needs of very low-income, low-income and moderate-income families as prescribed by the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the period of 2014- 2021 remain to be satisfied. A total of 1,175 units remain to be built for very low-income families, 796 units for low-income families and 993 units for moderate income families; and WHEREAS, while the City has made substantial progress in certain income categories, the housing needs of very low-income and low-income families as prescribed by the City of Anaheim’s Quantified Objective (QO) for the period of 2014-2021 remain to be satisfied. The QO has the following outstanding goals: 2 units for very low-income families and 256 units for low- income families. The City has exceeded the QO for moderate-income families by nine units; and August 14, 2018 WHEREAS, the City has exceeded its goals for above moderate-income families, as prescribed by the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) and QO, for the 2014-2021 reporting period. A total of 5,240 building permits have been issued for new residential construction since 2014, exceeding the RHNA and QO minimum requirements of 2,501 and 3,872 units, respectively; and WHEREAS, demand for affordable housing in Anaheim continues to be significant. There are currently over 25,000 families on the waiting list for the Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program, a rental subsidy program, and 20,000 families on the interest list for referrals for affordable housing in Anaheim, units where families pay their own way but rents are generally lower than those charged in privately owned rental housing; and WHEREAS, the City and the former Redevelopment Agency, through a variety of programs and incentives, has provided a broad spectrum of housing options for persons who live and/or work in Anaheim. The City and the former Redevelopment Agency’s efforts have resulted in the creation of over 6,784 units since 1978, including 4,894 affordable units, to house its residents; and WHEREAS, in 2005, the City Council adopted the Affordable Housing Strategic Plan (the “Strategy”), which set a goal of constructing 1,200 affordable housing units for very low to moderate-income households. The City met this goal and subsequently adjusted the goal in 2009 through 2014 to 2,700. While the increased production goal was not met due to the loss of Housing Set-aside funds, an outcome directly linked to the elimination of all Redevelopment agencies in California, over 1,370 of rental and homeownership units were completed under the Strategy; and WHEREAS, the City recognizes the importance of continuing to proactively develop affordable housing in Anaheim to meet the need of families who live and work in the City; and WHEREAS, at the City Council meeting of October 24, 2017, staff presented options for the Council’s consideration for approaches that may be used to increase the City’s supply of affordable housing. The options ranged from the adoption of a policy statement declaring affordable housing as a priority in the City and encouraging voluntary actions and/or options which would include mandatory approaches such as an inclusionary housing ordinance; and WHEREAS, Council Members Kring and Barnes and Mayor Pro Tem Moreno volunteered to work with staff to prepare an affordable housing policy statement for Council consideration and adoption; and WHEREAS, the City of Anaheim met and consulted with various stakeholders to solicit input, including market-rate and affordable housing developers, affordable housing advocates other real estate professionals; and WHEREAS, housing developers have stated that their ability to provide affordable housing would be positively affected by potential incentives, such as expedited processing, additional flexibility on certain development standards, and potential fee deferrals and/or waivers, to facilitate affordable units and mitigate the costs of doing so. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: August 14, 2018 Section 1. The City Council, by this resolution, affirms that affordable housing is a priority in the City of Anaheim and is adopting a policy statement that encourages a dialogue between City staff and all developers of upcoming rental and for-sale housing proposed in Anaheim to consider options and approaches for addressing the City’s affordable housing needs, as set forth in the Housing Element of the City’s General Plan, and other documents that guide the City’s affordable housing goals. The policy statement is not an absolute requirement to produce affordable housing units; however, it is the expectation of City leaders that developers will engage earnestly and objectively in discussions with City staff as projects are contemplated and proposed that result in the consideration of viable options for the creation of affordable housing to the extent feasible. By way of examples, this may include setting aside or designating a certain number of affordable housing units within proposed housing projects, offering buyer or rental incentive or assistance programs; down payment assistance programs to assist income-qualified first-time homebuyers; partnering with and assisting a non-profit organization(s) pursuing affordable housing projects in the City, including the provision of “in-kind” services; and/or other options that City deems in furtherance of its affordable needs, goals, and objectives. The City recognizes that there can be financial implications associated with the delivery of affordable housing. As such, the City is committed to being a partner in the production of affordable housing that is responsive to market conditions through the creation of the Anaheim Affordable Housing Action Plan (AHAP) that would be subject to the review and approval of the City Council. The AHAP is attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and is incorporated herein by this reference. The objectives of the AHAP are as follows: Regulatory Relief Continue the City’s commitment to reducing bureaucracy by providing relief from regulations that create barriers to the development of affordable housing. Efforts to reduce regulations could include: a) Ensuring that the City’s ordinances and programs are consistent with State laws that facilitate the production of affordable housing; b) Allowing for the development of all housing product-types, including creative housing solutions for all income levels; and c) Encourage the State to further streamline the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and its processes to alleviate challenges and impediments to affordable housing production, including broadening exemptions for affordable housing projects that meet certain criteria. Process Incentives Work with stakeholders to develop an affordable housing incentive program that reduces costs and/or development time during the permitting process. Such incentives could include deferment and/or waiver of certain development impact fees for developers who provide affordable units or otherwise make provisions for assisting the City in addressing its affordable housing needs. August 14, 2018 Middle-Income Housing Work with stakeholders to develop a middle-income housing program that promotes and incentivizes entry-level rental and for-sale affordable housing for individuals earning middle-class incomes. The vast majority of new market-rate housing units produced are at prices at the top of the market. In addition, state and federal funding for the development of new housing typically target very low and low-income families and individuals. As a result, this middle-income group, which includes professionals such as schoolteachers, healthcare workers, public safety personnel, engineers, etc., is quickly losing the ability to afford housing. The program would not compete with other housing tools that target very low and low-income individuals, but rather create another available option to increase housing supply and improve affordability. Affordable Housing Ambassador Program Develop an affordable housing ambassador program in which where the City would designate a staff person(s) to promote and facilitate the development of affordable housing in Anaheim. The program could include the following: First point of contact on any affordable housing projects Meet with market-rate developers to promote affordable housing Usher housing projects through the entitlement and permitting process Foster relationships with housing stakeholders Help educate residents on the need and value of well-designed affordable housing projects Develop conceptual site design and massing illustrations on potential development sites and promote them to developers Create an affordable housing marketing program Affordable Housing Development Funding Ensure that the City remains competitive to receive State and Federal funding, leverages the Anaheim Housing Authority’s remaining resources and assets to maximize the production of affordable housing, and encourages the State to adopt and pursue funding sources for affordable housing that can replace those lost through the elimination of redevelopment agencies. /// /// /// THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION IS PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM THIS 14 (4") DAY OF August , 2018, BY THE FOLLOWING ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Mayor Tait and Council Members Moreno, Murray, Vanderbilt, Barnes, Kring, and Faessel NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None CITY OF ANAHEIM By: Mayor City—Clerk of the City of Anaheim August 14, 2018 EXHIBIT “A” AFFORDABLE HOUSING ACTION PLAN SPECIFIC ACTIONS TIMEFRAME PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY 1. Regulatory Relief 1.1 Analyze and process amendments to the Zoning Code to ensure that the City’s ordinances and programs are consistent with State laws that facilitate the production of affordable housing. 6-12 months Planning & Building 1.2 Analyze and process amendments to the Zoning Code to allow the development of all housing product-types, including creative housing solutions for all income levels.6-12 months Planning & Building 1.3 Encourage the State to adopt meaningful reforms to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and its processes to alleviate challenges and impediments to affordable housing production. 6-12 months Planning & Building; City Manager’s Office 2. Process Incentives 2.1 Review the City’s impact fee and fee deferment program to look for additional opportunities to incentivize affordable housing, including the possibility of waiving up to 10% of development impact fees, depending on the level of affordability provided. 12-18 months Planning & Building 3. Middle-Income Housing 3.1 Develop a middle-income housing program that promotes and incentivizes entry-level affordable housing for individuals earning middle-class incomes.6-12 months Planning & Building; Community & Economic Development 4. Affordable Housing Ambassador 4.1 Develop an affordable housing ambassador program to promote and facilitate the development of affordable housing in Anaheim.6-12 months Planning & Building; Community & Economic Development 4.2 Collaborate with the community and other key stakeholders to provide public information and education on the need for and value of well-designed affordable and workforce housing projects. 6-12 months Planning & Building; Community & Economic Development EXHIBIT “A” 4.3 Partner with the business and development community to find and explore programs and tools that increase the production of affordable housing in Anaheim.6-12 months Planning & Building; Community & Economic Development 5. Affordable Housing Development Funding 5.1 Encourage Federal and State lawmakers to create new viable funding sources for affordable housing and work to ensure that the City remains competitive to receive existing and new State and Federal funding sources that can replace the affordable housing funds lost through the elimination of redevelopment agencies. 12-18 months Planning & Building; Community & Economic Development 5.2 Capitalize on the existence of the Anaheim Housing Authority by leveraging its remaining resources and assets to maximize the production of affordable housing.12-18 months Planning & Building; Community & Economic Development 5.3 Ensure the Housing Authority pursues additional funding, when available, for the Housing Choice Voucher Program as the funds are often used to support affordable housing development. 12-18 months Planning & Building; Community & Economic Development CLERK'S CERTIFICATE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) ss. CITY OF ANAHEIM ) I, LINDA ANDAL, City Clerk of the City of Anaheim, do hereby certify that the foregoing is the original Resolution No. 2018-106 adopted at a regular meeting provided by law, of the Anaheim City Council held on the 14th day of August 2018 by the following vote of the members thereof: AYES: Mayor Tait and Council Members Moreno, Vanderbilt, Murray, Barnes, Kring, and Faessel NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 15th day of August, 2018. CLERK O THE CITY OF ANAHEIM SEAL) EXHIBIT D THE 2016-2040 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN/ SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY A Plan for Mobility, Accessibility, Sustainability and a High Quality of Life ADOPTEDAPRIL 2016 MISSION STATEMENT REGIONAL COUNCIL POLICY COMMITTEE MEMBERS PAST REGIONAL COUNCIL & POLICY COMMITTEE MEMBERS RESOLUTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: ENVISIONING OUR REGION IN 2040 1 01 INTRODUCTION 10 02 WHERE WE ARE TODAY 18 INSERT: OUR PROGRESS SINCE 2012 40 03 CHALLENGES IN A CHANGING REGION 46 04 CREATING A PLAN FOR OUR FUTURE 62 05 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH 72 06 PAYING FOR THE PLAN 126 07 A PLAN THAT CREATES ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY: THE BIG PICTURE 142 08 MEASURING OUR PROGRESS FOR THE FUTURE 150 09 LOOKING AHEAD 174 GLOSSARY 184 LIST OF FIGURES/TABLES/EXHIBITS/FOCUS PAGES 198 LIST OF APPENDICES 199 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 200 ADOPTEDAPRIL 2016 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS Funding: The preparation of this document was financed in part through funds from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Additional financial assistance was provided by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of FHWA, FTA or Caltrans. U.S. D epartment of Transportation Federal Transit Administration U.S. D epartment of Transportation Federal Highway Administration LEADERSHIP | VISION | PROGRESS Leadership, vision and progress which promote economic growth, personal well-being and livable communities for all Southern Californians. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS WILL ACCOMPLISH THIS MISSION BY: z Developing long-range regional plans and strategies that provide for efficient movement of people, goods and information; enhance economic growth and international trade; and improve the environment and quality of life z Providing quality information services and analysis for the region z Using an inclusive decision-making process that resolves conflicts and encourages trust z Creating an educational and work environment that cultivates creativity, initiative and opportunity MISSION STATEMENT MEMBERS Imperial County Hon. Jack Terrazas Hon. Cheryl Viegas-Walker Los Angeles County Hon. Michael D. Antonovich Hon. Sean Ashton Hon. Bob Blumenfield Hon. Mike Bonin Hon. Joe Buscaino Hon. Gilbert Cedillo Hon. Margaret Clark Hon. Jonathan C. Curtis Hon. Gene Daniels Hon. Mitchell Englander Hon. Margaret E. Finlay Hon. Felipe Fuentes Hon. Eric Garcetti Hon. Jim Gazeley Hon. Lena Gonzalez Hon. Marqueece Harris Dawson Hon. Carol Herrera REGIONAL COUNCIL Hon. Steven D. Hofbauer Hon. Jose Huizar Hon. Paul Koretz Hon. Paul Krekorian Hon. Antonio Lopez Hon. Victor Manalo Hon. Nury Martinez Hon. Dan Medina Hon. Barbara A. Messina Hon. Judy Mitchell Hon. Gene Murabito Hon. Pam O’Connor Hon. Mitch O’Farrell Hon. Sam Pedroza Hon. Curren D. Price, Jr. Hon. Rex Richardson Hon. Mark Ridley-Thomas Hon. David Ryu Hon. Ali Saleh Hon. Andrew Sarega Hon. John Sibert Hon. Jose Luis Solache Hon. Jess Talamantes Hon. Herb Wesson, Jr. Orange County Hon. Arthur C. Brown Hon. Steven S. Choi, Ph.D. Hon. Ross Chun Hon. Steve Hwangbo Hon. Jim Katapodis Hon. Barbara Kogerman Hon. Michele Martinez Hon. Mike Munzing Hon. Kristine Murray Hon. Steve Nagel Hon. John Nielsen Hon. Erik Peterson Hon. Marty Simonoff Hon. Michelle Steel Hon. Tri Ta Riverside County Hon. Rusty Bailey Hon. Jeffrey Giba Hon. Jan C. Harnik Hon. Jim Hyatt Hon. Randon Lane Hon. Clint Lorimore Hon. Gregory S. Pettis Hon. Mary L. Resvaloso Hon. Karen S. Spiegel Hon. Chuck Washington Hon. Michael Wilson San Bernardino County Hon. Paul M. Eaton Hon. Curt Hagman Hon. Bill Jahn Mr. Randall W. Lewis Hon. Ray Marquez Hon. Larry McCallon Hon. Ryan McEachron Hon. Frank J. Navarro Hon. Deborah Robertson Hon. Alan D. Wapner Ventura County Hon. Glen T. Becerra Hon. Keith F. Millhouse Hon. Carl E. Morehouse Hon. Linda Parks Hon. Carmen Ramirez OFFICERS President Hon. Cheryl Viegas-Walker, El Centro First Vice President Hon. Michele Martinez, Santa Ana Second Vice President Hon. Margaret E. Finlay, Duarte Immediate Past President Hon. Carl E. Morehouse, San Buenaventura POLICY COMMITTEE MEMBERS COMMUNITY, ECONOMIC & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Chair Hon. Bill Jahn, Big Bear Lake* Vice-Chair Hon. Larry McCallon, Highland* Hon. Robert “Bob” Joe, South Pasadena Hon. Barbara Kogerman, Laguna Hills* Hon. Paula Lantz, Pomona Hon. Joe Lyons, Claremont Hon. Victor Manalo, Artesia* Hon. Charles Martin, Morongo Band of Mission Indians Hon. Joseph McKee, Desert Hot Springs Hon. Susan McSweeney, Westlake Village Hon. Carl E. Morehouse, San Buenaventura* Hon. Ray Musser, Upland Hon. Steve Nagel, Fountain Valley* Hon. Dante Acosta, Santa Clarita Hon. Al Austin, Long Beach Hon. Stacy Berry, Cypress Hon. Wendy Bucknum, Mission Viejo Hon. Carol Chen, Cerritos Hon. Steven S. Choi, Ph.D., Irvine* Hon. Jeffrey Cooper, Culver City Hon. Rose Espinoza, La Habra Hon. Kerry Ferguson, San Juan Capistrano Hon. Margaret E. Finlay, Duarte* Hon. Debbie Franklin, Banning Hon. Julie Hackbarth-McIntyre, Barstow Hon. Tom Hansen, Paramount Hon. John Nielsen, Tustin* Hon. Edward Paget, Needles Hon. Erik Peterson, Huntington Beach* Hon. Jim Predmore, Holtville Hon. John Procter, Santa Paula Hon. Mary L. Resvaloso, Torres-Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians* Hon. Rex Richardson, Long Beach* Hon. Sonny R. Santa Ines, Bellflower Hon. Andrew Sarega, La Mirada* Hon. Becky Shevlin, Monrovia Hon. Tri Ta, Westminster* Hon. Frank Zerunyan, Rolling Hills Estates * Regional Council Member TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE Chair Hon. Alan D. Wapner, Ontario* Vice-Chair Hon. Barbara A. Messina, Alhambra* Hon. Steve Hofbauer, Palmdale* Hon. Jose Huizar, Los Angeles* Hon. Jim Hyatt, Calimesa* Hon. Jim Katapodis, Huntington Beach* Hon. Linda Krupa, Hemet Hon. Randon Lane, Murrieta* Hon. Severo Lara, Ojai Hon. James C. Ledford, Palmdale Hon. Antonio Lopez, San Fernando* Hon. Clint Lorimore, Eastvale* Hon. Ray Marquez, Chino Hills* Hon. Michele Martinez, Santa Ana* Hon. Ryan McEachron, Victorville* Hon. Marsha McLean, Santa Clarita Hon. Dan Medina, Gardena* Hon. Keith F. Millhouse, Moorpark* Hon. Carol Moore, Laguna Woods Hon. Gene Murabito, Glendora* Hon. Kris Murray, Anaheim* Hon. Frank Navarro, Colton* Hon. Pam O’Connor, Santa Monica* Hon. Michael D. Antonovich, Los Angeles County* Hon. Sean Ashton, Downey* Hon. Rusty Bailey, Riverside* Hon. Glen T. Becerra, Simi Valley* Hon. Ben Benoit, Wildomar Hon. Russell Betts, Desert Hot Springs Hon. Arthur C. Brown, Buena Park* Hon. Joe Buscaino, Los Angeles* Hon. Diana Lee Carey, Westminster Hon. Jonathan Curtis, La Cañada Flintridge* Hon. Gene Daniels, Paramount* Hon. Paul M. Eaton, Montclair* Hon. Felipe Fuentes, Los Angeles* Hon. James Gazeley, Lomita* Hon. Jeffrey Giba, Moreno Valley* Hon. Lena Gonzalez, Long Beach* Hon. Bert Hack, Laguna Woods Hon. Curt Hagman, San Bernardino County* Hon. Jan Harnik, Palm Desert* Hon. Dave Harrington, Aliso Viejo Hon. Carol Herrera, Diamond Bar* Hon. Micheál O’Leary, Culver City Hon. Sam Pedroza, Claremont* Hon. Teresa Real Sebastian, Monterey Park Hon. Dwight Robinson, Lake Forest Hon. Ali Saleh, Bell* Hon. Damon Sandoval Morongo Band of Mission Indians Hon. Marty Simonoff, Brea* Hon. Zareh Sinanyan, Glendale Hon. Jose Luis Solache, Lynwood* Hon. David Spence, La Cañada Flintridge Hon. Karen Spiegel, Corona* Hon. Barb Stanton, Town of Apple Valley Hon. Michelle Steel, Orange County* Hon. Cynthia Sternquist, Temple City Hon. Jess Talamantes, Burbank* Hon. Brent Tercero, Pico Rivera Hon. Cheryl Viegas-Walker, El Centro* Hon. Chuck Washington* Hon. Michael Wilson, Indio* Mr. Gary T. Slater, Caltrans District 7 ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE Chair Hon. Deborah Robertson, Rialto* Vice-Chair Hon. Carmen Ramirez, Oxnard* Hon. Shari Horne, Laguna Woods Hon. Steve Hwangbo, La Palma* Hon. Diana Mahmud, South Pasadena Hon. Thomas Martin, Maywood Hon. Judy Mitchell, Rolling Hills Estates* Hon. Mike Munzing, Aliso Viejo* Hon. Jim Osborne, Lawndale Hon. Linda Parks, Ventura County* Hon. Greg Pettis, Cathedral City* Hon. David Pollock, Moorpark Hon. Denis Bertone, San Dimas Hon. Ross Chun, Aliso Viejo* Hon. Margaret Clark, Rosemead* Hon. Jordan Ehrenkranz, Canyon Lake Hon. Mitchell Englander, Los Angeles* Hon. Larry Forester, Signal Hill Hon. Laura Friedman, Glendale Hon. Mike Gardner, Riverside Hon. Sandra Genis, Costa Mesa Hon. Ed Graham, Chino Hills Hon. Meghan Sahli-Wells, Culver City Hon. Betty Sanchez, Coachella Valley Mr. Steve Schuyler, Building Industry Association of Southern California (BIASC) Hon. John Sibert, Malibu* Hon. Jack Terrazas, Imperial County* Hon. Mark Waronek, Lomita Hon. Diane Williams, Rancho Cucamonga Hon. Edward Wilson, Signal Hill Hon. Bonnie Wright, Hemet PAST REGIONAL COUNCIL & POLICY COMMITTEE MEMBERS REGIONAL COUNCIL Hon. Marion Ashley, Riverside County Hon. Bruce Barrows, Cerritos Hon. Lisa A. Bartlett, Dana Point Hon. Leslie Daigle, Newport Beach Hon. Steve De Ruse, La Mirada Hon. Jeff DeGrandpre, Eastvale Hon. Barbara Delgleize, Huntington Beach Hon. Roy Francis, La Habra Heights Hon. Michael Goodland, Jurupa Valley Hon. Ed Graham, Chino Hills Hon. Mario Guerra, Downey Hon. Matthew Harper, Huntington Beach Hon. Jon Harrison, Redlands Hon. James Johnson, Long Beach Hon. Tom LaBonge, Los Angeles Hon. Andrew Masiel, Sr., Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians Hon. Kathryn McCullough, Lake Forest Hon. Leroy Mills, Cypress Hon. Brett Murdock, Brea Hon. Steven Neal, Long Beach Hon. Shawn Nelson, Orange County Hon. Gary Ovitt, San Bernardino County Hon. Bernard Parks, Los Angeles Hon. Ronald “Ron” Roberts, Temecula Hon. Julio C. Rodriguez, Perris Hon. Adam Rush, Eastvale Hon. Mark Rutherford, Westlake Village Hon. Jeff Stone, Riverside County Hon. Donald Voss, La Cañada Flintridge COMMUNITY, ECONOMIC & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Hon. Sam Allevato, San Juan Capistrano Hon. Don Campbell, Brawley Hon. Lynne Dvorak, Laguna Woods Hon. Chris Garcia, Cudahy Hon. Ron Garcia, Brea Hon. Joseph Gonzales, South El Monte Hon. John Palinkas, Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians Hon. Rex Parris, Lancaster Hon. Ray Torres, Torres Martinez Band of Cahuilla Indians ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE Hon. John Denver, Menifee Hon. Steve Hernandez, Coachella Valley Hon. Geneva Mojado, Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians Hon. Jeffrey Prang, West Hollywood Hon. Stephen Sammarco, Redondo Beach Hon. Eric Schmidt, Hesperia Hon. Joe Shaw, Huntington Beach TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE Hon. John Addleman, Rolling Hills Estates Hon. Catalina Chacon, Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians Mr. Aziz Elattar, Caltrans District 7 Hon. Bill Hodge, Calexico Hon. Patricia Kelley, Mission Viejo Hon. Brian McDonald, Chemehuevi Indian Tribe Hon. Larry Smith, Hemet Hon. Tim Spohn, Industry Hon. Olivia Valentine, Hawthorne RESOLUTION NO. 16-578-2 A RESOLUTION OF THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS APPROVING THE 2016- 2040 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN/ SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY (2016 RTP/SCS); RELATED CONFORMITY DETERMINATION; AND RELATED CONSISTENCY AMENDMENT #15-12 TO THE 2015 FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (FTIP) WHEREAS, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is a Joint Powers Agency established pursuant to California Government Code Section 6502 et seq.; and WHEREAS, SCAG is the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the counties of Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura, Orange, and Imperial, pursuant to Title 23, United States Code Section 134(d); and WHEREAS, SCAG is responsible for maintaining a continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive transportation planning process which involves the preparation and update every four years of a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) pursuant to Title 23, United States Code Section 134 et seq., Title 49, United States Code Section 5303 et seq., and Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations Section 450 et seq.; and WHEREAS, SCAG is the multi-county designated transportation planning agency under state law, and as such, is responsible for preparing and adopting the FTIP (regional transportation improvement program, under state law) every two years pursuant to Government Code §§ 14527 and 65082, and Public Utilities Code §130301 et seq.; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 375 (Steinberg, 2008) as codified in Government Code §65080(b) et seq., SCAG must also prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that will be incorporated into the RTP and demonstrates how the region will meet its greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets as set forth by the California Air Resources Board (ARB); and WHEREAS, ARB set the per capita GHG emission reduction targets from automobiles and light trucks for the SCAG region at 8% below 2005 per capita emissions levels by 2020 and 13% below 2005 per capita emissions levels by 2035; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code §65080(b)(2)(B), the SCS must: (1) identify the general location of uses, residential densities, and building intensities within the region; (2) identify areas within the region sufficient to house all the population of the region, including all economic segments of the population, over the course of the planning period of the regional transportation plan taking into account net migration into the region, population growth, household formation and employment growth; (3) identify areas within the region sufficient to house an eight-year projection of the regional housing need for the region pursuant to Government Code Section 65584; (4) identify a transportation network to service the transportation needs of the region; (5) gather and consider the best practically available scientific information regarding resource areas and farmland in the region as defined in subdivisions (1) and (b) of the Government Code Sections 65080 and 65581; and (6) consider the statutory housing goals specified in Sections 65580 and 65581, (7) set forth a forecasted development pattern for the region which when integrated with the transportation network, and other transportation measures and policies, will reduce the GHG emissions from automobiles and light trucks to achieve the GHG reduction targets, and (8) allow the RTP to comply with air quality conformity requirements under the federal Clean Air Act; and WHEREAS, through the conduct of a continuing, comprehensive and coordinated transportation planning process in conformance with all applicable federal and state requirement, SCAG developed and prepared its latest RTP/SCS, the Final 2016- 2040 RTP/SCS (“2016 RTP/SCS”); and WHEREAS, the 2016 RTP/SCS sets forth the long-range regional plan, policies and strategies for transportation improvements and regional growth throughout the SCAG region through the horizon year of 2040; and WHEREAS, the 2016 RTP/SCS includes a regional growth forecast that was developed by working with local jurisdictions using the most recent land use plans and policies and planning assumptions; and WHEREAS, the 2016 RTP/SCS includes a financially constrained plan and a strategic plan. The constrained plan includes transportation projects that have committed, available or reasonably available revenue sources, and thus are probable for implementation. The strategic plan is an illustrative list of additional transportation investments that the region would pursue if additional funding and regional commitment were secured; and such investments are potential candidates for inclusion in the constrained RTP/SCS through future amendments or updates. The strategic plan is provided for information purposes only and is not part of the financially constrained and conforming Final 2016 RTP/SCS; and WHEREAS, the 2016 RTP/SCS includes a financial plan identifying the revenues committed, available or reasonably available to support the SCAG region’s surface transportation investments. The financial plan was developed following basic principles including incorporation of county and local financial planning documents in the region where available, and utilization of published data sources to evaluate historical trends and augment local forecasts as needed; and WHEREAS, the 2016 RTP/SCS includes a sustainable communities strategy which sets forth a forecasted development pattern for the region, which, when integrated with the transportation network, and other transportations measures and policies, if implemented, will reduce the GHG emissions from automobiles and light trucks to achieve the regional GHG targets set by ARB for the SCAG region; and WHEREAS, the 2016 RTP/SCS must be consistent with all applicable provisions of federal and state law including: (1) The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21, PL 112-141) and the metropolitan planning regulations at 23 U.S.C. §134 et seq., as was amended by the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (P.L. 114-94, December 4, 2015); (2) The metropolitan planning regulations at 23 C.F.R. Part 450, Subpart C; (3) California Government Code §65080 et seq.; Public Utilities Code §130058 and 130059; and Public Utilities Code §44243.5; (4) §§174 and 176(c) and (d) of the federal Clean Air Act [(42 U.S.C. §§7504 and 7506(c) and (d)] and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Transportation Conformity Rule, 40 C.F.R. Parts 51 and 93; (5) Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the Title VI assurance executed by the State pursuant to 23 U.S.C. §324; (6) The Department of Transportation’s Final Environmental Justice Strategy (60 Fed. Reg. 33896; June 29, 1995) enacted pursuant to Executive Order 12898, which seeks to avoid disproportionately high and adverse impacts on minority and low- income populations with respect to human health and the environment; (7) Title II of the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C. §§12101 et seq.) and accompanying regulations at 49 C.F.R. §27, 37, and 38; and (8) SB 375 (Steinberg, 2008) as codified in California Government Code §65080(b) et seq.; WHEREAS, SCAG is further required to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21000 et seq.) in preparing the 2016 RTP/SCS; and WHEREAS, SCAG prepared a program environmental impact report (PEIR) for the 2016 RTP/SCS. The PEIR serves as a programmatic document that conducts a region-wide assessment of potential significant environmental effects of the 2016 RTP/SCS; and WHEREAS, in non-attainment and maintenance areas for transportation-related criteria pollutants, the MPO, as well as the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA), must make a conformity determination on any updated or amended RTP in accordance with the federal Clean Air Act to ensure that federally supported highway and transit project activities conform to the purpose of the State Implementation Plan (SIP); and WHEREAS, transportation conformity is based upon a positive conformity finding with respect to the following tests: (1) regional emissions analysis, (2) timely implementation of Transportation Control Measures, (3) financial constraint, and (4) interagency consultation and public involvement; and WHEREAS, on April 4, 2012, the SCAG Regional Council found the 2012 RTP/SCS to be in conformity with the State Implementation Plans for air quality, pursuant to the federal Clean Air Act and the EPA Transportation Conformity Rule. Thereafter, FHWA and FTA made a conformity determination on the 2012 RTP/SCS with said determination to expire on June 4, 2016; and WHEREAS, on September 11, 2014, in accordance with federal and state requirements, the SCAG Regional Council approved the 2015/16 – 2020/21 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (2015 FTIP), which was federally approved on December 15, 2014. The 2015 FTIP represents a staged, multi-year, intermodal program of transportation projects which covers six fiscal years and includes a priority list of projects to be carried out in the first four fiscal years; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code §65080(b)(2)(F) and federal public participation requirements, including 23 C.F.R. §450.316(b)(1)(iv), SCAG must prepare the RTP/SCS by providing adequate public notice of public involvement activities and time for public review. On April 3, 2014, SCAG approved and adopted a Public Participation Plan, to serve as a guide for SCAG’s public involvement process, including the public involvement process to be used for the 2016 RTP/SCS, and included an enhanced outreach program that incorporates the public participation requirements of SB 375 and adds strategies to better serve the underrepresented segments of the region; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code §65080(b)(2)(F)(iii), during the summer 2015, SCAG held a series of RTP/SCS public workshops throughout the region, including residents, elected officials, representatives of public agencies, community organizations, and environmental, housing and business stakeholders; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the interagency consultation requirements, 40 C.F.R. 93.105, SCAG consulted with the respective transportation and air quality planning agencies, including but not limited to, extensive discussion of the Draft Conformity Report before the Transportation Conformity Working Group (a forum for implementing the interagency consultation requirements) throughout the 2016 update process; and WHEREAS, the Transportation Conformity Report contained in the Final 2016 RTP/SCS makes a positive transportation conformity determination. Using the final motor vehicle emission budgets released by ARB and found to be adequate by the EPA, this conformity determination is based upon staff’s analysis of the applicable transportation conformity tests; and WHEREAS, each project or project phase included in the FTIP must be consistent with the approved RTP, pursuant to 23 C.F.R. §450.324(g). Amendment #15-12 to the 2015 FTIP has been prepared to ensure consistency with the Final 2016 RTP/SCS; and WHEREAS, conformity of Amendment #15- 12 to the 2015 FTIP has been determined simultaneously with the Final 2016 RTP/ SCS in order to address the consistency requirement of federal law; and WHEREAS, on November 5, 2015, SCAG Policy Committees (comprising the Community, Economic and Human Development Committee; the Energy and Environment Committee; and the Transportation Committee) recommended that the Regional Council at its December 4, 2015 meeting authorize release of the Draft 2016 RTP/SCS PEIR for a public review and comment period concurrent with the public review and comment period for the Draft 2016 RTP/SCS; and WHEREAS, on December 3, 2015, the Regional Council approved release of the Draft 2016 RTP/SCS PEIR concurrent with release of the Draft 2016 RTP/SCS for a 60-day public review and comment period; and WHEREAS, SCAG released the Draft 2016 RTP/SCS and the associated Draft Amendment #15-12 to the 2015 FTIP for a 60-day public review and comment period that began on December 4, 2015 and ended on February 1, 2016; and Joann Africa Chief Counsel WHEREAS, the SCAG also released the Draft 2016 RTP/SCS PEIR concurrently with the release of the Draft 2016 RTP/SCS, and issued a Notice of Availability for the same 60-day public review and comment period of December 4, 2015 to February 1, 2016; and WHEREAS, SCAG followed the provisions of its adopted Public Participation Plan regarding public involvement activities for the Draft 2016 RTP/SCS and Draft 2016 RTP/SCS PEIR. Public outreach efforts included publication of the Draft 2016 RTP/SCS and Draft 2016 RTP/ SCS PEIR on SCAG’s website, distribution of public information materials, held four (4) duly- noticed public hearings (three public hearings were video-conferenced to four regional offices in different counties), and 14 elected official briefings within the SCAG region to allow stakeholders, elected officials and the public to comment on the Draft 2016 RTP/SCS and the Draft 2016 RTP/SCS PEIR; and WHEREAS, during the public review and comment period, SCAG received 162 verbal and written comment submissions on the Draft 2016 RTP/SCS and 81 comment submissions on the Draft 2016 RTP/SCS PEIR; and WHEREAS, SCAG staff presented an overview of the comments received on the Draft 2016 RTP/SCS and Draft 2016 RTP/SCS PEIR, and a proposed approach to the responses, to the Policy Committees and Regional Council at a joint meeting on March 3, 2016; and WHEREAS, comment letters and SCAG staff responses on the Draft 2016 RTP/SCS and Draft 2016 RTP/SCS PEIR were posted on the SCAG web page on March 14, 2016, and included as part of the Final 2016 RTP/ SCS, Public Participation and Consultation Appendix. SCAG also notified all commenters of the availability of the comments and responses; and WHEREAS, on March 18, 2016, SCAG posted the proposed Final 2016 RTP/SCS and proposed Final 2016 RTP/SCS PEIR on its website; and WHEREAS, on March 24, 2016, SCAG’s three Policy Committees held a public, special joint meeting to consider a recommendation to the Regional Council to approve and adopt the proposed Final 2016 RTP/SCS and certify the proposed Final 2016 RTP/SCS PEIR at the April 7, 2016 Regional Council meeting; and WHEREAS, prior to the adoption of this resolution, the Regional Council certified the Final 2016 RTP/SCS PEIR prepared for the 2016 RTP/SCS to be in compliance with CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Regional Council has had the opportunity to review the Final 2016 RTP/ SCS and its related appendices as well as the staff report related to the Final 2016 RTP/SCS, and consideration of the Final 2016 RTP/SCS was made by the Regional Council as part of a public meeting held on April 7, 2016. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the Regional Council hereby approves and adopts the Final 2016 RTP/SCS. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Regional Council that: 1. In adopting this Final 2016 RTP/SCS, the Regional Council finds as follows: a. The Final 2016 RTP/SCS complies with all applicable federal and state requirements, including the metropolitan planning provisions as identified in the Code of Federal Regulations Title 23 Part 450 and Title 49, Part 613, and the SCS and other State RTP requirements as identified in California Government Code Section 65080. Specifically, the Final 2016 RTP/ SCS fully addresses the requirements relating to the development and content of metropolitan transportation plans as set forth in 23 C.F.R.§450.322 et seq., including issues relating to: identification of transportation facilities that function as an integrated metropolitan transportation system; operational and management strategies; safety and security; performance measures; environmental mitigation; the need for a financially constrained plan; consultation and public participation; and transportation conformity; b. The Final 2016 RTP/SCS complies with the emission reduction targets established by the California ARB and meets the requirements of SB 375 (Steinberg, 2008) as codified in Government Code §65080(b) et seq. by achieving per capita GHG emission reductions relative to 2005 of 8% by 2020 and 18% by 2035; and c. The Final 2016 RTP/SCS’s preferred land use scenario and corresponding forecast of population, household and employment growth is adopted at the jurisdictional level, and any corresponding sub-jurisdictional level data and/or maps is advisory only. 2. The Regional Council hereby makes a positive transportation conformity determination of the Final 2016 RTP/SCS and Amendment #15-12 to the 2015 FTIP. In making this determination, the Regional Council finds as follows: a. The Final 2016 RTP/SCS and Amendment #15-12 to the 2015 FTIP passes the four tests and analyses required for conformity, namely: regional emissions analysis; timely implementation of Transportation Control Measures; financial constraint analysis; and interagency consultation and public involvement; 3. In approving the Final 2016 RTP/SCS, the Regional Council also approves and adopts Amendment #15-12 to the 2015 FTIP, in compliance with the federal requirement of consistency with the RTP; 4. That the foregoing recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by this reference; and 5. SCAG’s Executive Director or his designee is authorized to transmit the Final 2016 RTP/SCS and its conformity findings to the FTA and the FHWA to make the final conformity determination in accordance with the Federal Clean Air Act and EPA Transportation Conformity Rule, 40 C.F.R. Parts 51 and 93. TO BE PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the Regional Council of the Southern California Association of Governments at its regular meeting on the 7th day of April, 2016. Attest: Approved as to Form: Cheryl Viegas-Walker President Council Member, City of El Centro Hasan Ikhrata Executive Director Image courtesy of Samer Momani executive summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY HIGHLIGHTS OUR VISION 2 OUR OVERARCHING STRATEGY 2 CHALLENGES WE FACE 3 OUR PROGRESS SINCE 2012 4 SETTING THE STAGE FOR OUR PLAN 6 FINANCING OUR FUTURE 8 WHAT WE WILL ACCOMPLISH 8 HOW WE WILL ENSURE SUCCESS 9 LOOKING BEYOND 2040 9 Transport yourself 25 years into the future. What kind of Southern California do you envision? SCAG envisions a region that has grown by nearly four million people—sustainably. In communities across Southern California, people enjoy increased mobility, greater economic opportunity and a higher quality of life. ENVISIONING OUR REGION IN 2040 2 2016 RTP/SCS OUR VISION In our vision for the region in 2040, many communities are more compact and connected seamlessly by numerous public transit options, including expanded bus and rail service. People live closer to work, school, shopping and other destinations. Their neighborhoods are more walkable and safe for bicyclists. They have more options available besides driving alone, reducing the load on roads and highways. People live more active and healthy lifestyles as they bike, walk or take transit for short trips. Goods flow freely along roadways, highways, rail lines and by sea and air into and out of the region—fueling economic growth. Southern California’s vast transportation network is preserved and maintained in a state of good repair, so that public tax dollars are not expended on costly repairs and extensive rehabilitation. The region’s roads and highways are well-managed so that they operate safely and efficiently, while demands on the regional network are managed effectively by offering people numerous alternatives for transportation. Housing across the region is sufficient to meet the demands of a growing population with shifting priorities and desires, and there are more affordable homes for all segments of society. With more connected communities, more choices for travel and robust commerce, people enjoy more opportunities to advance educationally and economically. As growth and opportunity are distributed widely, people from diverse neighborhoods across the region share in the benefits of an enhanced quality of life. With more alternatives to driving alone available, air quality is improved and the greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global climate change are reduced. Communities throughout Southern California are more prepared to confront and cope with the inevitable consequences of climate change, including droughts and wildfires, heat waves, rising seas and extreme weather. Meanwhile, natural lands and recreational areas that offer people a respite from the busier parts of the region are preserved and protected. At mid-century, technology has transformed how we get around. Automated cars have emerged as a viable option for people and are being integrated into the overall transportation system. Shared mobility options that rely on instantaneous communication and paperless transactions have matured, and new markets for mobility are created and strengthened. Above all, people across the region possess more choices for getting around and with those choices come opportunities to live healthier, more economically secure and higher quality lives. This vision for mid-century, which is built on input received from thousands of people across Southern California, is embodied in the 2016 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2016 RTP/SCS, or Plan), a major planning document for our regional transportation and land use network. It balances the region’s future mobility and housing needs with economic, environmental and public health goals. This long-range Plan, required by the State of California and the federal government, is updated by SCAG every four years as demographic, economic and policy circumstances change. The 2016 RTP/SCS is a living, evolving blueprint for our region’s future. OUR OVERARCHING STRATEGY It is clear that the path toward realizing our vision will require a single unified strategy, one that integrates planning for how we use our land with planning for how we get around. Here is what we mean: we can choose to build new sprawling communities that pave over undeveloped natural lands, necessitating the construction of new roads and highways—which will undoubtedly become quickly overcrowded and contribute to regional air pollution and ever-increasing greenhouse gas emissions that affect climate change. Or, we can grow in more compact communities in existing urban areas, providing neighborhoods with efficient and plentiful public transit, abundant and safe opportunities to walk, bike and pursue other forms of active transportation, and preserving more of the region’s remaining natural lands for people to enjoy. This second vision captures the essence of what people have said they want during SCAG outreach to communities across the region. SCAG acknowledges that more compact communities are not for everyone, and that many residents of our region prefer to live in established suburban neighborhoods. The agency supports local control for local land use decisions, while striving for a regional vision of more sustainable growth. Within the 2016 RTP/SCS, you will read about plans for “High Quality Transit Areas,” “Livable Corridors” and “Neighborhood Mobility Areas.” These are a few of the key features of a thoughtfully planned, maturing region in which people benefit from increased mobility, more active lifestyles, increased economic opportunity and an overall higher quality of life. These features embody the idea of integrating planning for how we use land with planning for transportation. 3EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As we pursue this unified strategy, it will be vital that we ensure that the benefits of our initiatives are widely distributed and that the burdens of development are not carried by any one group disproportionately. Social equity and environmental justice are key considerations of our overall Plan. CHALLENGES WE FACE We are living at a time of great change in Southern California. Our region must confront several challenges as we pursue the goals outlined in the 2016 RTP/SCS: z We are growing slower: But our region is projected to grow to 22 million people by 2040—an increase of nearly four million people. z Our overall population will be older: The median age of our region’s overall population is expected to rise, with an increasing share of senior citizens. This demographic shift will have major impacts on transportation needs and on our transportation plans. A key challenge for the region will be to provide seniors with more transportation options for maintaining their independence as they age. z A smaller percentage of us will be working: The share of younger people of working age is expected to fall. The ratio of people over the age of 65 to people of working age (15 to 64) is expected to increase. This means that our region could face a labor shortage and a subsequent reduction in tax revenues. z A large number of us want more urban lifestyles: Today’s Millennials, born between 1980 and 2000, are expected to demand more compact communities and more access to transit—shifting regional priorities for the overall transportation system and the types of housing that are constructed. Baby Boomers are also expected to increasingly desire these kinds of communities. z Many of us will continue to live in the suburbs and drive alone: Despite the emerging trends discussed above, many people in the region will continue to live in suburban neighborhoods and drive alone to work, school, shopping and other destinations—rather than use public transit and other transportation alternatives. The 2016 RTP/SCS will not change how everyone chooses to get around, but the Plan is designed to offer residents more choices so that we can experience regionwide benefits. z Housing prices are increasing: Housing prices are rising steadily and affordability is declining. As communities are redeveloped to be more compact with new transit options and revitalized urban amenities, existing residents may risk displacement. z Our transportation system requires rehabilitation and maintenance: Southern California’s transportation system is becoming increasingly compromised by decades of underinvestment in maintaining and preserving our infrastructure. These investments have not kept pace with the demands placed on the system and the quality of many of our roads, highways, bridges, transit and bicycle and pedestrian facilities is continuing to deteriorate. If we continue on our current path of seriously underfunding system preservation, the cost of bringing our system back to a reasonable state of good repair will grow exponentially. z Transportation funding is scarce and insufficient: Full funding for transportation improvements is currently not sustainable, given the projected needs. Projected revenues from the gas tax, the historic source of transportation funding, will not meet transportation investment needs—and gas tax revenues, in real terms, are actually in decline as tax rates (both state and federal) have not been adjusted in more than two decades while the number of more fuel efficient and alternative powered vehicles continues to grow. z Moving goods through the region faces growing pains: The movement of goods will face numerous challenges as consumer demand for products increases and the region continues to grow as a major exchange point for global trade. Infrastructure for freight traffic will be strained, current efforts to reduce air pollution from goods movement sources will not be sufficient to meet national air quality standards, capacity at international ports will be over-burdened and warehouse space could fall short of demands. z Technology is transforming transportation: Mobility innovations including electric cars, the availability of real-time traveler information, the expansion of car sharing and ridesourcing due to smart phones and other technological advances will require updated planning to smoothly integrate these new travel options into the overall transportation system. z Millions suffer from chronic diseases: Many people in our region suffer from chronic diseases related to poor air quality and physical inactivity. Heart disease, stroke, cancer, chronic lower respiratory disease and diabetes are responsible for 72 percent of all deaths in our region. Nine percent of residents have been diagnosed with diabetes, 27 percent with hypertension and 13 percent with asthma, and more 4 2016 RTP/SCS than 60 percent are overweight or obese, according to the California Health Interview Survey. z Climate change demands that we adapt: The consequences of climate change will continue to impact everyday life for millions of people. The region is expected to experience more droughts and wildfires, water shortages because of drought but also because of declining snowpack in our mountains, rising seas, extreme weather events, and other impacts. Communities will need to make their neighborhoods more resilient to these changes. OUR PROGRESS SINCE 2012 Although our challenges are great, the region has made significant progress over the past few years. TRANSIT Transit service continues to expand throughout the region and the level of service has exceeded pre-recessionary levels—mainly due to a growth in rail service. Significant progress has been made toward completing capital projects for transit, including the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) Orange Line Extension and the Metro Expo Line. Meanwhile, five major Metro Rail projects are now under construction in Los Angeles County. PASSENGER RAIL Passenger rail is expanding and improving service on several fronts. The Amtrak Pacific Surfliner is now being managed locally by the Los Angeles- San Diego-San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency; Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) completed the Perris Valley Line in early 2016; Metrolink became the first commuter railroad in the nation to implement Positive Train Control and purchase fuel-efficient, low-emission Tier IV locomotives; and the California High-Speed Train is under construction in the Central Valley, and planning and environmental work is underway in our region to the Los Angeles/Anaheim Phase One terminus. Several other capital projects are underway or have been completed, including the Anaheim Regional Intermodal Transportation Center (ARTIC) and the Burbank Bob Hope Airport Regional Intermodal Transportation Center, among others. HIGHWAYS The expansion of highways has slowed considerably over the last decade because of land, financial and environmental constraints. Still, several projects have been completed since 2012 to improve access and close critical gaps and congestion chokepoints in the regional network. These include the Interstate 10 westbound widening in Redlands and Yucaipa, the Interstate 215 Bi-County HOV Project in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, and a portion of the Interstate 5 South Corridor Project in Los Angeles County (between North Fork Coyote Creek to Marquardt Avenue), among others. REGIONAL HIGH-OCCUPANCY VEHICLE (HOV) AND EXPRESS LANE NETWORK The demands on our region’s highways continue to exceed available capacity during peak periods, but several projects to close HOV gaps have been completed. The result has been 39 more lane miles of regional HOV lanes on Interstates 5, 405, 10, 215 and 605, on State Routes 57 and 91, and on the West County Connector Project (direct HOV connection between Interstate 405, Interstate 605 and State Route 22) within Orange County. The region is also developing a regional express lane network. Among the milestones: a one- year demonstration of express lanes in Los Angeles County along Interstate 10 and Interstate 110 was made permanent in 2014; and construction has begun on express lanes on State Route 91 extending eastward to Interstate 15 in Riverside County. ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION Our region is making steady progress in encouraging more people to embrace active transportation and more than $650 million in Active Transportation Program investments are underway. Nearly 38 percent of all trips are less than three miles, which is convenient for walking and biking. As a percentage share of all trips, bicycling has increased more than 70 percent since 2007 to 1.12 percent. More than 500 miles of new bikeways have been constructed in the region, and safety and encouragement programs are helping people choose walking and biking. 5EXECUTIVE SUMMARY GOODS MOVEMENT The region continues to make substantial progress toward completing several major capital initiatives to support freight transportation and reducing harmful emissions generated by goods movement sources. Progress since 2012 has included implementation of the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Program (CAAP), which is reducing diesel particulate matter dropping by 82 percent, nitrogen oxides by 54 percent and sulfur oxides by 90 percent; and the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Truck Program, which has led to an 80 percent reduction in port truck emissions. The region has also shown progress in advanced technology for goods movement, including a one-mile Overhead Catenary System (OCS) in the City of Carson. Construction of the Gerald Desmond Bridge has begun. Seventeen out of 71 planned grade separation projects throughout the region have been completed, and another 21 are expected to be complete in 2016. Double tracking of the Union Pacific (UP) Alhambra Subdivision has been initiated. The Colton Crossing, which physically separated two Class I railroads with an elevated 1.4-mile-long overpass that lifts UP trains traveling east-west, was completed in August 2013. SUSTAINABILITY IMPLEMENTATION Since 2012, SCAG’s Sustainability Planning Grant Program has funded 70 planning projects (totaling $10 million) to help local jurisdictions link local land use plans with 2012 RTP/SCS goals. Local jurisdictions have updated outmoded General Plans and zoning codes; completed specific plans for town centers and Transit Oriented Development (TOD); implemented sustainability policies; and adopted municipal climate action plans. Thirty of the 191 cities and two of the six counties in the SCAG region report having updated their General Plans since 2012, and another 42 cities have General Plan updates pending. Fifty-four percent of the cities reporting adopted or pending General Plan updates include planning for TOD, 55 percent plan to concentrate key destinations, and 76 percent include policies encouraging infill development. Of the counties reporting updates or pending updates to their General Plans, 75 percent include TOD elements, 100 percent encourage infill development, 75 percent promote concentrated destinations, and 75 percent feature policies to address complete communities. To protect water quality, 91 percent of cities have adopted water-related policies and 85 percent have adopted measures to address water quality. To conserve energy, 86 percent of cities have implemented community energy efficiency policies, with 80 percent of those cities implementing municipal energy efficiency policies and 76 percent implementing renewable energy policies. Of the region’s 191 cities, 189 have completed sustainability components, with 184 cities implementing at least ten or more policies or programs and ten cities implementing 20 or more policies or programs. This last group includes Pasadena, Pomona and Santa Monica. AFFORDABLE HOUSING The state is offering new opportunities to help regions promote affordable housing. In spring 2015, California’s Affordable Housing Sustainable Communities (AHSC) program awarded its first round of funding to applicants after a competitive grant process. Of $122 million available statewide, $27.5 million was awarded to ten projects in the SCAG region. Eight-hundred forty- two affordable units, including 294 units designated for households with an income of 30 percent or less of the area median income, will be produced with this funding. Meanwhile, Senate Bill 628 (Beall) and Assembly Bill 2 (Alejo) provide jurisdictions with an opportunity to establish a funding source to develop affordable housing and supportive infrastructure and amenities. PUBLIC HEALTH The SCAG region has several ongoing efforts to promote public health. The Los Angeles County Departments of Public Health and City of Los Angeles Planning Department are developing a Health Atlas that highlights health disparities among neighborhoods. In Riverside County, the Healthy Riverside County Initiative has formed a Healthy City Network to continue to successfully work with the county’s 28 cities to enact Healthy City Resolutions and Health Elements into their General Plans. The County of San Bernardino has recently completed the Community Vital Signs Initiative, which envisions a “county where a commitment to optimizing health and wellness is embedded in all decisions by residents, organizations and government.” ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE Since the adoption of the 2012 RTP/SCS, social equity and environmental justice have become increasingly significant priorities in regional plans. For example, plans to promote active transportation, improve public health, increase access to transit, preserve open space, cut air pollution and more are all evaluated for how well the benefits of these efforts are distributed among all demographic groups. The State of California’s Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) developed a new tool, CalEnviroScreen, which helps to identify areas in the state that have higher levels of environmental vulnerability due to historical rates of toxic exposure and certain social factors. Based on this tool, 6 2016 RTP/SCS attractive and viable option, the 2016 RTP/SCS also supports implementing and expanding transit signal priority; regional and inter-county fare agreements and media; increased bicycle carrying capacity on transit and rail vehicles; real-time passenger information systems to allow travelers to make more informed decisions; and implementing first/last mile strategies to extend the effective reach of transit. EXPANDING PASSENGER RAIL The 2016 RTP/SCS calls for an investment in passenger rail of $38.6 billion for capital projects and $15.7 billion for operations and maintenance. The Plan calls for maintaining the commitments in the 2012 RTP/SCS, including Phase 1 of the California High-Speed Train and the Southern California High-Speed Rail Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which identifies a candidate project list to improve the Metrolink system and the LOSSAN rail corridor, thereby providing immediate, near-term benefits to the region while laying the groundwork for future integration with California’s High-Speed Train project. These capital projects will bring segments of the regional rail network up to the federally defined speed of 110 miles per hour or greater and help lead to a blended system of rail services. IMPROVING HIGHWAY AND ARTERIAL CAPACITY The 2016 RTP/SCS calls for investing $54.2 billion in capital improvements and $103.0 billion in operations and maintenance of the State Highway System and regionally significant local streets and roads throughout the region. This includes focusing on achieving maximum productivity by adding capacity, primarily by closing gaps in the system and improving access and other measures including the deployment of new technology. The Plan also continues to support a regional network of express lanes, building on the success of the State Route 91 Express Lanes in Orange County, as well as Interstate 10 and Interstate 110 Express Lanes in Los Angeles County. MANAGING DEMANDS ON THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM The 2016 RTP/SCS calls for investing $6.9 billion toward Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies throughout the region. These strategies focus on reducing the number of drive-alone trips and overall vehicle miles traveled (VMT) through ridesharing, which includes carpooling, vanpooling and supportive policies for ridesourcing services such as Uber and Lyft; redistributing or eliminating vehicle trips from peak demand periods through incentives for telecommuting and alternative work schedules; and reducing the number of drive-alone trips through increased use of transit, rail, bicycling, walking and other alternative modes of travel. much of the region can stand to benefit from Cap-and-Trade grants that give priority to communities that are disproportionately impacted. SETTING THE STAGE FOR OUR PLAN SCAG began developing the 2016 RTP/SCS by first reaching out to the local jurisdictions to hear directly from them about their growth plans. The next step was to develop scenarios of growth, each one representing a different vision for land use and transportation in 2040. More specifically, each scenario was designed to explore and convey the impact of where the region would grow, to what extent the growth would be focused within existing cities and towns and how it would grow—the shape and style of the neighborhoods and transportation systems that would shape growth over the period. The refinement of these scenarios, through extensive public outreach and surveys, led to a “preferred scenario” that helped guide the strategies, programs and projects detailed in the Plan. MAJOR INITIATIVES With the preferred scenario selected, the 2016 RTP/SCS, which includes $556.5 billion in transportation investments, has proposed several major initiatives to strive toward our vision for 2040. PRESERVING THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM WE ALREADY HAVE (FIX-IT-FIRST) The 2016 RTP/SCS calls for the investment of $275.5 billion toward preserving our existing system. The allocation of these expenditures includes the transit and passenger rail systems, the State Highway System, and regionally significant local streets and roads. EXPANDING OUR REGIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEM TO GIVE PEOPLE MORE ALTERNATIVES TO DRIVING ALONE The 2016 RTP/SCS includes $56.1 billion for capital transit projects and $156.7 billion for operations and maintenance. This includes significant expansions of the Metro subway and Light Rail Transit (LRT) system in Los Angeles County. Meanwhile, new Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) routes will expand higher-speed bus service regionally; new streetcar services will link major destinations in Orange County; and new Metrolink extensions will further connect communities in the Inland Empire. Other extensive improvements are planned for local bus, rapid bus, BRT and express service throughout the region. To make transit a more 7EXECUTIVE SUMMARY area rail infrastructure; reducing environmental impacts by supporting the deployment of commercially available low-emission trucks and locomotives; and, in the longer term, advancing technologies to implement a zero- and near zero-emission freight system. LEVERAGING TECHNOLOGY Advances in communications, computing and engineering—from shared mobility innovations to zero-emission vehicles—can lead to a more efficient transportation system with more mobility options for everyone. Technological innovations also can reduce the environmental impact of existing modes of transportation. For example, alternative fuel vehicles continue to become more accessible for retail consumers and for freight and fleet applications—and as they are increasingly used, air pollution can be reduced. Communications technology, meanwhile, can improve the movement of passenger vehicles and connected transit vehicles. As part of the 2016 RTP/SCS, SCAG has focused location-based strategies specifically on increasing the efficiency of Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV) in the region. These are electric vehicles that are powered by a gasoline engine when their battery is depleted. The 2016 RTP/SCS proposes a regional charging network that will increase the number of PHEV miles driven on electric power, in addition to supporting the growth of the PEV market generally. In many instances, the additional chargers will create the opportunity to increase the electric range of PHEVs, reducing vehicle miles traveled that produce tail-pipe emissions. IMPROVING AIRPORT ACCESS Recognizing that the SCAG region is one of the busiest and most diverse commercial aviation regions in the world and that air travel is an important contributor to the region’s economic activity, the 2016 RTP/SCS includes strategies for reducing the impact of air passenger trips on ground transportation congestion. Such strategies include supporting the regionalization of air travel demand; continuing to support regional and inter-regional projects that facilitate airport ground access (e.g., High-Speed Train); supporting ongoing local planning efforts by airport operators, county transportation commissions and local jurisdictions; encouraging the development and use of transit access to the region’s airports; encouraging the use of modes with high average vehicle occupancy; and discouraging the use of modes that require “deadhead” trips to/from airports (e.g., passengers being dropped off at the airport via personal vehicle). FOCUSING NEW GROWTH AROUND TRANSIT The 2016 RTP/SCS plans for focusing new growth around transit, which is supported by the following policies: identifying regional strategic areas for OPTIMIZING THE PERFORMANCE OF THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM The 2016 RTP/SCS earmarks $9.2 billion for Transportation System Management (TSM) improvements. These include extensive advanced ramp metering, enhanced incident management, bottleneck removal to improve flow (e.g., auxiliary lanes), expansion and integration of the traffic signal synchronization network, data collection to monitor system performance, integrated and dynamic corridor congestion management, and other Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) improvements. Recent related initiatives include the Caltrans Advanced Traffic Management (ATM) study for Interstate 105 and the Regional Integration of ITS Projects (RIITS) and Information Exchange Network (IEN) data exchange efforts at Los Angeles Metro. PROMOTING WALKING, BIKING AND OTHER FORMS OF ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION The 2016 RTP/SCS plans for continued progress in developing our regional bikeway network, assumes all local active transportation plans will be implemented, and dedicates resources to maintain and repair thousands of miles of dilapidated sidewalks. The Plan invests $12.9 billion in active transportation strategies. The Plan also considers new strategies and approaches beyond those proposed in 2012. To promote short trips, these include improving sidewalk quality, local bike networks and neighborhood mobility areas. To promote longer regional trips, these strategies include developing a regional greenway network and continuing investments in the regional bikeway network and access to the California Coastal Trail. Active transportation will also be promoted by integrating it with the region’s transit system; increasing access to 224 rail, light rail and fixed guideway bus stations; promoting 16 regional corridors that support biking and walking; supporting bike share programs; educating people about the benefits of active transportation for students; and promoting safety campaigns. STRENGTHENING THE REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION NETWORK FOR GOODS MOVEMENT The 2016 RTP/SCS includes $70.7 billion in goods movement strategies. Among these are establishing a system of truck-only lanes extending from the San Pedro Bay Ports to downtown Los Angeles along Interstate 710; connecting to the State Route 60 east-west segment and finally reaching Interstate 15 in San Bernardino County; working to relieve the top 50 regional truck bottlenecks; adding mainline tracks for the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) San Bernardino and Cajon Subdivisions and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) Alhambra and Mojave Subdivisions; expanding/modernizing intermodal facilities; building highway-rail grade separations; improving port 8 2016 RTP/SCS infill and investment; structuring the Plan on centers development; developing “Complete Communities”; developing nodes on a corridor; planning for additional housing and jobs near transit; planning for changing demand in types of housing; continuing to protect stable, existing single-family areas; ensuring adequate access to open space and preservation of habitat; and incorporating local input and feedback on future growth. These policies support the development of: z High Quality Transit Areas (HQTAs): areas within one-half mile of a fixed guideway transit stop or a bus transit corridor where buses pick up passengers at a frequency of every 15 minutes or less during peak commuting hours. While HQTAs account for only three percent of total land area in SCAG region, they are planned and projected to accommodate 46 percent of the region’s future household growth and 55 percent of the future employment growth. z Livable Corridors: arterial roadways where jurisdictions may plan for a combination of the following elements: high-quality bus frequency; higher density residential and employment at key intersections; and increased active transportation through dedicated bikeways. z Neighborhood Mobility Areas (NMAs): strategies are intended to provide sustainable transportation options for residents of the region who lack convenient access to high-frequency transit but make many short trips within their urban neighborhoods. NMAs are conducive to active transportation and include a “Complete Streets” approach to roadway improvements to encourage replacing single- and multi-occupant automobile use with biking, walking, skateboarding, neighborhood electric vehicles and senior mobility devices. IMPROVING AIR QUALITY AND REDUCING GREENHOUSE GASES It is through integrated planning for land use and transportation that the SCAG region, through the initiatives discussed in this section, will strive toward a more sustainable region. The SCAG region must achieve specific federal air quality standards. It also is required by state law to lower regional greenhouse gas emissions. California law requires the region to reduce per capita greenhouse gas emissions in the SCAG region by eight percent by 2020—compared with 2005 levels—and by 13 percent by 2035. The strategies, programs and projects outlined in the 2016 RTP/SCS are projected to result in greenhouse gas emissions reductions in the SCAG region that meet or exceed these targets. PRESERVING NATURAL LANDS Many natural land areas near the edge of existing urbanized areas do not have plans for conservation and are vulnerable to development pressure. The 2016 RTP/SCS recommends redirecting growth from high value habitat areas to existing urbanized areas. This strategy avoids growth in sensitive habitat areas, builds upon the conservation framework and complements an infill-based approach. FINANCING OUR FUTURE To accomplish the ambitious goals of the 2016 RTP/SCS through 2040, SCAG forecasts expenditures of $556.5 billion—of which $275.5 billion is budgeted for operations and maintenance of the regional transportation system and another $246.6 billion is reserved for transportation capital improvements. Forecasted revenues comprise both existing and several new funding sources that are reasonably expected to be available for the 2016 RTP/SCS, which together total $556.5 billion. Reasonably available revenues include short- term adjustments to state and federal gas excise tax rates and the long-term replacement of gas taxes with mileage-based user fees (or equivalent fuel tax adjustment). These and other categories of funding sources were identified as reasonably available on the basis of their potential for revenue generation, historical precedence and the likelihood of their implementation within the time frame of the Plan. WHAT WE WILL ACCOMPLISH Overall, the transportation investments in the 2016 RTP/SCS will provide a return of $2.00 for every dollar invested. Compared with an alternative of not adopting the Plan, the 2016 RTP/SCS would accomplish the following: z The Plan would result in an eight percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions per capita by 2020, an 18 percent reduction by 2035 and a 21 percent reduction by 2040—compared with 2005 levels. This meets or exceeds the state’s mandated reductions, which are eight percent by 2020 and 13 percent by 2035. z Regional air quality would improve under the Plan, as cleaner fuels and new vehicle technologies help to significantly reduce many of the pollutants that contribute to smog and other airborne contaminants that impact public health in the region. z The combined percentage of work trips made by carpooling, active transportation and public transit would increase by about four percent, 9EXECUTIVE SUMMARY with a commensurate reduction in the share of commuters traveling by single occupant vehicle. z The number of Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per capita would be reduced by more than seven percent and Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT) per capita by 17 percent (for automobiles and light/medium duty trucks) as a result of more location efficient land use patterns and improved transit service. z Daily travel by transit would increase by nearly one-third, as a result of improved transit service and more transit-oriented development patterns. z The Plan would reduce delay per capita by 39 percent and heavy- duty truck delay on highways by more than 37 percent. This means we would spend less time sitting in traffic and our goods would move more efficiently. z More than 351,000 additional new jobs annually would be created, due to the region’s increased competitiveness and improved economic performance that would result from congestion reduction and improvements in regional amenities as a result of implementing the Plan. z The Plan would reduce the amount of previously undeveloped (greenfield) lands converted to more urbanized uses by 23 percent. By conserving open space and other rural lands, the Plan provides a solid foundation for more sustainable development in the SCAG region. z The Plan would result in a reduction in our regional obesity rate from 26.3 percent to 25.6 percent in areas experiencing land use changes, and a reduction in the share of our population that suffers with high blood pressure from 21.5 percent to 20.8 percent. HOW WE WILL ENSURE SUCCESS Our Plan includes several performance outcomes and measures that are used to gauge our progress toward meeting our goals. These include: z Location Efficiency, which reflects the degree to which improved land use and transportation coordination strategies impact the movement of people and goods. z Mobility and Accessibility, which reflects our ability to reach desired destinations with relative ease and within a reasonable time, using reasonably available transportation choices. z Safety and Health, which recognize that the 2016 RTP/SCS has impacts beyond those that are exclusively transportation-related (e.g., pollution-related disease). z Environmental Quality, which is measured in terms of criteria pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions. z Economic Opportunity, which is measured in terms of additional jobs created as a result of the transportation investments provided through the 2016 RTP/SCS. z Investment Effectiveness, which indicates the degree to which the Plan’s expenditures generate benefits that transportation users can experience directly. z Transportation System Sustainability, which reflects how well our transportation system is able to maintain its overall performance over time in an equitable manner with minimum damage to the environment and without compromising the ability of future generations to address their transportation needs. The 2016 RTP/SCS is designed to ensure that the regional transportation system serves all segments of society. The Plan is subject to numerous performance measures to monitor its progress toward achieving social equity and environmental justice. These measures include accessibility to parks and natural lands, roadway noise impacts, air quality impacts and public health impacts, among many others. LOOKING BEYOND 2040 The 2016 RTP/SCS is based on a projected budget constrained by the local, state and federal revenues that SCAG anticipates the region receiving between now and 2040. The Strategic Plan discusses projects and strategies that SCAG would pursue if new funding were to become available. The Strategic Plan discussion includes long-term emission reduction strategies for rail and trucks; expanding the region’s high-speed and commuter rail systems; expanding active transportation; leveraging technological advances for transportation; addressing further regional reductions in greenhouse gas emissions; and making the region more resilient to climate change—among other topics. We anticipate that these projects and strategies may inform the development of the next Plan, the 2020 RTP/SCS. 01 CHAPTER 1 HIGHLIGHTS ENVISIONING SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA IN 2040 12 THIS PLAN IS A LIVING, EVOLVING TOOL FOR PROGRESS 15 KEY STEPS TOWARD IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN 16 Image courtesy of Robert Wall Southern California is one of the most dynamic and beautiful places on the planet. A global center for entertainment and culture, commerce, tourism and international trade, our region is graced by a temperate climate, a spectacular coastline, rolling hills and inland valleys, towering mountain ranges, and expansive deserts. It is no wonder Southern California has become home to more than 18 million people. INTRODUCTION 12 2016 RTP/SCS ENVISIONING SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA IN 2040 OUR CHANGING REGION Today, our region is in the midst of great changes. Our population continues to increase and demographics are shifting. In the coming years, Baby Boomers, born between 1946 and 1964, and Millennials, born between 1980 and 2000, will have an increasingly greater impact on how and where we live and how we travel. Overall, our region will continue to grow more racially and ethnically diverse in the coming decades. These and other changes will transform the character of Southern California over the next 25 years as people choose different places to live and more efficient ways to get around. People will have new expectations for the health and vibrancy of their communities. They will want a greater degree of mobility with transportation options that are more accessible and flexible. People will also expect to have more options for recreational space. They will want cleaner air. How our region responds to growth and the evolving priorities and desires of the people who live here will significantly shape our overall quality of life. This 2016 RTP/SCS charts a course for closely integrating land use and transportation in certain areas of the region—so that we as a whole can grow smartly and sustainably. It outlines $556.5 billion in transportation system investments through 2040. The Plan was prepared through a collaborative, continuous and comprehensive (3 Cs) process by SCAG, the largest Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) in the nation. It serves as an update to SCAG’s 2012 RTP/SCS. It might seem obvious that as a region we should coordinate decisions about where people live, work, go to school, shop and spend their free time with decisions about the transportation system that serves them. But in a region as large and complex as ours, closely integrating strategies for land use and transportation is a huge undertaking. This Plan, more than just a list of projects and initiatives, tells an important story about our future. It is a story about how we will meet complex and daunting challenges in one of the biggest and most influential metropolitan regions in the world, and ultimately how working together we can integrate decisions about transportation and using land to realize a regional transportation system that promotes economic growth and sustainability. CHALLENGES WE FACE As we look to the future, we will confront many challenges, some of which we already face today and others that will emerge as we continue to grow. We are living now with the consequences of growth: more people, more houses, more jobs, more freight traffic and more cars. The six counties that encompass our region—Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura—have all experienced the consequences of that growth. In our urban and suburban areas, roads and highways have grown increasingly congested. As a result, regional air pollution has worsened and greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change have increased. Everyday trips to work, school, shopping and more have become more time consuming and in some cases more costly. Neighborhoods that many people once considered affordable are now priced out of reach—particularly in established urban communities that have seen major public and private investments such as new transit access and new developments that mix upscale housing with popular stores and restaurants. As our region’s demographics change, there will be a greater desire for housing situated closer to jobs, healthcare, shopping and other amenities, and more public transportation options. The region will have to find ways to meet these demands. Maintaining and enhancing a transportation system that can tackle these challenges will require adequate funding, and securing that funding for a better transportation system will be perhaps the region’s biggest challenge. Our overall transportation system is aging rapidly and deteriorating. Deferring maintenance because of a lack of funding will continue to strain the system. As our economy grows, freight traffic will increase on our roadways, along rail lines, and at our airports and seaports. This will place new demands on general transportation infrastructure such as highways and surface streets, as well as infrastructure specific to international trade and domestic commerce. This growth in goods movement also will contribute to air pollution, making it harder for the region to attain federal standards for air quality and comply with new state rules for lowering greenhouse gas emissions. Meanwhile, our region faces huge public health challenges, as people suffer from chronic diseases associated with poor air quality and a lack of physical activity. This is why it is so critical to integrate decisions about where we live and work with decisions about how we travel. It matters how neighborhoods 1301 INTRODUCTION are laid out and linked to bus lines, bike and walking paths, and other transportation options. Finally, our region faces the huge challenge of confronting and coping with the consequences of climate change. Making communities more resilient to heat waves, wildfires, rising seas, extreme rainstorms and other projected impacts will depend on smart planning. We’ll review these challenges in more depth in Chapter 3. REALIZING OUR VISION FOR A BETTER FUTURE The 2016 RTP/SCS outlines concrete steps for meeting these challenges, and creating the conditions and infrastructure that result in increased mobility, easier access to destinations, and more transportation options. The Plan also analyzes the impacts of its decisions, policies, strategies and development projects on the environment, the economy and social equity. By doing this, the 2016 RTP/SCS promotes a sustainable future in which the environment is protected, economic growth is supported and the Plan’s benefits are widely distributed. The 2016 RTP/SCS envisions vibrant, livable communities that are healthy and safe with transportation options that provide easy access to schools, jobs, services, health care and other basic needs. These communities will be conducive to walking and bicycling and will offer residents improved access to amenities such as parks and natural lands. Collectively, these communities will support opportunities for business, investment and employment and fuel for a more prosperous economy. This vision recognizes the region’s tremendous diversity, and that no single solution will work everywhere. SCAG worked closely with local jurisdictions to develop the Plan, which incorporates local growth forecasts, projects and programs and includes complementary regional policies and initiatives. Because SCAG encompasses six counties, it is important that the 2016 RTP/SCS reflect the region’s diverse needs and priorities. Every effort was made to ensure that this happened. Since 2009, every MPO in California has been required to develop a Sustainable Communities Strategy as part of its Regional Transportation Plan— therefore the name “RTP/SCS.” This SCS is a vital part of the overall Plan. It charts a course for how the SCAG region will reach state-mandated reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks, which contribute to climate change. This SCS will be discussed extensively in the coming pages. The SCS is a driving force of this Plan, although not the only one. Once implemented along with the rest of the Plan, it will improve the overall quality of life for all residents of the region. While our region faces great challenges, we are living at a time of technological and economic innovation that will help us meet those challenges. New mobility innovations can help the region meet the challenges of growth and increasing demands on our transportation system. Automated vehicles, drivers available on demand, data-driven infrastructure, and vehicles that respond to both their passengers and the environment are among the new mobility innovations that will reshape how we travel throughout the region. Many people, particularly Millennials, are already embracing some of these mobility innovations and are likely to be early adopters as new ones emerge. But these advances in mobility also have the potential to help all generations maintain their independence as they age. The Plan considers new patterns of development as the regional economy continues to recover and grow, the composition of our population changes, the housing market responds to evolving needs, and demands and mobility innovations emerge. The Plan also includes a long-term strategic vision for the region that will help guide decisions for transportation and how we use land, as well as the public investments in both, through 2040. MAJOR THEMES IN THE 2016 RTP/SCS Throughout this Plan you will read about important themes that resonate throughout the document and help define its focus. A few have already been introduced. These themes include: Integrating strategies for land use and transportation. The Plan recognizes that transportation investments and future land use patterns are inextricably linked, SUSTAINABILITY The practice of analyzing the impacts of decisions, policies, strategies and development projects on the Environment, the Economy and Social Equity 14 2016 RTP/SCS and continued recognition of this close relationship will help the region make choices that sustain our existing resources and expand efficiency, mobility and accessibility for people across the region. In particular, the Plan draws a closer connection between where we live and work, and it offers a blueprint for how Southern California can grow more sustainably. Striving for sustainability. Creating a more sustainable region means growing and living in ways that use our resources efficiently to survive and prosper— from the water we drink, to the air we breathe, to the energy we consume. It is essential that we strive for regional environmental sustainability as we also confront the potential impacts of continued climate change on our transportation infrastructure and communities. In Southern California, striving for sustainability includes achieving state-mandated targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks and federal air quality conformity requirements, and also adapting wisely to a changing environment and climate. Protecting and preserving our existing transportation infrastructure. The Plan places a priority on investing in the transportation system we already have, to maintain and extend its life and utility. It recognizes that deferring maintenance of infrastructure leads to costlier repairs in the future. Increasing capacity through improved systems management. Pouring new concrete is not the only way to add capacity to our roadways. Transportation Systems Management, or TSM, is a powerful strategy that aims to improve the capacity and efficiency of the existing transportation system without resorting to large-scale and expensive capital improvements. Examples of TSM projects include coordinating traffic signals along a corridor; deploying changeable message signs that display real-time road information; and ramp meters that control the timing of vehicles driving onto highways. Giving people more transportation choices. The Plan will provide people with more options for transportation and mobility, offering them various alternatives to driving alone. This will be accomplished by enhancing public transit capacity and increasing its viability by making it more accessible; completing critical road connections; providing greater opportunities for biking and walking, particularly for short trips; exploring how people might use alternative fuel vehicles within their neighborhoods and beyond; increasing telecommuting and flexible work schedules; encouraging new mobility innovations; and improving safety. These Transportation Demand Management, or TDM, strategies will help us better manage the demand we place on the roadway network by reducing the number of people who drive alone and encouraging them to use alternative modes of travel. Leveraging technology. Advances in communications, computing and engineering—from shared mobility innovations to zero-emissions vehicles— can lead to a more efficient transportation system with more mobility options for everyone. Technological innovations also can reduce the environmental impact of existing modes of transportation. For example, alternative fuel vehicles continue to become more accessible for retail consumers and for freight and fleet applications—and as they are increasingly used, air pollution can be reduced. Communications technology, meanwhile, can improve the movement of passenger vehicles and connected transit vehicles. Moreover, the way urban and suburban areas are shaped can support and encourage shared mobility and other new forms of transportation. Responding to demographic and housing market changes. The region’s demographics and housing market are fluid and dynamic. The housing market has rebounded since the 2012 RTP/SCS was adopted, and the number of Millennials and empty nesters has continued to increase with many seeking smaller housing and a more walkable lifestyle. For many households in the region, minimizing transportation and housing costs remains a priority. The Plan includes strategies focused on compact infill development, superior placemaking (the process of creating public spaces that are appealing), and expanded housing and transportation choices. The goal is to create a region that can respond to changing demographics and markets. Supporting commerce, economic growth and opportunity. The Plan supports economic growth by building the infrastructure the region needs to promote the smooth flow of goods and easier access to jobs, services, educational facilities, healthcare and more. The Plan also preserves natural lands, improves air quality and creates vibrant urban centers—all of which are critical for attracting and retaining the people and jobs Southern California needs to thrive. Promoting the links among public health, environmental protection and economic opportunity. The Plan places a priority on implementing the integration of transportation and land use strategies to improve our overall health. The Plan will result in improved air quality, provide more opportunities for people to be physically active, and protect natural lands and habitats. The result: communities will become healthier places to live, allowing people and businesses to thrive. Building a Plan based on the principles of social equity and environmental justice. The Plan is designed to create regionwide benefits that are distributed equitably, while avoiding having any one group carrying the burdens of development disproportionately. It is particularly important that the Plan 1501 INTRODUCTION consider the consequences of transportation projects on low-income and minority communities and minimize negative impacts. In striving for environmental justice, the Plan provides specific measures to lessen the negative environmental impacts of transportation projects on these communities, as well as metrics to monitor how successful these measures are throughout the communities. THIS PLAN IS A LIVING, EVOLVING TOOL FOR PROGRESS WHY SCAG UPDATES THIS PLAN The State of California and the federal government require that SCAG and other regional planning agencies update their respective Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy every four years. Key laws and requirements drive our work. Two primary mandates include: z SCAG is required by federal law to prepare and update a long-range (minimum of 20 years) RTP (23 U.S.C.A. §134 et seq). Most areas within the SCAG region have been designated as nonattainment or maintenance areas for one or more transportation-related criteria pollutants. Pursuant to the federal Clean Air Act, SCAG’s 2016 RTP/SCS is required to meet all federal transportation conformity requirements, including: regional emissions analysis, financial constraint, timely implementation of transportation control measures, and interagency consultation and public involvement (42 U.S.C. §7401 et seq). z California Senate Bill 375 (SB 375) requires that the RTP also include an SCS, which outlines growth strategies that better integrate land use and transportation planning and help reduce the state’s greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks (California Government Code §65080 (b)(2)(B). The RTP is combined with the SCS to form the RTP/SCS, which is further detailed in Chapter 5. For the SCAG region, the California Air Resources Board (ARB) has set greenhouse gas reduction targets at eight percent below 2005 per capita emissions levels by 2020, and 13 percent below 2005 per capita emissions levels by 2035. As we will discuss in this Plan, the region will meet or exceed these targets, lowering greenhouse gas emissions (below 2005 levels) by eight percent by 2020; 18 percent by 2035; and 21 percent by 2040. While SCAG is required to meet these statutory requirements, all good long- term plans are routinely re-evaluated and updated. SCAG is committed to ensuring that the RTP/SCS is a living document that evolves as the region’s demographics, priorities, desires and economy change. BENEFITS BEYOND CLEANER AIR This Plan, of course, is about much more than cleaner air and reduced greenhouse gas emissions, although those are primary goals. SCAG must plan for accommodating another 3.8 million residents in its region. The region also expects to add another 2.4 million jobs and 1.5 million new households by the Plan horizon of 2040. The strategies contained in the 2016 RTP/SCS are expected to produce numerous benefits. Among them are: MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY MOBILITY refers to how quickly and efficiently people can travel from one location to another. ACCESSIBILITY refers to how connected people’s destinations are to transportation options. Direct improvements to the transportation system can increase mobility. Two examples are speeding up train service and relieving congestion on highways. Improving accessibility requires better coordinating our investments for how we use land with our investments for transportation. Developing housing, businesses and other “Transit Oriented Development” around train stations, for example, improves accessibility. 16 2016 RTP/SCS KEY STEPS TOWARD IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN To move forward on the Plan, SCAG needs to take some critical steps. Here are a few of them: 1. Funding the Plan The 2016 RTP/SCS includes a $556.5 billion financial plan, discussed in Chapter 6 and detailed further in the Transportation Finance Appendix, that identifies how much money will be available to support the region’s capital, operating, maintenance and transportation system preservation needs over the life of the Plan. It includes a core revenue forecast of existing local, state and federal funding sources, along with new funding sources that are reasonably expected to be available through 2040. These new sources of funding include anticipated adjustments to state and federal gas tax rates based on historical trends and recommendations from two national commissions created by Congress; efforts to further leverage existing local sales tax measures; value capture strategies (e.g., tax increment financing); potential national freight program/freight fees; and passenger and commercial vehicle tolls for specific facilities. Other reasonably expected revenues in the future will come from innovative financing strategies, such as private equity participation. The Plan includes strategies to ensure that these sources of revenue are available, in accordance with federal guidelines. There is also a need to identify and secure funding to support deployment and implementation of the land use policies and strategies contained in the Plan to fully realize a sustainable regional vision. It will be essential to secure resources from the California Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, also know as Cap-and-Trade, in order to support the Plan’s objectives. Additionally, innovative and emerging financing options such as Enhanced Infrastructure Finance Districts will need to be explored and implemented by local jurisdictions. 2. Collaborating with Local Jurisdictions and Stakeholders Implementing the Plan will require SCAG to continue working closely with all jurisdictions, just as it did during its development. In particular, SCAG will need to work with the six county transportation commissions responsible for managing and prioritizing the portfolio z Better Placemaking: The Plan will promote the development of better places to live and work through measures that encourage more compact development in certain areas of the region, varied housing options, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, and efficient transportation infrastructure. z Improved Access and Mobility: The Plan will encourage strategic transportation investments that add appropriate capacity and improve critical road conditions in the region, increase transit capacity and expand mobility options. Meanwhile, the Plan outlines strategies for developing land in coming decades that will place destinations closer together, thereby decreasing the time and cost of traveling between them. z Households save more money: The Plan is expected to result in less energy and water consumption across the region, as well as lower transportation costs for households. z Improved Public Health and a Healthier Environment: Improved placemaking and strategic transportation investments will help improve air quality; improve health as people have more opportunities to bicycle, walk and pursue other active alternatives to driving; and better protect natural lands as new growth is concentrated in existing urban and suburban areas. These benefits add up to a simple and powerful idea: a more efficient transportation network and more livable and sustainable communities throughout our region. GREENHOUSE GASES Components of the atmosphere (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and fluorinated gases) that contribute to the greenhouse effect 1701 INTRODUCTION of transportation investments in their respective counties. SCAG also must work with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), transit operators, port and airport authorities, and other implementing agencies. In addition, the agency will have to work with the local jurisdictions and counties responsible for land use and transportation planning, and the air quality management districts in charge of monitoring conditions throughout the region. The agency will also have to work with key stakeholders including local public health departments to ensure that the Plan benefits the economy and promotes social equity. To ensure that the region makes progress on its goals, SCAG will monitor its own progress toward achieving its targets and will share this information with its partners and the public. 3. Looking Ahead Beyond 2040 To fully address our region’s long-term needs, SCAG must consider strategies and investments beyond what is contained in the financially constrained portion of the 2016 RTP/SCS—that is, the investment plan built on revenues that are reasonably expected over the life of the Plan. Chapter 9 provides an overview of potential programs and policies that may be implemented if additional funding becomes available in the future. These include: „Long-term emission-reduction investments for trucks and rail „Unfunded operational improvements „Unfunded capital improvements „Expansion of our region’s high-speed rail and commuter rail systems „Increased use of active transportation „Technology and new mobility innovations „Expansion of the regional network of express lanes SCAG expects that the 2016 RTP/SCS Strategic Plan will influence the next update to the RTP/SCS in 2020, and the strategies detailed above will eventually be incorporated into future investment plans. Chapter 2 discusses the current transportation system in the region, how we use land today and also a graphic overview of progress achieved since the 2012 RTP/SCS was adopted. It will be followed in Chapter 3 with a review of challenges we face as a region. The first three chapters of the 2016 RTP/ SCS set the stage for a discussion of the Plan’s development in Chapter 4 and a comprehensive review of the Plan’s strategies, programs and projects in Chapter 5. THE RTP/SCS WHAT’S REQUIRED z Long-term vision of how the region will address regional transportation and land use challenges and opportunities z Investment framework FEDERAL z Updated every four years to maintain eligibility for federal funding z Long-range: 20+ years into the future z Demonstrate transportation conformity „Regional emissions analysis „Financially-constrained (revenues = costs) „Timely implementation of transportation control measures „Interagency consultation and public involvement z Must be developed in consultation/coordination with key stakeholders STATE z Achieve SB 375 requirements (reduce greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks) WHAT’S INCLUDED z Vision, policies and performance measures z Forecasts (e.g., population, households, employment, land use and housing needs) z Financial plan z List of projects (to be initiated and/ or completed by 2040) z Analysis of priority focus areas (e.g., goods movement and active transportation) CHAPTER 2 HIGHLIGHTS 02 THE SETTING 20 CONCLUSION 39 To plan effectively for the future, it is important to understand the current conditions of land use and transportation throughout our large and complex region. This chapter reviews those current conditions. WHERE WE ARE TODAY 20 2016 RTP/SCS THE SETTING HOW WE USE LAND TODAY SCAG recognizes that decisions by local jurisdictions about how land is used can impact the regional transportation system, and decisions about regional transportation investments can impact land use. The agency also understands that most land use planning is typically conducted by local jurisdictions, while regional and state agencies often make major decisions about transportation investments. This is why it is critical for the region to integrate strategies for our transportation system with strategies for how we use land. Only by doing this can we achieve sustainable growth and a high quality of life for our region. This first section of Chapter 2 offers an overview of how we use land in the SCAG region, and its relevance to improving our regional transportation system as we head toward 2040. CATEGORIZING LAND USE Of the 38,000 square miles of total land in the SCAG region, only 21 percent is suitable for development. Of this limited developable land, more than half has already been fully developed. However, of the remaining developable land, only a small portion of it can be developed as sustainable transit-ready infill— meaning it can be reached via planned transit service and that it can readily access existing infrastructure (water resources, sewer facilities, etc.). According to regional land use data, only two percent of the total developable land in the region is located in High Quality Transit Areas (HQTAs), defined as areas within one-half mile of a well-serviced fixed guideway transit stop, and including bus transit corridors where buses pick up passengers every 15 minutes or less during peak commute hours. A more compact land development strategy is needed, which will be discussed in Chapter 5. Please note that this limited remaining land for future development does not account for potential reductions of developable acreage resulting from conservation efforts currently underway. As the agency prepared the 2016 RTP/SCS, it needed to organize the many different types and classifications of land uses in the region for required technical analyses. The SCAG region is diverse and large, and the types and classifications of land use used by one jurisdiction often differ from those used by another. The result is that there are many different land use types and classifications that SCAG must organize for its own analyses. To accurately represent land uses throughout the region, SCAG aggregated information from jurisdictions and simplified the types and classifications of land use into a consolidated set of land use types. The agency then converted these consolidated land uses into 35 “Place Types” to reflect the diversity of land use planning. Descriptions, standards and graphic examples of each Place Type can be found in the Reference Documents section of the SCS Background Documentation Appendix. These Place Types were used in an urban setting design tool known as the Urban Footprint Scenario Planning Model (SPM), to demonstrate urban development in the Plan in terms of form, scale and function in the built environment. SCAG then classified the Place Types into three Land Development Categories (LDCs). A table of how the 35 Place Types were categorized into the three LDCs can be found in the Reference Documents section of the SCS Background Documentation Appendix. The agency used these categories to describe the general conditions that exist and/or are likely to exist within a specific area. They reflect the varied conditions of buildings and roadways, transportation options, and the mix of housing and employment throughout the region. The three Land Development Categories that SCAG used are: 1. Urban: These areas are often found within and directly adjacent to moderate and high density urban centers. Nearly all urban growth in these areas would be considered infill or redevelopment. The majority of housing is multifamily and attached single-family (townhome), which tend to consume less water and energy than the larger types found in greater proportion in less urban locations. These areas are supported by high levels of regional and local transit service. They have well-connected street networks, and the mix and intensity of uses result in a highly walkable environment. These areas offer enhanced access and connectivity for people who choose not to drive or do not have access to a vehicle. 2. Compact: These areas are less dense than those in the Urban Land Development Category, but they are highly walkable with a rich mix of retail, commercial, residential and civic uses. These areas are most likely to occur as new growth on the urban edge, or as large-scale redevelopment. They have a rich mix of housing, from multifamily and attached single-family (townhome) to small- and medium- lot single-family homes. These areas are well served by regional 2102 WHERE WE ARE TODAY and local transit service, but they may not benefit from as much service as urban growth areas and are less likely to occur around major multimodal hubs. Streets in these areas are well connected and walkable, and destinations such as schools, shopping and entertainment areas can typically be reached by walking, biking, taking transit, or with a short auto trip. 3. Standard: These areas comprise the majority of separate-use, auto-oriented developments that have characterized the American suburban landscape for decades. Densities in these areas tend to be lower than those in the Compact Land Development Category, and they are generally not highly mixed. Medium- and larger-lot single-family homes comprise the majority of this development form. Standard areas are not typically well served by regional transit service, and most trips are made by automobile. NATURAL LANDS AND FARM LAND Southern California is one of the most biodiverse areas on the planet, with an enormous wealth of natural habitats, and flora and fauna that include species that only exist in Southern California. Our iconic mountain ranges, chaparrals, numerous rivers and expansive deserts make up our regional identity. Additionally, Southern California has a rich agricultural history and continues to be a food producer for the rest of the country. However, issues such as infrastructure needs, continuing development pressure, climate change and limited financial resources present significant challenges in protecting and maintaining the quality and quantity our natural lands and farm lands. A considerable amount of the region’s natural lands, including some key habitat areas, are already protected.1 Some areas, especially near the edge of existing urbanized areas, do not have plans for conservation and are susceptible to development. These include lands that are important and unique habitats and have high per-acre habitat values, such as riparian habitat (i.e., areas adjacent to bodies of water such as streams or rivers). These habitat types tend to have high per-acre habitat values—meaning these areas are home to a high number of species and serve as highly functional habitats. Some key habitat types are underrepresented within areas of the region already under protection. Local land use decisions play a pivotal role in the future of some of the region’s most valuable habitat and farm lands. Many local governments have taken 1 O’Neill, T., & Bohannon, J. (2015). Conservation Framework and Assessment. SCAG. steps toward planning comprehensively for conserving natural lands and farm lands, while also meeting demands for growth. Across the region, transportation agencies and local governments have used tools, such as habitat conservation plans, to link land use decisions with comprehensive conservation plans in order to streamline development. To support those and other comprehensive conservation planning efforts and to inform the local land use decision making process, SCAG has studied regional- scale habitat values (see EXHIBIT 2.1), developed a conservation framework and assembled a natural resource database.2 Over the past several years, SCAG and regional partners such as county transportation commissions (CTCs), environmental organizations and local governments have supported natural land restoration, conservation and acquisition in ways that could contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, streamlining projects and addressing climate change impacts to natural habitats. Please see the Natural & Farm Lands Appendix for additional details. SHIFTING HOUSING TYPES In the postwar era that shaped the physical landscape and popular image of Southern California, most households consisted of parents with children— often residing on large suburban lots with single-family houses. But in the 21st century, the region is witnessing demographic shifts that are influencing housing choices. Today, a smaller percentage of households have younger children at home, and the number of households without children is dramatically increasing. The housing market is expected to reflect these trends with an increased demand for smaller-lot single-family houses, as well as multifamily housing close to shopping, transit services and other amenities. Currently, 55 percent of the region’s homes are detached single-family houses. Over the next 20 years, the region is projected to add another 1.5 million homes, and much of this increase will be homes on smaller lots and multifamily housing (33 percent single-family housing to 67 percent multifamily housing). Though new housing will tend to be multifamily housing, the region’s overall housing stock will remain similar to the existing housing stock, with a breakdown of 49 percent single-family housing and 51 percent multifamily housing (see FIGURE 2.1). OUR HOUSING NEEDS As a Council of Governments, SCAG is required by California housing law to 2 These documents can be found at: http://sustain.scag.ca.gov/Pages/LinksResources.aspx. 22 2016 RTP/SCS conduct a Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) every eight years. This assessment determines future housing needs for every jurisdiction in a given region for a specific time period. This determination is referred to as the RHNA allocation, which represents projected housing needs for an eight-year period, as required by state law. For our region, the most recent RHNA allocation, also known as the fifth RHNA cycle, was adopted by the SCAG’s Regional Council in October 2012 and it covers a projection period between January 2014 and October 2021. The RHNA allocation breaks down housing needs into four income categories: very low (less than 50 percent of the county’s median income); low (50 to 80 percent of the median); moderate (80 to 120 percent); and above moderate (more than 120 percent). For the fifth RHNA cycle, the regional RHNA allocation was 412,137 units, broken down as follows: 100,632 very low; 64,947 low; 72,053 moderate; and 174,505 above moderate. However, although these housing units are planned and zoned for, available data sources indicate that the supply of affordable housing has not met needs, despite strong building activity for market rate housing. For example, during the last RHNA cycle (2006–2014), nearly 22,000 units were constructed using Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC), a rough benchmark in affordable housing building activity for households with very low income. This building activity represents about 12 percent of the 165,457 units in this category regionally. In contrast, more than 150,000 single-family homes, most likely Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Security Pacific National Bank (Prior to 1987) and Construction Industry Research Board (1988 to present) Single-family housing units include detached, semi-detached, row house and town house units. Multifamily housing includes duplexes, 3-4 unit structures, and apartment type structures with five units or more. 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Multiple Family Housing Single-Family Housing 21% 79% 62% 38% FIGURE 2.1 SCAG REGION SHARE OF MULTIPLE/SINGLE BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED Exhibit 2.1 titLE San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County Santa Ana Salton Sea Southern Mojave Lower Colorado Tulare-Buena Vista Lakes Northern Mojave Central Nevada Desert Basins Laguna-San Diego Coastal Ventura-San Gabriel Coastal Central California Coastal Source: SCAG O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Exhibit2-1_HighValueHabitat.mxd | Date: 2/23/2016Map Title: High Value Habitat Per-Acre Habitat Value Urban/Agricultural (2.39 to 8.75)Low (8.76 to 14.20)Medium (14.21 to 17.48)High (17.49 to 20.28)Very High (20.29 to 24.43)Basin County Boundaries °0 10 205 Miles EXHIBIT 2.1 HABITAT VALUE Habitat value refers to the numeric value of a site or area based on an assessment that takes into account species, habitat and functional relationship. The assessment tool aims to spatially capture biodiversity and complexity based on peer-reviewed informational data sets. Please see the Natural & Farm Lands Appendix for a more detailed description of the assessment used to develop the Habitat Value map. (Source: SCAG) TRANSITFOCUS Transit Passenger Miles (millions) Transit Trips (per capita) Public Transportation BenefitsTransit Trips by Mode MOTOR BUS 201282% 8%LIGHT RAIL 7%HEAVY RAIL 1%DEMAND RESPONSE 2%COMMUTER RAIL LIGHT RAIL MOTOR BUS HEAVY RAIL DEMAND RESPONSE COMMUTER RAIL Transit use has increased over the last 20 years. In 2012, transit riders took 711 million trips, traveling more than 3.6 billion miles. Growth in passenger miles was driven by a 15% increase in average transit trip length. Growth in transit use has not always kept up with population. The number of transit trips per person is about the same as it was 20 years ago. Passenger Miles by Mode (percent) Rail usage has increased, reflecting significant investments in a regional rail network. The share of bus trips in the region has decreased over time but buses still represent the majority of all transit modes. 100 80 60 40 20 0 91 94 97 00 03 06 09 12 50 45 35 30 25 91 94 97 00 03 06 09 12 1991 2012 3.6 BILLION MILES 2.4 BILLION MILES 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 Enhances personal mobility and access to opportunities. 10%–30% LESS GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS per household 4,000 FEWER MILES DRIVEN reduced gas consumption REDUCES GASOLINE CONSUMPTION & GHG EMISSIONS $4 RETURN FOR EVERY $1 INVESTED IN TRANSIT PROPERTY VALUES PERFORM BETTER WHEN NEAR TRANSIT 42% PROVIDES ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES Source: American Public Transportation Association $13,000SAVES MONEY saved per year for 2-person household 2502 WHERE WE ARE TODAY suitable for the above moderate income category, representing more than 52 percent of the 293,547 above moderate units needed, were built over the same period. A similar trend can be seen in the first two years after the adoption of the fifth cycle RHNA (2013 and 2014), with barely 2,000 units of new construction reporting use of LIHTC while nearly 30,000 single-family units have been built during this time. No new construction using LIHTC was reported in 2014. Although LIHTC has historically been used in about one out of five new multifamily construction, this data suggests that market rate building activity is far stronger than building activity for very low income housholds and that the need for affordable housing continues to increase. Within the housing elements of their General Plans, each jurisdiction in our region is required to show how it would accommodate its RHNA allocation for the designated period. This is accomplished through a sites and inventory analysis that evaluates zoning and land use policies. SCAG is tasked with providing the regional RHNA allocation, but housing elements are reviewed and approved by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. Since the fifth cycle adoption due date of October 2013, 84 percent of the region’s jurisdictions have housing elements in compliance with state housing law. The next RHNA allocation for our region is anticipated to be adopted by SCAG in October 2020, with housing elements due by October 2021. HIGH QUALITY TRANSIT AREAS (HQTAs) AND TRANSIT PRIORITY AREAS (TPAs) The overall land use pattern detailed in the 2012 RTP/SCS reinforced the idea of focusing new housing and employment within the region’s HQTAs. For planning purposes, an HQTA, as we have mentioned, is defined as an area within one-half mile of a well-serviced fixed guideway transit stop, and it includes bus transit corridors where buses pick up passengers every 15 minutes or less during peak commute hours. The 2012 RTP/SCS also identified Transit Priority Areas (TPAs), which are defined as locations where two or more high- frequency transit routes intersect. Currently, more than five million residents in the region live within HQTAs. These HQTAs currently accommodate 2.8 million jobs (see TABLE 2.1). High density development could also produce high quality housing with consideration of urban design, construction and durability, and result in increased ridership on important public transit investments. Local jurisdictions throughout the region are applying more sophisticated planning practices in the specific plans and zoning codes that govern these areas in order to promote this kind of development. As housing density increases in cities and HQTAs, local governments are investing in pedestrian and bike infrastructure and reducing parking requirements to support people who choose not to have a car or cannot afford one. Local jurisdictions are also creating and retaining affordable housing near transit, helping to increase connectivity to employment opportunities and reducing reliance on automobile ownership. The positive effects on real estate values, retail sales and property taxes, as well as the social benefits of developing within HQTAs are also well documented.3 For example, less automobile-dependent settings, like HQTAs, spur volunteerism, social interaction and community engagement with more opportunities for face-to-face contact. Creating active places that are busy throughout the day and evening also improves safety and reduces crime rates within the surrounding neighborhood. Increased retail sales and easy transit accessibility translate into higher business profits, rent, commercial real estate values and government property taxes. Similarly, housing value premiums associated with being near a transit station (usually expressed as being within one-quarter to one-half mile of a station) average 17 percent to 30 percent higher than comparable properties located elsewhere. 3 Center for Neighborhood Technology. (2013). The New Real Estate Mantra: Location Near Public Transportation. Washington, D.C. COUNTY WITHIN HQTA HOUSEHOLDS %EMPLOYMENT % Imperial 0 -0 - Los Angeles 1,552,900 48% 2,357,400 56% Orange 173,500 17%392,900 26% Riverside 3,200 0.50%24,500 4% San Bernardino 17,200 3%39,600 6% Ventura 6,800 3%22,400 7% SCAG 1,753,600 30% 2,836,800 38% TABLE 2.1 2012 HQTA Exhibit 2.1 titLE %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&'|}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ Camarillo Moorpark Ojai Simi Valley Thousand Oaks Oxnard Arcadia Azusa Burbank Carson Downey El Monte Glendale Glendora La Mirada Los Angeles Monrovia Monterey Park Norwalk Pasadena Pomona Torrance Walnut West Covina Whittier Calabasas Long Beach Adelanto Apple Valley Barstow Chino Chino Hills Colton Fontana Hesperia Highland Loma LindaOntario Rancho Cucamonga Redlands Rialto San BernardinoUpland Victorville Yucaipa Yucca Valley Lancaster Palmdale Santa Clarita Eastvale Lake Elsinore Hemet Indio Indian Wells Temecula Perris Moreno Valley Murrieta Wildomar Rancho Mirage Corona Jurupa Valley Desert Hot Springs San Jacinto Beaumont Banning Calimesa Palm Desert Riverside Menifee Norco La Quinta Palm SpringsAnaheim Brea Buena Park Costa Mesa Fullerton Garden Grove Huntington Beach Irvine Laguna Niguel Mission Viejo Newport Beach Orange San Clemente Santa Ana Seal Beach Tustin Yorba Linda 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County (Source: SCAG) O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Exhibit2-2_2012BaseYearTransitNetwork.mxd | Date: 11/19/2015Map Title: 2012 Base Year Transit Network 62 86 78 78 987 1868 10 10 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Bus Rapid Bus and Bus Rapid Transit Urban Rail Commuter Rail °0 5 102.5 Miles EXHIBIT 2.2 2012 BASE YEAR TRANSIT NETWORK 2702 WHERE WE ARE TODAY HQTAs and TPAs are powerful examples of how integrating strategies for land use and transportation can help us achieve our long-term goals for greater mobility, a strong economy and sustainable growth. In the next section of this chapter, we will discuss the state of our overall transportation system today. That will help us set the stage for Chapter 5, where we will review our strategies, programs and projects for our transportation system and explain how we will integrate them with how we use land. Efficient use of our land is the basis for an efficient transportation system. HOW WE TRAVEL TODAY TRANSIT Our regional transit system today is comprised of an extensive network of services provided by dozens of operators. This network includes fixed-route local bus lines, community circulators, express and rapid buses, Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), demand response,4 light rail transit, heavy rail transit (subway) and commuter rail.5 The region’s providers of transit offer the second largest amount of service in the country, after that of the New York City metropolitan area (see EXHIBIT 2.2). Transit plays an important role in Southern California’s integrated transportation system. It provides an alternative to driving for many and provides mobility to people who do not have cars. The transit network is the region’s largest non- automotive passenger transportation mode by trip volume, by a huge degree. Riders of transit took more than eight times as many trips as air travelers in FY2011-12 and nearly 267 times as many trips as passenger rail travelers. Transit use provides external benefits to the region’s transportation system, through investment, reduced traffic congestion and air pollution emissions reductions. The American Public Transportation Association (APTA) estimates that for every billion dollars invested in transit (as of 2007) about 36,000 jobs are created. This includes the direct purchasing power of transit agencies and 4 “Demand response” is defined as a transit mode comprised of passenger cars, vans or small buses operating in response to calls from passengers or their agents to the transit operator, who then dispatches a vehicle to pick up the passengers and transport them to their destinations. 5 Commuter rail is discussed separately in more detail, along with intercity passenger rail such as Amtrak and CA High-Speed Train, as part of “Passenger Rail.” also the spending power of the employees of transit agencies.6 Were this rate to have held constant into FY2011-12, transit spending in the SCAG region would have resulted in the creation or maintenance of roughly 150,000 jobs. The Texas Transportation Institute (TII), in its annual Urban Mobility Report, estimates traffic congestion delay averted due to the use of the region’s public transportation system. In 2011, using transit helped residents of the SCAG region avoid 10 hours of delay per person, and saved the region more than $250 million in averted traffic delay costs. Each of the region’s residents take an average of 39 transit trips each year, at an operating and maintenance cost of $3.46 per trip (this amount increases to roughly $5.05 when both operations and capital expenditures are accounted for). Transit users typically pay 25 percent of the operating and maintenance cost of their travel, with the remaining 75 percent paid for by state and local public subsidies. Most capital expenditures are also funded with public subsidies, including a larger share of federal grants. Despite recent service cuts, the region’s total combined capital and operations spending exceeded $3.59 billion in FY2011-12. The past eight years have been tough economically for Southern California’s transit agencies. Although bus service accounted for 82 percent of the region’s transit trips in FY2011-12, the agencies that provide it have been hit particularly hard. Many have had to cut service. Total bus service provided by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) has declined by 10 percent, Orange County providers have cut bus service by 11 percent, and Los Angeles County Municipal Operators bus service has fallen by three percent. These declines in service are tied to the Great Recession, as total ridership and per-capita ridership have stagnated. In FY2011-12, ridership of just under 711 million trips was up 1.7 percent compared with the prior year, but it represented a six percent decline from a pre-recession high of more than 750 million trips. The per-capita trip total of nearly 39 for FY2011-12 represents a loss of seven percent from the pre-recession high of more than 42 per-capita trips. Preliminary data for FY2014-15 show that total ridership and per capita ridership have continued to decline. Total transit trips are expected to fall below 700 million for the first time since FY2003-04. 6 American Public Transportation Association, 2009, “Job Impacts of Spending on Public Transportation: An Update.” White Paper. 28 2016 RTP/SCS Surfliner. This program had never been fully developed by Caltrans Division of Rail (DOR), and recently it had been discontinued. These cooperative fare agreements and media efforts include effective marketing across passenger rail markets and transit riders. Metrolink has been successful with its special service trains for both Dodgers’ and Angels’ games and other special events. These types of services introduce passenger rail to the general public and can lead to new regular customers. In July 2015, Metrolink started a pilot fare project on the Antelope Valley Line. It included a 25-percent reduction in fares (except for the weekend day pass) and allowed station-to-station travel for just $2.00. Due to the success of this pilot program, on January 1, 2016 Metrolink implemented a $3.00 station-to-station fare system-wide. (The $2.00 station-to-station program was discontinued on the Antelope Valley Line, however the 25 percent fare reduction was extended to June 30, 2016.) Since 2012, Metrolink has offered its successful weekend pass, allowing unlimited travel throughout the entire Metrolink system on both Saturday and Sunday for just $10.00. (The fare has since increased to $10.00 per weekend day.) Monthly pass holders can take unlimited trips on the weekend. The renaissance of rail travel in our region is exciting. However, significant challenges are keeping our commuter and intercity rail networks from realizing their full potential to help reduce highway congestion, and cut air pollution and lower greenhouse gas emissions. Among these challenges: More than half of the commuter and intercity rail network operates on one track, some of which is owned by freight railroads that maintain priority for their own operations. Passenger trains are assigned “slots,” meaning that they are allowed to move in a particular direction for a fixed time period. This results in the relatively slow average speeds noted above, reducing the incentive for commuters to use the train system (and instead prompting them to commute by car), as well as reducing the number of passenger trains that can serve our region. One-track operations present other challenges. Even a minor delay can lead to a train losing its slot, thereby causing cascading delays throughout the network and throughout the day. Commuter and intercity rail networks in Chicago and on the East Coast have much higher service frequencies than we do in our region, mainly because they have fewer single-track segments and fewer conflicts with freight railroads. Our region has a large list of rail improvements either in the planning phases or which are ready for construction. These Since 1991, transit agencies in the region have provided about 13.22 billion transit trips. In that time, urban rail and commuter rail have grown from 1.3 percent of transit trips to 16.1 percent of trips in 2012. Bus trips have declined from 98.6 percent of trips to about 83 percent. Urban and commuter rail together supply 11.6 percent of all Vehicle Revenue Miles because the per vehicle capacity is much higher than that of buses. Urban and commuter rail services are 20.9 percent of all transit operating expenses in our region. PASSENGER RAIL Southern California is served by an ever expanding passenger rail network, including intercity, commuter and freight services, and this network is expanding and improving in terms of capacity, efficiency and safety. Many capital, operational and safety improvements are underway and planned throughout this existing network, including transportation corridors currently not served by rail. The region’s passenger rail network, along with the number of passengers and service levels, has steadily grown since 1990, except for a dip during the Great Recession. In 1990, the only passenger rail service operating in the region was the Pacific Surfliner and Amtrak’s long-distance trains such as the Coast Starlight and Southwest Chief. Metrolink began commuter rail service in October 1992, and it continues to expand its network and levels of service. The Pacific Surfliner, which carried 2.7 million passengers in FY2013-14, operates 11 daily round-trips between Los Angeles and San Diego, five round-trips between Los Angeles and Santa Barbara/Goleta, and two round-trips north to San Luis Obispo. The Pacific Surfliner is Amtrak’s second busiest corridor, behind the Northeast Corridor between Washington, D.C. and Boston. The line’s average speed is 46 miles per hour (mph). The Southern California Regional Rail Authority (SCRRA), the operator of Metrolink, operates 165 weekday trains on seven lines and the system carried 11.7 million passengers in FY2013-14. Weekend service provides 34 trains on Saturdays and 28 on Sundays. Metrolink operates two round- trip express trains: one round-trip on the San Bernardino Line and one round-trip on the Antelope Valley Line (to Palmdale only). System-wide average speed is 37 mph. Notable recent efforts include the first Metrolink e-ticketing program rollout in 2016. Also, the LOSSAN Rail Corridor (Los Angeles–San Diego–San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor) received a Cap-and-Trade Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program grant in the spring of 2015 to re-establish a cooperative fare agreement with local connecting transit agencies for free transfers to and from the Pacific 2902 WHERE WE ARE TODAY The regional bike network is expanding but remains fragmented. Nearly 500 additional miles of bikeways were built since SCAG’s 2012 RTP/SCS, but only 3,919 miles of bikeways exist regionwide, of which 2,888 miles are bike paths/ lanes (see EXHIBIT 2.3). Walking represents nearly 17 percent of all trips in the SCAG region, with the largest share in Los Angeles County. It is how most transit riders reach their station. Most walk trips (83 percent) are less than one half mile; walkers are less likely to travel further because of a lack of pedestrian friendly infrastructure. Routes to stops and stations are often circuitous and/or obstructed, increasing the time it takes to complete a trip by transit and therefore making the choice to use transit less attractive. A study in Los Angeles County found that the most common barriers to station access on foot or bicycle include: long blocks, highway over/underpasses, concerns about safety and security, sidewalk maintenance, legibility/lack of signage and right-of-way constraints leading to limited space for safe walking and biking.8 Currently, all six counties in the SCAG region are pursuing first/last mile solutions to make transit or border crossing stations more accommodating to active transportation. Their efforts are aided by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), which has extended the “walk-shed” (the area encircling a destination point) from transit stations from a quarter mile to a half mile, enabling transit funding to be used for larger areas around transit stations.9 The “bike-shed,” as defined through FTA guidance, extends three miles in all directions from a station. While the number of bicyclists and pedestrians is increasing, so are injuries and fatalities—although not as fast as the growth overall in active transportation. Nevertheless, injuries among those who bike and walk are increasing at a time when the total number of traffic-related injuries and fatalities is dropping regionwide. Improving safety will likely require pursuing innovative strategies (as described in the following sections) to reduce conflicts among bicyclists, pedestrians and automobiles. In 2015, the City of Los Angeles began its Vision Zero Campaign. Vision Zero is a road safety policy that promotes smart behaviors and roadway design that anticipates mistakes, so that collisions do not result in severe injury or death. 8 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (2014) First Last Mile Strategic Plan & Planning Guidelines. 9 Department of Transportation (Friday, August 19, 2011): Final Policy Statement on the Eligibility of Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements Under Federal Transit Law. Federal Register Volume 76, Number 161 Pages 52046-52053. 501 INTRODUCTION 2.HOW WE GET TO WORK 76% DRIVE ALONE 14% CARPOOL 5% NON-MOTORIZED (Walk/Bike) 5% TRANSIT (Bus/Rail) Source: SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model improvements include adding double-tracking, sidings, station improvements and grade separations to increase speed and service levels. However, there is no dedicated long-term funding for commuter and intercity rail to move these projects forward. ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION Our region has made steady progress in encouraging people to embrace active transportation, that is, human-powered transportation such as walking and biking. Across our region today, many people live and work in areas where trips are short enough to be completed by walking or biking. Walking and biking as a share of all trips is more than 18 percent in our most urban areas where there are abundant nearby destinations/land uses, yet still reaches 11 percent in rural areas where land uses are less diverse.7 There is a strong relationship between land use and travel behavior. Land use characteristics play a key role in determining the conditions for and feasibility of walking and biking in a community, due to the sensitivity of these modes to trip length. 7 California Department of Transportation (2012). California Household Travel Survey. Exhibit 2.1 titLE Kern San Diego Santa Barbara NEVADA ARIZONA MEXICO San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County Bikeways (Source: SCAG) O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Exhibit2-3_ExistingBikeways2012.mxd | Date: 11/23/2015Map Title: Existing Bikeways 2012 °0 10 205 Miles EXHIBIT 2.3 EXISTING BIKEWAYS 2012 3102 WHERE WE ARE TODAY HIGHWAYS AND ARTERIALS Our region’s highways and arterials continue to be the backbone of our overall transportation network, and they are vital to moving people and goods throughout the region. Across the Southern California region, our highway and arterial system covers about 70,000 roadway lane miles and accommodates 66 million trips per day. Our roadways are not only used by automobiles and freight trucks, they are also used for transit and for those who choose to walk, bike and use other forms of active transportation. According to SCAG’s Regional Travel Demand Model (RTDM), more than nine out of 10 trips rely either entirely or in part on the highway and arterial system. Based on currently available data, there are 3.6 million person-hours of daily delay and 11.8 minutes of daily delay per capita along our region’s highways and local arterials. Maintaining the operational efficiency of our roadways is crucial if we are to maintain the mobility of our region. Unfortunately, traffic congestion continues to adversely affect our highway and arterial system every day. Although we have made improvements, the increasing travel demands that will come with a growing population in coming years will lead to increased congestion. This traffic congestion will not only make life difficult for commuters, it will also degrade our region’s air quality and our overall quality of life. To address congestion and to improve our transportation network’s efficiency, the region has been investing in Transportation Systems Management and Transportation Demand Management projects as described in the following sections. TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT (TSM) AND TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) For our regional transportation system to operate efficiently and smoothly, operators must manage the system effectively, as well as the demands placed on it. To do so, they implement TSM and TDM strategies. TSM employs a series of techniques designed to maximize the capacity and efficiency of the existing transportation system and its facilities. One of these techniques deploys Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), which will be discussed below. TDM involves a variety of strategies to manage the demand placed on our roadway network and to reduce our dependence on driving alone. These include promoting ridesharing, value pricing,10 telecommuting or alternative work schedules and alternative modes of travel such as transit, passenger rail and active transportation. 10 Value pricing is a user fee applied during peak demand periods on congested roadways to improve the reliability and efficiency of the transportation system and provide travelers with greater choices. The common goals of TSM and TDM are to improve the productivity of our transportation system, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality and reduce or eliminate the need to construct new and expensive transportation infrastructure. Transportation Systems Management (TSM) A critical TSM technique is Intelligent Transportation Systems, or ITS, which makes use of advanced detection, communications and computing technologies to improve the safety and efficiency of our surface transportation network. These systems allow system operators and users to better manage and optimize the capacity of the region’s transportation system. Data is collected about the status of our highways, traffic signals, transit vehicles, freight vehicles, passenger trains and shared-ride vehicles and is integrated in ways that improve the efficiency of the overall transportation system. SCAG has a critical role to play in the development and management of ITS in the region. As the region’s Metropolitan Planning Organization, SCAG is charged with developing and maintaining the Southern California Regional ITS Architecture. This architecture is the regional planning tool for ensuring a cooperative process to prioritize and deploy ITS technologies and for identifying critical data connections between institutional stakeholders (e.g., connecting two transit operators). This architecture helps the region deploy ITS systems that are truly integrated. Stakeholders are able to share information among many agencies in consistent and compatible formats to achieve improved safety and efficiency. SCAG works closely with the CTCs, local governments and Caltrans Districts to update and maintain the regional architecture and assure the use of required systems, engineering requirements and applicable standards—which is required when federal funds are used on ITS projects. The Southern California highway system has an extensive ITS system that covers most of the urbanized portion of our region. Loop detectors in the pavement and video cameras provide information on speed and volume, and identify congestion and incidents that are fed to Caltrans/California Highway Patrol (CHP) Transportation Management Centers (TMCs). Arterial ITS systems are in place throughout the region as well. Local arterial systems include advanced signal synchronization capabilities to increase the flow of traffic and also to detect and respond to changes in traffic volume or direction of travel and manage incidents. Like the highway network, these systems include loop and video detection and also rely on wireless data such as that provided by Google. Most medium- to large-scale, fixed-route and Dial-a-Ride operators in our region have implemented transit ITS components. These include automatic 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 110 134 91 22 134 101 101 101 215 10 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 105 5 10 405 210 San Bernardino County Riverside CountyOrange County Los Angeles County Ventura County Camarillo Simi Valley Thousand Oaks Burbank Carson GlendaleLos Angeles Pasadena Pomona Whittier Calabasas Adelanto Apple Valley Barstow Chino Chino Hills Fontana Hesperia Highland Ontario Rancho Cucamonga Redlands Rialto Upland Victorville Yucaipa Yucca Valley Lancaster Palmdale Santa Clarita Lake Elsinore Hemet Indio Temecula Perris Moreno Valley Murrieta Wildomar Rancho Mirage Corona Jurupa Valley San Jacinto Banning Calimesa Riverside Menifee Norco La Quinta Palm Springs Anaheim Brea Fullerton Irvine Orange Santa Ana Seal Beach (Source: SCAG, CoStar Realty Information Inc.) O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Exhibit2-4_ExistingRegionalGoodsMovementSystem.mxd | Date: 2/24/2016Map Title: Existing Regional Goods Movement System 8 10 10 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Ports Ports of Entry Major Airports Intermodal Facilities Routes Major Freight Highway Corridors Main Line Rail Network Alameda Corridor 0 5 102.5 Miles Warehouses >= 50,000 sq ft < 50,000 sq ft EXHIBIT 2.4 EXISTING REGIONAL GOODS MOVEMENT SYSTEM 3302 WHERE WE ARE TODAY vehicle location (AVL) and transit signal priority (TSP) systems. Automatic vehicle location systems have greatly increased the effectiveness of real-time scheduling information, increasing convenience for transit passengers. TSP gives transit vehicles signal priority to improve passenger throughput and bus speed. The TSP system is an integral part of Metro’s Rapid Bus program, which has 20 routes. Santa Monica’s Big Blue Bus, Culver City Bus and Torrance Transit are others that employ TSP systems as well. Using a combination of hard-wired loop technology and wireless technology, they reduce travel times by up to 25 percent. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Our region employs an array of TDM strategies to better manage the demand placed on our roadway network by reducing the number of people who drive alone as well as encouraging them to use alternative modes. As a consequence, these strategies have helped reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. These strategies include promoting carpooling and vanpooling; biking and walking; car sharing and bike sharing; telecommuting; flexible work schedules; and intelligent parking, among other strategies. The region has a long history of investing in a comprehensive High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) or carpool lane system, supported by investments in park-and-ride facilities, rideshare matching and vanpooling services. A 2014 national study of employers by the Families and Work Institute and the Society for Human Resource Management showed that employers are becoming more willing to provide employees with flexible work arrangements and more choices in managing work time, without loss of pay. As Baby Boomers continue to retire in increasing numbers and are replaced by younger, more tech-savvy workers, and as employers continue to embrace technology and remote access capabilities, we expect to see increases in the percentage of workers who telecommute or have flexible work schedules. A significant amount of travel in the region is still by people who choose to drive alone (42 percent of all trips and nearly 76 percent of work trips). So, the challenge of getting individuals to seek alternative modes of travel remains. GOODS MOVEMENT Our region’s transportation network for moving goods, referred to as our “goods movement” system, relies today on multiple modes of transportation and complex infrastructure. Whether carrying imported goods from the ports to regional distribution centers, supplying materials for local manufacturers, or delivering consumer goods to residents, our goods movement system sustains regional industries and consumer needs every day. This system includes deep- water marine ports, international border crossings, Class I rail lines, interstate highways, state routes and local connector roads, air cargo facilities, intermodal facilities, and distribution and warehousing centers. EXHIBIT 2.4 depicts our region’s multimodal goods movement system. Major Elements of the Goods Movement System: z Seaports (Ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach and Hueneme): Serving as the largest container port complex in the U.S., the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach (together called the San Pedro Bay Ports) handled about 117 million metric tons of imports and exports in 2014— for a total value of about $395.7 billion.11 The Port of Hueneme in Ventura County specializes in the import and export of automobiles, fresh fruit and produce and serves as the primary support facility for the offshore oil industry. In 2014, two-way trade activities through the Port of Hueneme were valued at nearly $9.2 billion and generated $1.1 billion in economic activities in the immediate region.12 z Land Ports: The international border crossings in Imperial County are busy commercial land ports, and they were responsible for more than $8 billion in imports and $6 billion in exports in 2014. This cross- border commerce was driven by the maquiladora trade, as well as the movement of agricultural products. 13 z Air Cargo Facilities: The region is home to numerous air cargo facilities, including Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) and Ontario International Airport (ONT). Together they handled more than 99 percent of the region’s air cargo, valued at more than $96 billion,14 in 2014. z Highways and Local Roads: Our region has more than 70,000 roadway lane miles.15 Sections of Interstate 710, Interstate 605, State Route 60 and State Route 91 carry the highest volumes of truck traffic in the region and averaged more than 25,000 trucks per day in 2013. Other major components of the regional highway network also serve significant numbers of trucks. These include Interstates 5, 10, 15 and 210. More than 20,000 trucks per day travel on some sections. 11 American Association of Port Authorities and U.S. Trade Online, U.S. Census. 12 U.S. Trade Online, U.S. Census and Port of Hueneme. 13 The term maquiladora refers to a manufacturing operation in Mexico. The majority of them are located along the US border and within the Foreign Trade Zones (FTZs) to capitalize on duty-free and tariff-free provisions for assembly and material processing. 14 U.S. Trade Online, U.S. Census. 15 Highway Performance Monitoring System, California Department of Transportation, http:// www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tsip/hpms/. THE SCAG REGION IS THE LARGEST INTERNATIONAL GATEWAY IN THE U.S. supported by AIRPORTS, LAND PORTS OF ENTRY, SEAPORTS, RAILWAYS, HIGHWAYS and WAREHOUSE & DISTRIBUTION CENTERS STORE FACTORY GOODS MOVEMENTFOCUS HOW CAN WE GROW WITH LESS IMPACT? in VEHICLE HOURS OF DELAY per day at rail-highway grade crossings across the region by 2040 GROWTH 371%$2.6 BILLION COST OF WASTED LABOR HOURS & FUEL from Truck Congestion on Highways SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA has the LARGEST CONTAINER PORT COMPLEX in the UNITED STATES #1 and has the NINTH LARGEST CONTAINER PORT COMPLEX in the WORLD #9 ARE FACILITIES >50K SQ. FT. IN SIZE 750MILLION SQ. FT. OF WAREHOUSING & DISTRIBUTION SPACE CLOSE TO1.2 BILLION SQ. FT. (2014) OF HIGHWAYS (that is 41% of all the highway road miles in California) SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA HAS3,747 MILES 2 6 CLASS 1RAILROADS INTERMODALRAIL YARDS** ** Not including carload and automobile terminals REGIONAL AIRPORTS HANDLED NEARLY IN INTERNATIONAL AIR CARGO IN 2014 BILLION$96 $515 BILLION In 2014, the VALUE OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE that moved through the SCAG region was over 2.9 MILLIONIn 2014, Goods Movement dependent industries generated includes maritime and cross-border trade and air freight CLOSE TO ANNUAL COST OF AIR POLLUTION in the SCAG region is at least BILLION$14.6 3502 WHERE WE ARE TODAY These roads carry a mix of cargo loads, including local, domestic and international. The arterial roadway system also plays a critical role in goods movement, providing first/last mile connections to regional ports, manufacturing facilities, intermodal terminals, warehousing and distribution centers, and retail outlets. z Class I Railroads: Critical to the growth of the region’s economy, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway (BNSF) and Union Pacific (UP) carry international and domestic cargo to and from distant parts of the country. The BNSF mainline operates on the Transcontinental Line (and San Bernardino Subdivision). The UP operates on the Coast Line, Saugus Line through Santa Clarita, Alhambra and Los Angeles Subdivisions and Yuma Subdivision to El Paso. Both railroads operate on the Alameda Corridor, which connects directly to the San Pedro Bay Ports. The San Pedro Bay Ports also provide several on-dock rail terminals, along with the six major intermodal terminals operated by the BNSF and UP. z Warehouse and Distribution Centers: The SCAG region is home to one of the largest clusters of logistics activity in North America. In 2014, the region had close to 1.2 billion square feet of facility space for warehousing, distribution, cold storage and truck terminals.16 Nearly 750 million square feet of this space, in 4,900 buildings, were facilities larger than 50,000 square feet. An estimated ten percent of the occupied warehouse space served port-related uses, while the remaining 90 percent supported domestic shippers.17 Many of these warehouses are clustered along key goods movement corridors. Port- related warehousing is concentrated in the Gateway Cities subregion, while national and regional distribution facilities tend to be located in the Inland Empire. Key Goods Movement Functions and Markets Our region’s goods movement system serves a wide range of markets including international, domestic and local trade. Although the international trade market has a significant presence in the region, most freight activities are generated by local businesses moving goods to local customers and supporting national domestic trade. These businesses are sometimes referred to as “goods movement-dependent industries.” In 2014, these industries, including manufacturing, wholesale and retail trade, construction, and warehousing, employed nearly three million people throughout the region and 16 CoStar Reality Information, Inc. www.costar.com, based on November 2014 data downloads. 17 Industrial Warehousing in the SCAG Region Study, SCAG, based on the Avison-Young methodology for port-related and non-port related warehousing needs. contributed $291 billion to the regional gross domestic product (GDP). These industries are anticipated to grow substantially, with manufacturing projected to increase its GDP contribution 130 percent by 2040 and wholesale trade growing 144 percent.18 Growth of E-Commerce and Goods Movement The retail industry provided nearly $30 billion in wages and salaries for the region in 2014.19 This industry includes a wide variety of subsectors such as motor vehicles, furniture, electronics and appliances, building materials, health and personal care products, clothing, sporting goods, and books. One of the most notable changes in the retail industry is the strong growth in e-commerce sales. E-commerce sales for U.S. retailers totaled $261 billion in 2013, an increase of 13.6 percent from 2012. Total retail sales increased by 3.8 percent in the same period. Within the e-commerce sales merchandise category, clothing and clothing accessories had the largest sales at $40 billion, followed by electronics and appliances at nearly $23 billion. E-commerce provides consumers with a broad range of shopping options, including the ability to compare product prices instantaneously from mobile devices and to opt for home delivery or store pick-up of merchandise. Simultaneously, e-commerce has changed how traditional distribution centers and retail outlets are operating to meet customer demand. Distribution centers in the past delivered bulk size goods to their customers or vendors. Because e-commerce orders tend to be smaller in size (i.e., a single item order as compared to a bulk-case order), many retailers and distribution center/warehouse operators are upgrading their facilities, or developing new facilities, to meet surging e-commerce orders. These changes are also generally characterized by the use of smaller trucks and integrator delivery vans (such as UPS, FedEx and DHL) due to overnight or two-day delivery requirements of e-commerce customers. Same-Day Delivery Demands Consumers are increasingly demanding quicker fulfillment of their orders. More recent developments include same-day delivery options. To meet the same- day delivery promise, distribution or fulfillment center proximity to population centers becomes critical. This is exemplified by large-scale e-commerce fulfillment center developments at the periphery of urban population centers. At the same time, small to medium size buildings that are narrow, but with ample loading doors and docks in urban cores, have also been attractive as they provide even quicker access to dense population centers than those in the outskirts. Additionally, retailers are increasingly using products available 18 REMI TranSight SCAG, CA, USv3.6.5. 19 Regional Economic Model Inc. TranSight SCAG, CA, US v3.6.5. 36 2016 RTP/SCS STATE OF SAFETY The safety of people and goods is one of the most important considerations in developing, maintaining and operating our diverse transportation system. Throughout California, the rate of fatal and injury collisions on highways has declined dramatically since the California Highway Patrol began keeping such data in the 1930s (see FIGURE 2.2). California has led the nation in roadway safety for many of the past 20 years. Only recently have roadways nationally become as safe as those in California. California’s most recently recorded mileage death rate (MDR)—defined as fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles traveled (VMT)—was 0.91, while the MDR within the SCAG region was slightly lower at 0.83. Both MDRs for the state and SCAG region are lower than the national MDR of 1.09. at their stores to fulfill e-commerce orders. Parcel hubs, delivery centers and accessibility to local streets and highways throughout the region will continue to be critical to e-commerce growth.20 21 22 20 E-commerce Evolutions – Element 4: Distribution and Fulfillment Centers, NAIOP, May 2015, http://www.naiop.org/en/E-Library/Business-Trends/Distribution-and-Fulfillment- Centers.aspx. 21 Retailers must overcome logistics lag for same-day delivery, Kris Bjornson, JLL, April 2014, http://www.joneslanglasalleblog.com/investor/ retailers-must-overcome-logistics-lag-for-same-day-delivery/. 22 Same-day delivery is transforming the CRE industry, Kris Bjornson, JLL, June 2015, http:// www.joneslanglasalleblog.com/investor/same-day-delivery-is-transforming-the-cre-in- dustry/?utm_source=us-retail-ecom&utm_medium=jll-website&utm_campaign=featured- post. Source: https://www.chp.ca.gov/InformationManagementDivisionSite/Documents/2012-sec1.pdf 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 1933 1940 1947 1954 1961 1968 1975 1982 1989 1996 2003 2010 Pe r 1 0 0 M i l l i o n M i l e s o f T r a v e l FIGURE 2.2 MAKING OUR ROADWAYS SAFER: CALIFORNIA MILEAGE DEATH RATE (1933–2012) 3702 WHERE WE ARE TODAY Our region has an extensive transportation system, with more than 70,000 lane miles of highway and arterial lanes and 3,900 miles of bikeways. As of 2014, the region had 14.9 million licensed drivers and 11.8 million registered vehicles. As of 2012 (the most recent year that data was available), more than 1,300 people died and 121,000 were injured (of which 6,800 were considered severe) in traffic collisions in the region. In 2012 President Obama signed into law MAP-21, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act, which funded surface transportation programs and required states to develop Strategic Highway Safety Plans (SHSPs).23 The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) responded by developing an updated SHSP through a participatory process. Throughout 2014, Caltrans conducted an extensive outreach effort to more than 50 agencies and organizations throughout the state—including SCAG—to gather feedback on improving the overall SHSP. This effort led to the release of the final California SHSP in 2015. California’s ultimate goal is to reach zero deaths on our highways—a concept known as “Toward Zero Deaths” (TZD). Specifically, California aims to achieve a three percent per year reduction for the number 23 In December 2015, the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act, or “FAST Act,” was signed into law, which authorizes funding for surface transportation programs. SCAG expects to work with Caltrans to monitor the rulemaking process to implement FAST Act provisions. 1501 INTRODUCTION 2. 1 2 3 4 5 9 8 6 7 10 11 12 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY RIVERSIDE COUNTY LOS ANGELESCOUNTY VENTURACOUNTY ORANGECOUNTY IMPERIAL COUNTY Oxnard Palmdale Burbank Bob Hope Los Angeles International Long Beach Southern California Logistics San Bernardino International Ontario International John Wayne March Inland Port Palm Springs International Imperial County12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 2 3 4 5 9 8 6 7 10 11 12 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY RIVERSIDE COUNTY LOS ANGELESCOUNTY VENTURACOUNTY ORANGECOUNTY IMPERIAL COUNTY Oxnard Palmdale Burbank Bob Hope Los Angeles International Long Beach Southern California Logistics San Bernardino International Ontario International John Wayne March Inland Port Palm Springs International Imperial County12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1Map of Airports 12 EXISTING & PLANNED COMMERCIAL AIRPORTS SERVING THE SCAG REGION 38 2016 RTP/SCS and rate of fatalities and a 1.5 percent per year reduction for the number and rate of severe injuries. Although the SHSP and previous California SHSPs set various actions that state agencies can take to reduce fatalities, there are complementary strategies that local governments can pursue, such as Vision Zero initiatives. For additional details regarding strategies, please see the Safety &Security Appendix. As we continue to work to improve safety for motorists, we also must tackle the alarming fatality rates of those who use other modes of transportation. Safety is a priority for all modes of transportation, and improving safety for people who walk and bike is critical. Based on currently available data, about 27 percent of all traffic-related fatalities in our region involved pedestrians and five percent of traffic-related fatalities involved bicyclists, according to data from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS). AVIATION AND GROUND ACCESS The SCAG region is one of the busiest and most diverse commercial aviation regions in the world. In 2014, more than 60 airlines offered scheduled service to one or more of our region’s airports, providing more than 1,200 daily commercial departures—one every 70 seconds. These departing flights travel all over the United States and to every corner of the globe; a total of 169 destinations in 37 countries had non-stop service from our region in 2014. Our airports also play a critical role in the region’s goods movement network, and they impact the operations of our ground transportation network as well. The passengers arriving at or departing from our airports generate more than 200,000 daily trips on our region’s ground transportation system. Passenger and cargo air travel in the region is supported by a multiple airport system that spans six counties. There are seven commercial airports with scheduled passenger service, five additional facilities with the infrastructure to accommodate scheduled service, seven active military air fields and more than forty general aviation airports. Worldwide, few other regions have as many commercial airports within a comparable geographic area, making Southern California one of the world’s most complex aviation systems. In 2014, the airports in our region handled more than 1.5 million aircraft operations (take-offs and landings), nearly 800,000 of which were commercial operations. In the face of this huge number of air travelers and aircraft, our airports work efficiently. Flights to our region arrive on schedule more than 80 percent of the time. Thanks to favorable weather conditions, lengthy tarmac delays that occur in other regions are virtually unheard of here. The size of the regional market for air travel and the absence of a single dominant air carrier in the region result in healthy competition among airlines, so air travelers enjoy some of the lowest average airfares in the country. Air travel is an important contributor to the region’s economic activity. Nearly half of the air travel in the region consists of visitors from other parts of the country and the world traveling here to conduct business, enjoy a vacation or visit friends and relatives. About one-third of air travel to the region is business related. Therefore, any passenger who arrives at or departs from an airport in our region is good for the region as a whole. Spending by passengers who used our airports to visit the region in 2012 contributed nearly $27.4 billion to the regional economy. The money spent by visitors on meals, lodging, entertainment, transportation and other purchases supported nearly 275,000 jobs. As with other modes of transportation, the demand for air travel was impacted heavily by the recession that began in 2007. In 2014, the airports in our region served 91.2 million total passengers, surpassing the previous peaks of 89.4 million in 2007 and 88.7 million in 2000. The demand for air cargo was even more sharply impacted by the recessions of 2001 and 2007. The 2.4 million metric tons of cargo transported through the airports in our region in 2014 remained ten percent below the pre-recession peak of 2.7 million metric tons in each year from 2004–2006 and five percent below year 2000 levels. In addition to its commercial airports, the SCAG region is also home to a large general aviation (GA) system. Included in this segment are airports serving non-commercial corporate jets, single engine planes, helicopters, emergency and firefighting operations, and flight training activity. General aviation airport facilities also act as relievers to commercial airports and provide diversionary locations for commercial planes that require emergency landings. There are more than 40 general aviation airports in the SCAG region, and they are as diverse in size and market area as the commercial facilities. Van Nuys Airport (VNY), the second busiest general aviation facility in the United States, serves several important functions for the region, including serving as the base for many corporate jets. As of May 2015, Van Nuys Airport began offering U.S. Customs and Border Protection services for international general aviation flights to benefit business travelers and reduce airspace congestion. AIRLINE PASSENGER VOLUME 71 91 MILLION IN 1994 MILLION IN 2014 3902 WHERE WE ARE TODAY CONCLUSION Today we face numerous challenges on the road toward greater mobility, a stronger economy and sustainable growth that maintains a high quality of life regionwide. In the Chapter 3, we’ll review some of these challenges. OUR PROGRESS SINCE 2012 TRANSIT Transit service continues to expand throughout the region and the level of service has exceeded pre-recessionary levels—mainly due to a growth in rail service. Significant progress has been made toward completing capital projects for transit, including the Metro Orange Line Extension and the Metro Expo Line. Meanwhile, five major Metro Rail projects are now under construction in Los Angeles County. PASSENGER RAIL Passenger rail is expanding and improving service on several fronts. The Amtrak Pacific Surfliner is now being managed locally by the Los Angeles- San Diego-San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Rail Corridor Agency; Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) completed the Perris Valley Line in early 2016; Metrolink became the first commuter railroad in the nation to implement Positive Train Control and purchase fuel-efficient, low- emission Tier IV locomotives; and the California High-Speed Train is under construction in the Central Valley, and planning and environmental work is underway in our region to the Los Angeles/Anaheim Phase One terminus. Several other capital projects are underway or have been completed, including the Anaheim Regional Intermodal Transportation Center (ARTIC) and the Burbank Bob Hope Airport Regional Intermodal Transportation Center, among others. HIGHWAYS The expansion of highways has slowed considerably over the last decade because of land, financial and environmental constraints. Still, several projects have been completed since 2012 to improve access and close critical gaps and congestion chokepoints in the regional network. These include the Interstate 10 westbound widening in Redlands and Yucaipa, the Interstate 215 Bi-County HOV Project in Riverside and San Bernardino Counties, and a portion of the Interstate 5 South Corridor Project in Los Angeles County (between North Fork Coyote Creek to Marquardt Avenue), among others. REGIONAL HIGH-OCCUPANCY VEHICLE (HOV) AND EXPRESS LANE NETWORK The demands on our region’s highways continue to exceed available capacity during peak periods, but several projects to close HOV gaps have been completed. The result has been 39 more lanes miles of regional HOV lanes on Interstates 5, 405, 10, 215 and 605, on State Routes 57 and 91 and on the West County Connector Project (direct HOV connection between Interstate 405, Interstate 605 and State Route 22) within Orange County. The region is also developing a regional express lane network. Among the milestones: a one-year demonstration of express lanes in Los Angeles County along Interstate 10 and Interstate 110 was made permanent in 2014; and construction has begun on express lanes on State Route 91 extending eastward to Interstate 15 in Riverside County. ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION Our region is making steady progress in encouraging more people to embrace active transportation and more than $650 million in Active Transportation Program investments are underway. Nearly 38 percent of all trips are less than three miles, which is convenient for walking or biking. As a percentage share of all trips, bicycling has increased more than 70 percent since 2007 to 1.12 percent. More than 500 miles of new bikeways have been constructed in the region and safety and encouragement programs are helping people choose walking and biking as options. THE 2012 RTP/SCS WAS THE FIRST REGIONAL PLAN THAT SCAG DEVELOPED WITH A SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY, a new state requirement following the passage of SB 375, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008. The legislation required that land use and transportation planning be integrated to achieve its prescribed greenhouse gas reduction targets and air quality requirements. At its core, the 2012 RTP/SCS envisioned a future in which an abundance of safe and efficient transportation choices provide ready access to jobs, education and healthcare— and the region’s economy, public health and overall quality of life are strong. Since 2012, the region has made considerable progress. Here are some highlights: GOODS MOVEMENT The region continues to make substantial progress toward completing several major capital initiatives to support freight transportation and reducing harmful emissions generated by goods movement sources. Progress since 2012 has included implementation of the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Program (CAAP), reducing diesel particulate matter by 82 percent, nitrogen oxide by 54 percent and sulfur dioxide by 90 percent; and the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Truck Program has led to an 80 percent reduction in port truck emissions. The region has also shown progress in advanced technology for goods movement, including a one-mile Overhead Catenary System (OCS) in the City of Carson. Construction of the Gerald Desmond Bridge has begun. Seventeen out of 71 planned grade separation projects throughout the region have been completed, and another 21 should be completed in 2016. Double tracking of the Union Pacific (UP) Alhambra Subdivision has been initiated. The Colton Crossing, which physically separated two Class I railroads with an elevated 1.4-mile-long overpass that lifts UP trains traveling east-west, was completed in August 2013. SUSTAINABILITY IMPLEMENTATION Since 2012, SCAG’s Sustainability Planning Grant Program has funded 70 planning projects (totaling $10 million) to help local jurisdictions link local land use plans with 2012 RTP/SCS goals. Local jurisdictions have updated outmoded General Plans and zoning codes; completed specific plans for town centers and Transit Oriented Development (TOD); implemented sustainability policies; and adopted municipal climate action plans. Thirty of the 191 cities and two of the six counties in the SCAG region report having updated their General Plans since 2012, and another 42 cities have General Plan updates pending. Fifty-four percent of the cities reporting adopted or pending General Plan updates include planning for Transit Oriented Development (TOD), 55 percent plan to concentrate key destinations, and 76 percent include policies encouraging infill development. Of the counties reporting updates or pending updates to their General Plans, 75 percent include TOD elements, 100 percent encourage infill development, 75 percent promote concentrated destinations, and 75 percent feature policies to address complete communities. To protect water quality, 91 percent of cities have adopted water-related policies and 85 percent have adopted measures to address water quality. To conserve energy, 86 percent of cities have implemented community energy efficiency policies, with 80 percent of those cities implementing municipal energy efficiency policies and 76 percent implementing renewable energy policies. Of the region’s 191 cities, 189 have completed sustainability components, with 184 cities implementing at least ten or more sustainability policies or programs and ten cities implementing 20 or more sustainability policies or programs. This last group includes Pasadena, Pomona and Santa Monica. AFFORDABLE HOUSING The state is offering new opportunities to help regions promote affordable housing. In spring 2015, California’s Affordable Housing Sustainable Communities (AHSC) program awarded its first round of funding to applicants after a competitive grant process. Of $122 million available statewide, $27.5 million was awarded to ten projects in the SCAG region. Eight-hundred forty-two affordable units, including 294 units designated for households with an income of 30 percent or less of the area median income, will be produced with this funding. Meanwhile, Senate Bill 628 (Beall) and Assembly Bill 2 (Alejo), provide jurisdictions with an opportunity to establish a funding source to develop affordable housing and supportive infrastructure and amenities. PUBLIC HEALTH The SCAG region has several ongoing efforts to promote public health. The Los Angeles County Departments of Public Health and the City of Los Angeles Planning Department are developing a Health Atlas that highlights health disparities among neighborhoods. In Riverside County, the Healthy Riverside County Initiative has formed a Healthy City Network to continue to successfully work with the county’s 28 cities to enact Healthy City Resolutions and Health Elements into their General Plans. The County of San Bernardino has recently completed the Community Vital Signs Initiative, which envisions a “county where a commitment to optimizing health and wellness is embedded in all decisions by residents, organizations and government.” ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE Since the adoption of the 2012 RTP/SCS, social equity and environmental justice have become increasingly significant priorities in regional plans. For example, plans to promote active transportation, improve public health, increase access to transit, preserve open space, cut air pollution and more are all evaluated for how well the benefits of these efforts are distributed among all demographic groups. The State of California’s Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) developed a new tool, CalEnviroScreen, which helps to identify areas in the state that have higher levels of environmental vulnerability due to historical rates of toxic exposure and certain social factors. Based on this tool, much of the region can stand to benefit from Cap-and-Trade grants that give priority to communities that are disproportionately impacted. ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 3/7/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!%&'|}ÿ|}ÿ |}ÿ|}ÿ|}ÿ |}ÿ11111511578ImperialCounty Passenger Rail ImprovementsExpress LanesHOV ImprovementsMixed-Flow ImprovementsTransit Capital Improvements!Transit Capital Improvements!Passenger Rail Improvements!Mixed-Flow Improvements!Goods Movement Improvements!HOV ImprovementsNote: Line layers must be separate, as labels are of different colors ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 710 5 15 405 110 420 419 41 430 429 431 428 424 425 426 423 427 434 434 435 434434434434 434 434 434 434 434 434 434 43346 44 45 47 43 48 42 410 49 412 414 416 413 417 415411422 421 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/22/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 ! ! %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 111 115 115 78 Imperial County Passenger Rail Improvements Express Lanes HOV Improvements Mixed-Flow Improvements Transit Capital Improvements !Transit Capital Improvements !Passenger Rail Improvements !Mixed-Flow Improvements !Goods Movement Improvements !HOV Improvements OUR PROGRESS SINCE 2012 Mobility Projects in the SCAG Region ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 710 5 15 405 110 420 419 41 430 429 431 428 424 425 426 423 427 434 434 435 434434434434 434 434 434 434 434 434 434 43346 44 45 47 43 48 42 410 49 412 414 416 413 417 415411422 421 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/22/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 ! ! %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 111 115 115 78 Imperial County Passenger Rail Improvements Express Lanes HOV Improvements Mixed-Flow Improvements Transit Capital Improvements !Transit Capital Improvements !Passenger Rail Improvements !Mixed-Flow Improvements !Goods Movement Improvements !HOV Improvements ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/23/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 ! ! !!!!! !! ! ! ! ! !!! %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 111 115 115 78 Imperial County Passenger Rail Improvements Express Lanes HOV Improvements Mixed-Flow Improvements Transit Capital Improvements !Transit Capital Improvements !Passenger Rail Improvements !Mixed-Flow Improvements !Goods Movement Improvements !HOV Improvements Note: Line layers must be separate, as labels are of different colors ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/23/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 111 115 115 78 Imperial County Passenger Rail Improvements Express Lanes HOV Improvements Mixed-Flow Improvements Transit Capital Improvements !Transit Capital Improvements !Passenger Rail Improvements !Mixed-Flow Improvements !Goods Movement Improvements !HOV Improvements Note: Line layers must be separate, as labels are of different colors ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/23/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 111 115 115 78 Imperial County Passenger Rail Improvements Express Lanes HOV Improvements Mixed-Flow Improvements Transit Capital Improvements !Transit Capital Improvements !Passenger Rail Improvements !Mixed-Flow Improvements !Goods Movement Improvements !HOV Improvements Note: Line layers must be separate, as labels are of different colors ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/23/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 111 115 115 78 Imperial County Passenger Rail Improvements Express Lanes HOV Improvements Mixed-Flow Improvements Transit Capital Improvements !Transit Capital Improvements !Passenger Rail Improvements !Mixed-Flow Improvements !Goods Movement Improvements !HOV Improvements Note: Line layers must be separate, as labels are of different colors ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/23/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 ! !!!!!!!! ! !!!!!! %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 111 115 115 78 Imperial County Passenger Rail Improvements Express Lanes HOV Improvements Mixed-Flow Improvements Transit Capital Improvements !Transit Capital Improvements !Passenger Rail Improvements !Mixed-Flow Improvements !Goods Movement Improvements !HOV Improvements Note: Line layers must be separate, as labels are of different colors ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/23/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 ! ! !!! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 111 115 115 78 Imperial County Passenger Rail Improvements Express Lanes HOV Improvements Mixed-Flow Improvements Transit Capital Improvements !Transit Capital Improvements !Passenger Rail Improvements !Mixed-Flow Improvements !Goods Movement Improvements !HOV Improvements Note: Line layers must be separate, as labels are of different colors ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/23/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 ! ! !!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 111 115 115 78 Imperial County Passenger Rail Improvements Express Lanes HOV Improvements Mixed-Flow Improvements Transit Capital Improvements !Transit Capital Improvements !Passenger Rail Improvements !Mixed-Flow Improvements !Goods Movement Improvements !HOV Improvements Note: Line layers must be separate, as labels are of different colors ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/23/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 111 115 115 78 Imperial County Passenger Rail Improvements Express Lanes HOV Improvements Mixed-Flow Improvements Transit Capital Improvements !Transit Capital Improvements !Passenger Rail Improvements !Mixed-Flow Improvements !Goods Movement Improvements !HOV Improvements Note: Line layers must be separate, as labels are of different colors ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/23/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 111 115 115 78 Imperial County Passenger Rail Improvements Express Lanes HOV Improvements Mixed-Flow Improvements Transit Capital Improvements !Transit Capital Improvements !Passenger Rail Improvements !Mixed-Flow Improvements !Goods Movement Improvements !HOV Improvements Note: Line layers must be separate, as labels are of different colors ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/23/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 111 115 115 78 Imperial County Passenger Rail Improvements Express Lanes HOV Improvements Mixed-Flow Improvements Transit Capital Improvements !Transit Capital Improvements !Passenger Rail Improvements !Mixed-Flow Improvements !Goods Movement Improvements !HOV Improvements Note: Line layers must be separate, as labels are of different colors ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/23/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 ! ! !!!! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 111 115 115 78 Imperial County Passenger Rail Improvements Express Lanes HOV Improvements Mixed-Flow Improvements Transit Capital Improvements !Transit Capital Improvements !Passenger Rail Improvements !Mixed-Flow Improvements !Goods Movement Improvements !HOV Improvements Note: Line layers must be separate, as labels are of different colors ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/23/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 111 115 115 78 Imperial County Passenger Rail Improvements Express Lanes HOV Improvements Mixed-Flow Improvements Transit Capital Improvements !Transit Capital Improvements !Passenger Rail Improvements !Mixed-Flow Improvements !Goods Movement Improvements !HOV Improvements Note: Line layers must be separate, as labels are of different colors ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/23/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 111 115 115 78 Imperial County Passenger Rail Improvements Express Lanes HOV Improvements Mixed-Flow Improvements Transit Capital Improvements !Transit Capital Improvements !Passenger Rail Improvements !Mixed-Flow Improvements !Goods Movement Improvements !HOV Improvements Note: Line layers must be separate, as labels are of different colors ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 °0 7 143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/23/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 111 115 115 78 Imperial County Passenger Rail Improvements Express Lanes HOV Improvements Mixed-Flow Improvements Transit Capital Improvements !Transit Capital Improvements !Passenger Rail Improvements !Mixed-Flow Improvements !Goods Movement Improvements !HOV Improvements Note: Line layers must be separate, as labels are of different colors 21 22 36 36 36 36 36 36 37 36 36 36 14 20 17 26 27 23 28 25 24 11 16 1 8 6 9 5 3 2 4 10 7 13 1512 29 30 32 31 33 34 19 18 36 36 I-5 South Corridor One mixed-flow lane on I-5 from OC line to I-605 (currently in construction, however portion between North Fork Coyote Creek to Marquardt Avenue is complete). I-215 Central One mixed-flow lane in each direction between Scott Road and Nuevo Road. I-215 South One mixed-flow lane in each direction between Murrieta Hot Springs Road and Scott Road. I-10 Widening One westbound mixed flow lane on I-10 between Live Oak Canyon Road in Yucaipa and Ford Street in Redlands. State Route 57 Widening (Northern Segment) One northbound mixed-flow lane on SR-57 between Orangethorpe Avenue and Lambert Road. State Route 57 Widening (Southern Segment) One northbound mixed-flow lane on SR-57 between Katella Avenue and Lincoln Avenue. SR-91 Lane Addition (Eastern Segment) One mixed-flow lane on SR-91 between SR-241 and SR-71. SR-91 Lane Addition (Western Segment) One westbound mixed-flow lane on SR-91 between SR-57 and I-5. SR-91 Lane Extension and Reconstruction Addition of a Tustin Avenue exit bypass lane, reconstructing the auxiliary lane and modifying the number one and two lanes of the connector to serve as two general purpose lanes that merge into one general purpose lane just west of Tustin Avenue off- ramp. SR-138 Corridor Improvements Lane widening on SR-138 between Avenue T and SR-18. I-405 Sepulveda Pass Improvements Addition of northbound HOV lane on I-405 between I-10 and US-101. I-10 HOV Lane (Phase I) Addition of HOV lane on I-10 between I-605 and Puente Avenue as permanent facility. SR-91 HOV Lane Addition of HOV lane on SR-91 from Adams Street to SR-60/I-215 Interchange. US-101 HOV Lane Addition of HOV lane on US-101 from Mobil Pier Road to Casitas Pass Road. I-215 Bi-County HOV Gap Closure Addition of HOV lane on I-215 from Orange Show Road to SR-91/SR-60 Interchange. West County Connector Direct HOV connector between I-405/I-605/SR-22. I-5 HOV Lane Addition of HOV lane on I-5 from Hollywood Way to SR-118. I-5 South Corridor Addition of HOV lane on I-5 from OC line to I-605 (currently in construction, however portion between North Fork Coyote Creek to Marquardt Avenue is complete). I-5/SR-14 HOV Connector Addition of HOV connector between I-5 and SR-14. SR-170/I-5 HOV Connector Addition of HOV connector between SR-170 and I-5. I-110 Express Lanes Conversion of the I-110 Harbor Transitway HOV lanes (Harbor Gateway Transit Center to Adams Blvd.) to permanent Express Lanes. I-10 Express Lanes Conversion of the I-10 El Monte Busway HOV lanes (I-605 to Alameda St.) to permanent Express Lanes. Anaheim Regional Intermodal Transportation Center (ARTIC) An Intermodal transportation center in Orange County serving Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) buses and various intercity buses, as well as Metrolink and the Amtrak Pacific Surfliner. Burbank Bob Hope Airport Regional Intermodal Transportation Center A multimodal transportation center which includes a consolidated rental car center, bike storage and a bus transit center. A pedestrian bridge to the existing Amtrak and Metrolink station is in the planning stage. Downtown San Bernardino Transit Center and Metrolink Extension One-mile Metrolink extension to downtown San Bernardino, from the previous terminus at the Santa Fe Depot. This multimodal center serves Metrolink, sbX (bus rapid transit), the future Redlands Rail and local Omnitrans bus lines. Vincent Grade/Acton Siding and Platform Adds significant capacity to the northern portion of the Antelope Valley Line, which is mostly single track. Fullerton Metrolink Station Parking Structure Construction of a parking structure providing an additional 814 parking spaces serving Metrolink and OCTA patrons. Metrolink Perris Valley Line A 24-mile extension of existing Metrolink service from downtown Riverside to south Perris, with four new stations constructed at Riverside Hunter Park, Moreno Valley/March Field, Downtown Perris and South Perris. Metro Orange Line Extension A four-mile northward extension of the Metro Orange Line from Canoga Station to the Chatsworth Station. Metro Exposition Line An 8.6 mile light rail corridor connecting Downtown LA and Culver City, including ten new light rail stations. Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Phase 2A An 11.5-mile light rail extension between Pasadena and Azusa serving six new stations. Omnitrans E Street sbX A 16-mile bus rapid transit project including 6-miles of dedicated bus lanes on E Street, providing service between California State University San Bernardino and the City of Loma Linda. OCTA Bravo! Route 543 A new 12-mile limited-stop bus service along Harbor Boulevard, from the Fullerton Transportation Center through the cities of Anaheim, Garden Grove, Santa Ana and terminating at MacArthur Boulevard in Costa Mesa. The Brawley Transit Transfer Center Transit transfer station in Imperial County serving various Imperial Valley Transit routes including the new Gold Line circulator shuttle. SunLine Transit Administrative Facility New SunLine Transit administrative building in Coachella Valley. Grade Separations Various grade separation improvements throughout the region. Colton Crossing A rail to rail grade separation project that physically separated two Class I mainline rail tracks with an elevated 1.4 mile-long overpass that lifts UP trains traveling east-west. This project removed the chokepoint that existed where the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) mainline crossed UP tracks in Colton. 1 3 5 7 9 6 8 10 11 12 13 14 18 16 20 27 29 33 2 4 15 19 17 21 26 22 23 24 25 28 30 34 31 35 32 36 37 ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 °07143.5 Miles O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\MobilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 2/23/2016Map Title: Completed Mobility Projects as of 2012 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!%&'|}ÿ|}ÿ|}ÿ|}ÿ|}ÿ|}ÿ11111511578ImperialCountyPassenger Rail ImprovementsExpress LanesHOV ImprovementsMixed-Flow ImprovementsTransit Capital Improvements!Transit Capital Improvements!Passenger Rail Improvements!Mixed-Flow Improvements!Goods Movement Improvements!HOV ImprovementsNote: Line layers must be separate, as labels are of different colors 35 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 444 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 91 14 60 126 71 40 86 78 57 60 73 241 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\SustainabilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 11/19/2015Map Title: Sustainability Projects Since 2012 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444486111 787811511598987 1868ImperialCounty °0 10 205 Miles OUR PROGRESS SINCE 2012 Sustainability Planning Grant Projects in the SCAG Region 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 444 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 91 14 60 126 71 40 86 78 57 60 73 241 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\SustainabilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 11/19/2015Map Title: Sustainability Projects Since 2012 4 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4444 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 44 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 44 44 4444 4 44 4 4 444 4 44 4 4 86 111 78 78 115 115 98 987 1868 Imperial County °0 10 205 Miles 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 444 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 91 14 60 126 71 40 86 78 57 60 73 241 101 15 215 10 15 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 San BernardinoCounty Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\SustainabilityProjectsInTheSCAGregion.mxd | Date: 11/19/2015Map Title: Sustainability Projects Since 2012 4 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4444 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 44 44 4 4 4 4 4 44 4 4 4 44 4444 4 44 4 4 444 4 44 4 4 86 111 78 78 115 115 98 987 1868 Imperial County °0 10 205 Miles 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 68 VENTURA COUNTY Ventura County Connecting Newbury Park Multi-Use Pathway Plan LOS ANGELES COUNTY Las Virgenes-Malibu Council of Governments Multi-Jurisdictional Regional Bicycle Plan Los Angeles Van Nuys & Boyle Heights Modified Parking Requirements Los Angeles Northeast San Fernando Sustainability & Prosperity Strategy Lancaster Complete Streets Master Plan Palmdale Avenue Q Feasibility Study Burbank Mixed-Use Development Standards La Cañada Flintridge Climate Action Plan Los Angeles Hollywood Central Park Glendale Space 134 Pasadena Form-Based Street Design Guidelines Pasadena GHG Emission Reduction Evaluation Protocol Los Angeles CEQA Streamlining Assessment Los Angeles Park 101 District Los Angeles Bicycle Plan Performance Evaluation Hermosa Beach Carbon Neutral Plan South Bay Bicycle Coalition Mini-Corral Plan South Bay COG Neighborhood-Oriented Development Graphics Hawthorne Crenshaw Station Area Active Transportation Plan Lynwood Safe and Healthy Community Element South Gate Gateway District/Eco Rapid Transit Station Specific Plan Bell General Plan Update Pico Rivera Kruse Rd. Open Space Study West Covina Downtown Central Business District San Dimas Downtown Specific Plan Rancho Palos Verdes/Los Angeles Western Ave. Corridor Design Implementation Guidellines Long Beach Willow Springs Wetland Habitat Creation Plan Paramount/Bellflower Regional Bicycle Connectivity - West Santa Ana Branch Corridor ORANGE COUNTY Seal Beach Climate Action Plan Stanton Green Planning Academy Anaheim Bicycle Master Plan Update Fullerton East Wilshire Avenue Bicycle Boulevard Orange County Parks OC Bicycle Loop Placentia General Plan/Sustainability Element & Development Code Westminster General Plan Update - Circulation Element Garden Grove Re:IMAGINE Pedals & Feet Orange County “From Orange to Green” Zoning Code Update Santa Ana Complete Streets Plan Huntington Beach Neighborhood Electric Vehicle Plan Fountain Valley Euclid/I-405 Overlay Zone Costa Mesa Implementation Plan for Multi-Purpose Trails Dana Point General Plan Update SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY Chino Hills Climate Action Plan and Implementation Strategy Chino Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan Rancho Cucamonga Healthy RC Sustainability Action Plan Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station and TOD Feasibility Report San Bernardino Bloomington Area Valley Blvd. Specific Plan Health & Wellness Element SANBAG Climate Action Plan Implementation Tools SANBAG Countywide Bicycle Route Mobile Application SANBAG Countywide Complete Streets Strategy and Safe Routes to School Study Yucaipa College Village/Greater Dunlap Neighborhood Sustainable Community Big Bear Lake Rathbun Corridor Sustainability Plan RIVERSIDE COUNTY Eastvale Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plan WRCOG Public Health: Implementing the Sustainability Framework WRCOG Land Use, Transportation and Water Quality Planning Framework WRCOG Climate Action Plan Implementation Riverside Restorative Growthprint Moreno Valley Nason St. Corridor Plan Calimesa Wildwood & Calimesa Creek Trail Master Plan Beaumont Climate Action Plan Hemet Downtown Specific Plan Palm Springs Urban Forestry Initiative Palm Springs Sustainablility Master Plan Update Indio General Plan Sustainability & Mobility Elements Cathedral City General Plan Update - Sustainability CVAG CV Link Health Impact Assessment Coachella La Plaza East Urban Development Plan IMPERIAL COUNTY Imperial County Transportation Commission Safe Routes to School Plan 18 20 191 3 5 7 9 6 8 10 11 12 13 14 16 2 4 15 17 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 03 CHAPTER 3 HIGHLIGHTS RECESSION, RECOVERY AND CURRENT ECONOMIC CHALLENGES 49 CURRENT DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS 49 FINANCING TRANSPORTATION 50 PRESERVING OUR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM 53 MOVING GOODS EFFICIENTLY IN A HUGE AND COMPLEX REGION 53 HOUSING AFFORDABILITY, GENTRIFICATION AND DISPLACEMENT 55 IMPROVING PUBLIC HEALTH 59 CONFRONTING A CHANGING ENVIRONMENT 59 CONCLUSION 61 The challenges facing our region are formidable and require that we strategically plan now. This chapter explores some of our more pressing challenges as we head toward 2040. CHALLENGES IN A CHANGING REGION DEMOGRAPHICSFOCUS Average Annual Population Growth Rate Changes in Ethnic Composition of Population Source: CA DOF, CA EDD, SCAG PO P U L A T I O N 18 . 3 MI L L I O N 22 . 1 MI L L I O N 5. 9 MI L L I O N 7. 4 MI L L I O N HO U S E H O L D S 7. 4 MI L L I O N 9. 9 MI L L I O N EM P L O Y M E N T GROWTH PROJECTIONS 2012 & 2040 More Baby Boomers Will Age & Retire AGE GROUP UNDER 15 AGE GROUP 15–64 AGE GROUP 65+ 2040 18% 4 MILLION 64% 14.1 MILLION 18% 4 MILLION 2010 21% 3.8 MILLION 68% 12.3 MILLION 11% 2 MILLION 1990 23% 3.4 MILLION 67% 9.9 MILLION 9% 1.4 MILLION 1980 22% 2.5 MILLION 67% 7.7 MILLION 11% 1.2 MILLION Source: US Census Bureau, SCAG * Non-Hispanic | Source: US Census Bureau, SCAG 15% ASIAN & OTHERS* 19% ASIAN & OTHERS* 7% AFRICAN AMERICAN* 5% AFRICAN AMERICAN* 45% HISPANIC 53% HISPANIC 34% WHITE* 22% WHITE* 20 1 0 20 4 0 2.6% 2.6% 1.0%0.7% 0.9% 0.8% 1980 to 1990 1990 to 2000 2000 to 2010 2010 to 2015 2015 to 2040 CALIFORNIA UNITED STATES SCAG REGION Source: US Census Bureau, CA DOF, SCAG Due to rounding total may not be 100 percent 4903 CHALLENGES IN A CHANGING REGION RECESSION, RECOVERY AND CURRENT ECONOMIC CHALLENGES The Great Recession, which lasted from December 2007 through June 2009, caused massive job losses and had a devastating impact on our region’s economic well-being and population growth. Now that the recession is behind us and our region has experienced a decline in unemployment and housing foreclosures, challenges still remain. Though the region’s employment levels are now where they were in 2007, our population continues to grow slowly. Also, the region’s median household income (adjusted for inflation) has declined as wages have stagnated for a larger population base. This is because of not only the lack of high income jobs for the median household, but the inability to access higher paying jobs that are available but require higher education and/or technical skills. An increase in the number of low-paying jobs, and the resulting lower income, has contributed to more people slipping into poverty. The health of Southern California’s economy depends on the well-being of businesses and households, and a strong and efficient regional transportation system can go a long way in helping businesses and households succeed. An efficient transportation system can lead to an increase in productivity, personal income and ultimately public tax revenues. Businesses depend on a reliable transportation network to create products and services that reach their customers at a reasonable cost. Households depend on an integrated, accessible and dependable transportation network to provide reliable access to education, jobs, shopping and recreational activities. A sustainable, time- efficient and cost-effective transportation system can help neighborhood businesses compete more effectively with those in neighboring jurisdictions. Relieving congestion contributes greatly to future employment growth. For our region to remain a competitor in the global economy, SCAG must continue to invest strategically in transportation infrastructure, while ensuring that it obtains the maximum return on those investments. CURRENT DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS The six counties that comprise our region have experienced significant demographic changes and they can expect even more changes over the next 25 years. The overall population will continue to grow more slowly than in the past, and it will also change in terms of its age distribution and racial and ethnic breakdown. Where people choose to live will also change. More people in our region will increase the demands on our already strained transportation system, as well as on available land for development. According to the California Department of Finance, our region is now home to 18.9 million people, or about 5.9 percent of the U.S. population and 48.3 percent of California’s population. The region is the second-largest metropolitan area in the country, after the New York metropolitan area. If it were a state, our region would rank fifth in the U.S. in terms of the size of its population, just behind New York and ahead of Illinois. By 2040, the region’s population is expected to grow by more than 20 percent to 22 million people—an increase of 3.8 million people. Importantly, we expect the region to grow differently than in the past. Before 1990, population growth was driven largely by both a natural increase and migration. That is, people moved into Southern California from other states and countries and there was additional population growth due to a net increase in the existing population (births minus deaths). Since 1990, however, any gains from immigration have been offset by domestic migration losses and Southern California’s population growth has been fueled mostly by a natural increase (more births than deaths)—despite declining fertility rates. This continuing trend is expected to account for most of the Southern California’s future population growth by 2040. As we approach the middle of the century, Southern California’s population will still remain racially and ethnically diverse. Currently, we are 47 percent Hispanic, 31 percent non-Hispanic White, 16 percent non-Hispanic Asian/ Other and six percent non-Hispanic African American. In particular, the rapid growth of the region’s Hispanic population is expected to continue; by 2040 it is projected that 53 percent of the region’s residents will be Hispanic. The region’s non-Hispanic Asian/Other population is also expected to increase, growing to 19 percent of the population. Notably, the median age of our region’s overall population is projected to rise, with more older people throughout Southern California as we approach the middle of the century. As the Baby Boomer generation continues to age, our region will experience a significant increase in its senior population—a trend expected nationwide. Today, people who are 65 and older represent around 12 percent of the region’s total population. But by 2040, the number of seniors will increase to 18 percent (i.e., nearly one in five people in our region). This demographic shift will have major impacts on the locations and types of housing we build and our plans for transportation. This demographic group of seniors covers a wide range of needs; residents in their late sixties and early seventies will have different needs than those in their eighties and nineties. Nonetheless, a key challenge for the region will be to help seniors maintain their independence in their homes and communities. 50 2016 RTP/SCS As the number and share of seniors are projected to increase, the percentage share of younger people of working age is expected to fall. The ratio of people older than 65 to people of working age (15 to 64) is expected to increase to 28 seniors per 100 working age residents by 2040—up from 16 in 2010. This means that our region could face a labor shortage and a subsequent reduction in tax revenues. As we plan for the future and face these challenges, we also expect an interesting convergence of interests between two distinct population groups— namely Millennials, who today range in age from 20 to 35, and aging Baby Boomers, who range in age from 51 to 70. Millennials represent 22.4 percent of our region’s total population and rely less on automobiles than have previous generations; they are less apt to acquire drivers licenses, drive fewer miles and conduct fewer overall trips. Research also shows that Millennials often prefer to live in denser, mixed-use urban areas well served by transit, rather than decentralized suburban areas. This trend could explain why there has been increasing demand for new multifamily housing.1 Millennials also are more likely than other groups to embrace a range of mobility options, including shared cars, biking, transit and walking. These evolving preferences for transportation and housing are significant because Millennials will account for a large part of Southern California’s overall population in 2040. In the near term, their housing and transportation preferences, when combined with the need of Baby Boomers to maintain their independence, could significantly change how Southern California develops. FINANCING TRANSPORTATION Perhaps our most critical challenge is securing funds for a transportation system that promotes a more sustainable future. The cost of a multimodal transportation system that will serve the region’s projected growth in population, employment and demand for travel surpasses the projected revenues expected from the gas tax—our historic source of transportation funding. The purchasing power of our gas tax revenues is decreasing and will continue on a downward trajectory as tax rates (both state and federal) have not been adjusted in more 1 Dutzik, T., Inglis, J., & Baxandall, Ph.D., P. (2014). Millennials in Motion: Changing Travel Habits of Young Americans and the Implications for Public Policy. U.S. PIRG Education Fund. than two decades while transportation costs escalate, fuel efficiency improves and the number of alternative-fuel vehicles continues to grow. FIGURE 3.1 highlights the decline in gas tax revenues, in relation to the growing population and demand for travel. To backfill limited state and federal gas tax revenues, our region has continued to rely on local revenues to meet transportation needs. In fact, 71 percent of SCAG’s core revenues are local revenues. Seven sales tax measures have been adopted throughout the region since the 1980s, so the burden of raising tax dollars has shifted significantly to local agencies. In reality, we need a stronger state and federal commitment to raising tax dollars for the Southern California transportation system—given its prominence and importance to the state and national economy, particularly when it comes to the movement of goods. Our region’s transportation system should be able to rely on more consistent tax revenues raised at all levels of government. Source: Caltrans, California Department of Finance, California State Board of Equalization, White House Office of Management and Budget 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 1970 1990 2010 2030 2050 Population Vehicles Miles Traveled Gas Tax Revenues (indexed to 1970) FIGURE 3.1 CALIFORNIA POPULATION, TRAVEL AND GAS TAX REVENUE TRENDS STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM PRESERVATION TOTAL NEEDS = $65.8 EXISTING FUNDS = $26.7 GAP = $39.0 BILLION BILLION BILLION Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding. 5103 CHALLENGES IN A CHANGING REGION POPULATION HOUSEHOLDS EMPLOYMENT REGION 2012 2020 2035 2040 2012 2020 2035 2040 2012 2020 2035 2040 IMPERIAL 180,000 234,000 272,000 282,000 49,000 72,000 89,000 92,000 59,000 102,000 121,000 125,000 LOS ANGELES 9,923,000 10,326,000 11,145,000 11,514,000 3,257,000 3,494,000 3,809,000 3,946,000 4,246,000 4,662,000 5,062,000 5,226,000 ORANGE 3,072,000 3,271,000 3,431,000 3,461,000 999,000 1,075,000 1,135,000 1,152,000 1,526,000 1,730,000 1,870,000 1,899,000 RIVERSIDE 2,245,000 2,480,000 3,055,000 3,183,000 694,000 802,000 1,009,000 1,055,000 617,000 849,000 1,112,000 1,175,000 SAN BERNARDINO 2,068,000 2,197,000 2,638,000 2,731,000 615,000 687,000 825,000 854,000 659,000 789,000 998,000 1,028,000 VENTURA 835,000 886,000 945,000 966,000 269,000 285,000 306,000 312,000 332,000 375,000 409,000 420,000 SCAG 18,322,000 19,395,000 21,486,000 22,138,000 5,885,000 6,415,000 7,172,000 7,412,000 7,440,000 8,507,000 9,572,000 9,872,000 Source: SCAG Note: All figures are rounded to the nearest 1,000. The County numbers may not sum to the region total due to rounding. TABLE 3.1 PROPOSED 2016–2040 RTP/SCS GROWTH FORECAST Bumpy Roads Ahead Study & TRIP, A National Transportation Research Group, 2013 $832LOS ANGELES/ ORANGE COUNTY $738HEMET $664TEMECULA/MURRIETA $638INLAND EMPIRE The State of Disrepair A Bumpy & Costly Ride Annual Vehicle Maintenance Costs by Metropolitan Area Due to Poor Road Conditions We Will Pay More–If We Do Not Fix-it-First EACH $1 SPENT HERE... Seals, Thin Overlays (Preventive Maintenance) SURFACE DAMAGE 4–7 Years DELAYS SPENDING $3 HERE... Thicker Overlays MINOR DAMAGE 6–7 Years DELAYS SPENDING $8 HERE... Rehabilitation/Reconstruction MAJOR DAMAGE 10+ Years Source: Federal Highway Administration National Bridge Inventory & 2014 State Highway Operation & Protection Program Source: 2013 State of the Pavement Report of all proposed expenditures through 2040 are allocated to highway & arterial system operations & maintenance in the 2016 RTP/SCS MISSION VIEJO$542 VENTURA COUNTY$534 INDIO-CATHEDRALCITY- PALM SPRINGS$501 LANCASTER-PALMDALE$421 BILLION $103OF HIGHWAYS ARE DISTRESSED 17% OF BRIDGES RATED AS STRUCTURALLY DEFICIENT 10% OF BRIDGES RATED AS FUNCTIONALLY OBSOLETE 18% OF LOCAL ROADS IN FAILED CONDITION IN 2012 6% OF LOCAL ROADS WILL BE IN FAILED CONDITION IN 2022 UNDER CURRENT (2012) FUNDING 25% IMPORTANCE OF SYSTEM PRESERVATIONFOCUS 5303 CHALLENGES IN A CHANGING REGION PRESERVING OUR TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM Southern California’s transportation system is in an unfortunate state of disrepair due to decades of underinvestment. Quite simply, investments to preserve the system have not kept pace with the demands placed on it. The inevitable consequence of this deferred maintenance is poor road pavement, which is particularly evident on our highways and local arterials. The rate of deterioration is expected to accelerate significantly as maintenance continues to be deferred. And as maintenance is deferred, the cost of bringing these assets back to a state of good repair is projected to grow exponentially. SCAG estimates that the cost to maintain our transportation system at current conditions, which is far from ideal, will be in the tens of billions of dollars beyond what is currently committed. For instance, the gap between needs and existing funding for the State Highway System through 2040 is now estimated at $39.0 billion. It should be noted that Caltrans is the owner and operator of the State Highway System and is responsible for funding the operation and maintenance of state highways, while local jurisdictions are responsible for the funding of operations and maintenance of local arterials. Moving forward, the region needs to continue to “Fix-it-First” as a top priority— that is, focusing the necessary funds on preserving the existing transportation network while strategic investments are made in system expansions. Failing to adequately invest in the preservation of Southern California’s roads, highways, bridges, railways, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and transit infrastructure will only lead to further deterioration, which has the potential to worsen our congestion challenges. In addition, potholes and other imperfections in the roadway come with real costs to motorists, estimated by one study at more than $700 per household each year. The region’s transportation system represents billions of dollars of investments that must be protected in order to serve current and future generations. The loss of even a small fraction of these assets could significantly compromise the region’s overall mobility. Preservation of the region’s transit system, for example, is more important than ever as Baby Boomers, one of the fastest growing groups requiring transportation services, age. The region needs to plan for this projected increase in seniors with increased funding for transit and paratransit maintenance and preservation. Preserving infrastructure that encourages active transportation, such as walking and biking, is also important for maintaining mobility for those unable or uninterested in driving. It is also a cost-effective way to increase the number of roadway users without increasing roadway congestion. MOVING GOODS EFFICIENTLY IN A HUGE AND COMPLEX REGION The smooth and efficient movement of goods is critical to our regional economy, particularly as our region continues to recover from the recession. A number of key trends and drivers are expected to impact our region’s goods movement system. Some of these, along with associated challenges, are highlighted below. Population and Employment Growth: The regional population and rate of employment in our region are key indicators of economic health, and both are projected to grow rapidly over the next two decades. Our region’s population growth is expected to fuel consumer demand for products and the goods movement services that provide them. This increased demand will drive stronger growth in freight traffic on already constrained highways and rail lines. Truck volumes on many key corridors are anticipated to grow substantially, as shown in EXHIBIT 3.1. Truck and auto delays will increase, as will truck- involved accidents. Levels of harmful emissions also will rise. The increase in rail volumes is expected to exacerbate vehicle hours of delay at rail and highway crossings.2 Moreover, growing demand for commuter rail services on rail lines owned by the freight railroads will create additional capacity challenges. Continued Growth in International Trade: The San Pedro Bay Ports anticipate cargo volumes to grow to 36 million containers by 2040—despite increasing competition with other North American ports, the expansion of the Panama Canal and more recent delays at port terminals due to labor negotiations. Port of Hueneme in Ventura County is also positioned to grow as a preferred port for specialized cargo such as automobiles, break bulk and military cargo. This growth will place further demands on marine terminal facilities, highway connections and rail intermodal terminals. If port-related rail traffic and commuter demands are to be met, mainline rail capacity improvements will be required as well. Meanwhile, mitigating the impacts of increased train traffic in communities will continue to be a challenge. Logistics Epicenter: Southern California is the nation’s epicenter for distribution and logistics activity, and it will continue to be a significant source of well- paying jobs in the region through 2040. The region has close to 1.2 billion square feet of facility space for warehousing, distribution, cold storage and truck terminals.2 Nearly 1.1 billion square feet of this space is occupied. By 2040, 2 CoStar Realty Information, Inc. www.costar.com, based on November 2014 data downloads. Exhibit 3.1 titLE Alhambra Arcadia Artesia Azusa Baldwin Park Bell Bell Gardens Bellflower Bradbury Carson Cerritos Claremont Commerce Compton Covina Cudahy Diamond Bar Downey Duarte El Monte Glendale Glendora Hawaiian Gardens Huntington Park Industry Irwindale La Habra Heights La Mirada La Puente La Verne Lakewood Los Angeles Lynwood Maywood Monrovia Montebello Monterey Park Norwalk Paramount Pasadena Pico Rivera Pomona Rosemead San Dimas San Gabriel San Marino Santa Fe Springs Sierra Madre Signal Hill South El Monte South Gate South Pasadena Temple City Vernon Walnut West Covina Whittier Long Beach Chino Chino Hills Fontana Montclair Ontario Rancho CucamongaUpland Eastvale Corona Jurupa Valley Norco Anaheim Brea Buena Park Cypress Fountain Valley Fullerton Garden Grove Huntington Beach Irvine La Habra La Palma Los Alamitos Orange Placentia Santa Ana Seal Beach Stanton Tustin Villa Park Westminster Yorba Linda 60 71 57 110 134 91 22 134 101 210 605 710 15 5 10 405 210 210 San BernardinoCounty Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County (Source: SCAG) O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Exhibit3-1_RisingTruckVolumesOnKeyTruckCorridors(2012and2040Baseline).mxd | Date: 11/19/2015Rising Truck Volumes on Key Truck Corridors (2012 and 2040 Baseline) °0 1 20.5 Miles 2012 I 2040 DAILY TRUCKS (BIDIRECTIONAL) Numbers in thousands (rounded) 41 68 28 44 3418 3620 3218 3322 2919 2922 3717 3623 3927 25 2617 34 2515 2317 EXHIBIT 3.1 RISING TRUCK VOLUMES ON KEY TRUCK CORRIDORS (2012 AND 2040 BASELINE) 5503 CHALLENGES IN A CHANGING REGION the region may experience a shortfall of more than 527 million square feet of warehouse space, relative to demand.3 Air Quality Issues: Goods movement emissions contribute to regional air pollution problems (e.g., NOx and PM 2.5) and pose public health challenges. Emissions generated by the movement of goods are being reduced through efforts such as the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan, as well as regulations such as the statewide Heavy Duty Truck and Bus Rule. But these reductions alone are unlikely to be sufficient to meet regional air quality goals. Currently, much of the SCAG region does not meet federal ozone and fine particulate air quality standards as mandated by the federal Clean Air Act. The South Coast Air Basin has a deadline to reduce ozone concentrations to 80 parts per billion (ppb) by 2023 under the revoked 1997 eight-hour ozone standards, and further down to 75 ppb by 2031 under the current 2008 eight- hour ozone standards. Moreover, new federal ozone standards are expected to be finalized by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the 2015/2016 time frame, with an expected new attainment deadline of 2037. This means that NOx emissions in the South Coast Air Basin must be reduced 65 percent by 2023 and 75 percent (beyond projected 2023 emissions) by 2032 in order to attain federal ozone standards.4 Additional attainment deadlines are in effect for PM 2.5. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is also a priority, as determined by the landmark California legislation Assembly Bill 32 and Senate Bill 375, and the more recent Executive Order B-30-15 signed by Governor Brown in April 2015. Several state measures have been implemented to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, with some implications for freight. These include the Low Carbon Fuel Standard and the inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions from transportation fuels under the California’s Cap-and-Trade Program. Additional state programs are under development as part of the state’s Sustainable Freight Strategy (SFS). 3 Industrial Warehousing in the SCAG Region Study, Task 4 Warehousing Demand Forecast. 4 Preliminary Draft AQMD Air Quality Management Plan White Paper, Goods Movement, June 2015. HOUSING AFFORDABILITY, GENTRIFICATION AND DISPLACEMENT The cost of housing in Southern California is among the highest in the nation. Across our region, home prices and rents continue to rise, and the region continues to experience a shortage of affordable housing. The California Association of Realtors’ (CAR) affordability index, which measures the percentage of households that can afford to purchase a median priced home in the state, remains around 35 percent for the SCAG region. Nearly 55 percent of renters and 45 percent of homeowners spend more than 30 percent of their income on rent or mortgage payments. Affordability is becoming a significant issue in many communities, particularly in urban areas after the implementation of a new rail line, transit station or other major public investment. Housing unaffordability can undermine the overall goals of the RTP/SCS because it can contribute to suburban sprawl, longer job commutes and higher greenhouse gas emissions. As wealthier “outsiders” move into established communities, the increased demand for housing and business/retail space can lead to escalating costs for residential and commercial real estate. Many traditionally low-income, urban core communities at risk for gentrification are seeing dramatic changes in housing, retail stores, schools and other neighborhood amenities. The region’s overall affordability issues are particularly troubling because the region has a disproportionately high concentration of low-income and minority populations that are unemployed, live under the poverty line, have lower educational attainment, and live in close proximity to environmentally stressed areas. The region accounts for 67 percent of Californians who live in disadvantaged communities, as defined by Senate Bill 535, which requires investment in disadvantaged communities from California’s Cap-and-Trade revenues. This represents more than 6.36 million people. Investments in transportation and other public infrastructure, affordable housing, economic development and job creation can help these communities in need. As our region builds communities that are more compact and more transit- oriented, regional greenhouse gas emissions are anticipated to decline and residents from a variety of income levels will continue to make housing choices that allow them to use an increasing number of mobility options. The overall quality of life is expected to increase for many people. Transit investments and strategies will be most effective if coordinated with land use strategies, ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 91 14 60 71 40 86 57 60 73 241 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Peak Day Train Volume by Segment.mxd | Date: 2/11/2016Map Title: Regional Rail Segments and Grade Separations 86 111 787811511598987 1868ImperialCounty Grade Separation Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015):!Complete!Planned & Under ConstructionRail Network (Incl. Commuter & Freight)W Colton to SilverwoodSan Bernardino to SilverwoodBNSF_San_Bernardino_SubdivisionBNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Atwood_W_RiversideBNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Hobart_FullertonPomona to W ColtonYuma Junction to PomonaEast LA to PomonaUP_Yuma_Subdivision °0 5 102.5 Miles PEAK DAY TRAIN VOLUME BY SEGMENT (2012 to 2040) ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 91 14 60 71 40 86 57 60 73 241 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Peak Day Train Volume by Segment.mxd | Date: 2/11/2016Map Title: Regional Rail Segments and Grade Separations 86 111 78 78 115 115 98 987 1868 Imperial County Grade Separation Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015): !Complete !Planned & Under Construction Rail Network (Incl. Commuter & Freight) W Colton to Silverwood San Bernardino to Silverwood BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Atwood_W_Riverside BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Hobart_Fullerton Pomona to W Colton Yuma Junction to Pomona East LA to Pomona UP_Yuma_Subdivision °0 5 102.5 Miles ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 91 14 60 71 40 86 57 60 73 241 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Peak Day Train Volume by Segment.mxd | Date: 2/11/2016Map Title: Regional Rail Segments and Grade Separations 86 111 78 78 115 115 98 987 1868 Imperial County Grade Separation Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015): !Complete !Planned & Under Construction Rail Network (Incl. Commuter & Freight) W Colton to Silverwood San Bernardino to Silverwood BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Atwood_W_Riverside BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Hobart_Fullerton Pomona to W Colton Yuma Junction to Pomona East LA to Pomona UP_Yuma_Subdivision °0 5 102.5 Miles LEGEND 27 40 62 91 2012 2040 PASSENGERTRAINS PER DAY FREIGHTTRAINS PER DAY 2012 2040 BNSF San Bernardino Subdivision Atwood-W. Riverside ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 91 14 60 71 40 86 57 60 73 241 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Peak Day Train Volume by Segment.mxd | Date: 2/11/2016Map Title: Regional Rail Segments and Grade Separations 86 111 78 78 115 115 98 987 1868 Imperial County Grade Separation Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015): !Complete !Planned & Under Construction Rail Network (Incl. Commuter & Freight) W Colton to Silverwood San Bernardino to Silverwood BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Atwood_W_Riverside BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Hobart_Fullerton Pomona to W Colton Yuma Junction to Pomona East LA to Pomona UP_Yuma_Subdivision °05 102.5 Miles 1 40 2 95 2012 2040 PASSENGERTRAINS PER DAY FREIGHTTRAINS PER DAY 2012 2040 UPRR Yuma Subdivision Colton - Indio ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 91 14 60 71 40 86 57 60 73 241 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Peak Day Train Volume by Segment.mxd | Date: 2/11/2016Map Title: Regional Rail Segments and Grade Separations 861117878115115 98 987 1868 ImperialCounty Grade Separation Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015):!Complete!Planned & Under ConstructionRail Network (Incl. Commuter & Freight)W Colton to SilverwoodSan Bernardino to SilverwoodBNSF_San_Bernardino_SubdivisionBNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Atwood_W_RiversideBNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Hobart_FullertonPomona to W ColtonYuma Junction to Pomona East LA to Pomona UP_Yuma_Subdivision °05102.5 Miles 39 60 108 139 2012 2040 PASSENGERTRAINS PER DAY FREIGHTTRAINS PER DAY 2012 2040 BNSF San Bernardino Subdivision W. Riverside-Colton ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 91 14 60 71 40 86 57 60 73 241 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Peak Day Train Volume by Segment.mxd | Date: 2/11/2016Map Title: Regional Rail Segments and Grade Separations 86 111 78 78 115 115 98 987 1868 Imperial County Grade Separation Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015): !Complete !Planned & Under Construction Rail Network (Incl. Commuter & Freight) W Colton to Silverwood San Bernardino to Silverwood BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Atwood_W_Riverside BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Hobart_Fullerton Pomona to W Colton Yuma Junction to Pomona East LA to Pomona UP_Yuma_Subdivision °05102.5 Miles 49 110 36 80 2012 2040 PASSENGERTRAINS PER DAY FREIGHTTRAINS PER DAY 2012 2040 BNSF San Bernardino Subdivision Hobart-Fullerton ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 91 14 60 71 40 86 57 60 73 241 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Peak Day Train Volume by Segment.mxd | Date: 2/11/2016Map Title: Regional Rail Segments and Grade Separations 86 111 78 78 115 115 98 987 1868 Imperial County Grade Separation Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015): !Complete !Planned & Under Construction Rail Network (Incl. Commuter & Freight) W Colton to Silverwood San Bernardino to Silverwood BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Atwood_W_Riverside BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Hobart_Fullerton Pomona to W Colton Yuma Junction to Pomona East LA to Pomona UP_Yuma_Subdivision °05102.5 Miles 13 43 48 112 2012 2040 PASSENGERTRAINS PER DAY FREIGHTTRAINS PER DAY 2012 2040 UP LA Subdivision Pomona-W. Riverside PLUS UPRR Alhambra Subdivision Pomona-W. Colton ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 91 14 60 71 40 86 57 60 73 241 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Peak Day Train Volume by Segment.mxd | Date: 2/11/2016Map Title: Regional Rail Segments and Grade Separations 86 111 78 78 115 115 98 9871868 Imperial County Grade Separation Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015): !Complete !Planned & Under Construction Rail Network (Incl. Commuter & Freight) W Colton to Silverwood San Bernardino to Silverwood BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Atwood_W_Riverside BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Hobart_Fullerton Pomona to W Colton Yuma Junction to Pomona East LA to Pomona UP_Yuma_Subdivision °05102.5 Miles ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 91 14 60 71 40 86 57 60 73 241 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Peak Day Train Volume by Segment.mxd | Date: 2/11/2016Map Title: Regional Rail Segments and Grade Separations 86 111 78 78 115 115 98 9871868 Imperial County Grade Separation Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015): !Complete !Planned & Under Construction Rail Network (Incl. Commuter & Freight) W Colton to Silverwood San Bernardino to Silverwood BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Atwood_W_Riverside BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Hobart_Fullerton Pomona to W Colton Yuma Junction to Pomona East LA to Pomona UP_Yuma_Subdivision °05102.5 Miles 2 2 89 167 2012 2040 PASSENGERTRAINS PER DAY FREIGHTTRAINS PER DAY 2012 2040 BNSF Cajon Subdivision San Bernardino-Silverwood PLUS UPRR Mojave Subdivision W. Colton-Silverwood ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 91 14 60 71 40 86 57 60 73 241 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Peak Day Train Volume by Segment.mxd | Date: 2/11/2016Map Title: Regional Rail Segments and Grade Separations 86 111 78 78 115 115 98 9871868 Imperial County Grade Separation Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015): !Complete !Planned & Under Construction Rail Network (Incl. Commuter & Freight) W Colton to Silverwood San Bernardino to Silverwood BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Atwood_W_Riverside BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Hobart_Fullerton Pomona to W Colton Yuma Junction to Pomona East LA to Pomona UP_Yuma_Subdivision °05102.5 Miles ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 91 14 60 71 40 86 57 60 73 241 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Peak Day Train Volume by Segment.mxd | Date: 2/11/2016Map Title: Regional Rail Segments and Grade Separations 86 111 78 78 115 115 98 9871868 Imperial County Grade Separation Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015): !Complete !Planned & Under Construction Rail Network (Incl. Commuter & Freight) W Colton to Silverwood San Bernardino to Silverwood BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Atwood_W_Riverside BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Hobart_Fullerton Pomona to W Colton Yuma Junction to Pomona East LA to Pomona UP_Yuma_Subdivision °05102.5 Miles 54 37 98 100 2012 2040 PASSENGERTRAINS PER DAY FREIGHTTRAINS PER DAY 2012 2040 UPRR LA Subdivision East LA-Pomona PLUS UP Alhambra Subdivision Yuma Jct. - Pomona ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 91 14 60 71 40 86 57 60 73 241 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Peak Day Train Volume by Segment.mxd | Date: 2/11/2016Map Title: Regional Rail Segments and Grade Separations 86 111 78 78 115 115 98 9871868 Imperial County Grade Separation Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015): !Complete !Planned & Under Construction Rail Network (Incl. Commuter & Freight) W Colton to Silverwood San Bernardino to Silverwood BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Atwood_W_Riverside BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Hobart_Fullerton Pomona to W Colton Yuma Junction to Pomona East LA to Pomona UP_Yuma_Subdivision °05102.5 Miles ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!! ! ! ! ! !!!! !!! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ 91 14 60 71 40 86 57 60 73 241 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Peak Day Train Volume by Segment.mxd | Date: 2/11/2016Map Title: Regional Rail Segments and Grade Separations 86 111 78 78 115 115 98 9871868 Imperial County Grade Separation Constrained Plan Status (as of November 2015): !Complete !Planned & Under Construction Rail Network (Incl. Commuter & Freight) W Colton to Silverwood San Bernardino to Silverwood BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Atwood_W_Riverside BNSF_San_Bernardino_Subdivision_Hobart_Fullerton Pomona to W Colton Yuma Junction to Pomona East LA to Pomona UP_Yuma_Subdivision °05102.5 Miles RAIL SEGMENTS 5,500 DAILY VEHICLE HOURS OF DELAY IN 2040 24 + 42 CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION PLANNED GRADE SEPARATION PROJECTS WOULD SAVE AN ESTIMATED 58 2016 RTP/SCS them. Research suggests that lower income residents generate fewer vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and demonstrate the largest relative VMT reductions with location efficiency.5 This Plan’s vision and goals include ensuring that regionwide benefits improve social equity—that is, the benefits of our Plan are realized by all populations in our Southern California region while its burdens are not carried disproportionately by one group over another. Providing people throughout our region with access to high quality transit and ensuring that they also have access to more affordable housing are related objectives. Currently, SCAG is partnering with the state and other regional agencies to study issues related to displacement and travel behavior near transit. Those results will inform future regional policies. Community advocates and other housing stakeholders are working to ensure that investments in traditionally low-income communities benefit existing residents and businesses instead of dividing communities. SCAG encourages municipalities to pursue strategies that avoid displacement, especially near transit stations, and ensure that existing communities retain their housing options. The integration of affordable housing development with the goals of Senate Bill 375 has been the focus of several recently enacted state legislative bills. Bills such as Assembly Bill 2222 (Nazarian) and Assembly Bill 313 (Atkins) aim to preserve affordable housing in rapidly changing development environments, such as in projects that apply for local density bonuses and within Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts, respectively. Other bills, such as Assembly Bill 744 (Chau), reduce parking requirements for housing designed for low income households and seniors and meet certain thresholds for transit access, which not only lower the cost of building affordable housing but also encourages the development of affordable housing near transit—a clear goal of Senate Bill 375. On a local level, there are a variety of tools available for jurisdictions to consider to increase the supply of affordable housing available (please see Affordable Housing Toolbox graphic). These tools are designed to reduce the cost of building affordable housing or establish a funding source for preserving or building affordable housing. While there is not a “one size fits all” approach, SCAG encourages jurisdictions to consider these strategies in order to address local housing affordability challenges. 5 Newmark, Ph.D, G., & Haas Ph.D., P. (2015). Income, Location Efficiency, and VMT: Affordable Housing as a Climate Strategy. San Francisco: California Housing Partnership. including transit-oriented development and providing affordable housing. However, people from low-income communities near new transit infrastructure may face displacement. Generally, displacement refers to a situation in which gentrification places pressure (through eviction or because of market forces) on people from existing communities to relocate to more affordable places. If those communities are priced out and move away from newly constructed transit facilities, those facilities lose the very people who are more likely to use AFFORDABLE HOUSING TOOLBOX FOR LOCAL JURISDICTIONS 1. Streamline the residential project permitting process 2. Reduced fees or waivers for affordable housing development 3. Reduce parking requirements, especially in transit- rich areas 4. Adopt an affordable housing overlay zone 5. Preservation of mobile homes 6. Establish a housing trust fund 7. Add inclusionary zoning to the housing ordinance 8. Density Bonus ordinance 9. Increase density in transit-rich areas 10. Link a housing program with other policies such as active transportation and public health 11. Consider new building types and models, such accessory dwelling units or small units 12. Establish a Community Revitalization and Investment Authority (per AB 2) or Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (per SB 628) 5903 CHALLENGES IN A CHANGING REGION how physically active they are and how safe their everyday lives can be.7 As a result, regional planning for land use and transportation across the U.S. has increasingly incorporated strategies to improve public health. MPOs such as SCAG are focusing on improving transportation safety, offering people more opportunities to walk, bike and embrace other forms of active transportation, improve first/last mile connections to transit, and improve access to natural lands. They are also pursuing strategies to make neighborhoods more walkable, improve air quality, help people cope with climate change impacts such as extreme heat events, improve accessibility to essential destinations such as hospitals and schools, and work overall toward a transportation system and land use patterns that promote regional economic strength. One of the challenges that SCAG faces as it strives to improve public health is the sheer size and diversity of our region. Public health varies widely by geographic location, income and race. There is no one size fits all approach to meeting this complex challenge. It requires flexibility and creativity to ensure that initiatives are effective in both rural and urban areas. To gain more insight on the connection between how we use land and public health, SCAG has identified seven focus areas for further analysis: access to essential destinations, affordable housing, air quality, climate adaptation, economic opportunity, physical activity and transportation safety. For more details, see the Plan’s Public Health Appendix. CONFRONTING A CHANGING ENVIRONMENT The consequences of continued climate change already are impacting California and more intensified changes are expected. Ongoing drought conditions, water shortages due to less rainfall as well as declining snowpack in our mountains, and an agriculture industry in crisis have become hard realities in recent years. Climate change is transforming the state’s natural habitats and overall biodiversity. Continued changes are expected to impact coastlines as sea levels rise and storm surges grow more destructive. Forests will continue to be impacted by drought and wildfire. Climate change also will impact how we use energy and the quality of public health. Our statewide transportation 7 Frank, L. D., Schmid, T. L., Sallis, J. F., Chapman, J., & Saelens, B. E. (2005). “Linking Objectively Measured Physical Activity with Objectively Measured Urban Form: Findings from SMARTRAQ.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 28(2S2), 117-125. Additionally, there are a number of statewide programs and resources to assist local jurisdictions in funding the production of affordable housing. As mentioned in earlier chapters, there are several new funding opportunities to help regions and jurisdictions promote affordable housing. California’s Affordable Housing Sustainable Communities (AHSC) program, funded by the statewide Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund created by Assembly Bill 32, provides funding to certain projects that provide affordable housing through a competitive grant process. Moreover, other programs such as the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD)’s Housing- related Parks Program, provides funds to local jurisdictions to maintain and rehabilitate parks and open space based on the number of affordable housing units built. Other opportunities to build housing also include Senate Bill 628 (Beall) and Assembly Bill 2 (Alejo), which allow jurisdictions to establish special reinvestment districts to develop affordable housing and supportive infrastructure and amenities. As the regional MPO, SCAG is committed to providing jurisdictions and stakeholders applying for funding opportunities with data, technical and policy support in order to further the progress of establishing more affordable housing in the region aligned with the goals of the RTP/SCS. IMPROVING PUBLIC HEALTH Today, many people in our region suffer from poor health due to chronic diseases related to poor air quality and physical inactivity. Chronic diseases including heart disease, stroke, cancer, chronic lower respiratory disease and diabetes are responsible for 72 percent of all deaths in our region, according to the California Department of Public Health. Furthermore, more than 60 percent of residents are overweight or obese, more than eight percent have diabetes, 27 percent suffer from hypertension and more than 12 percent suffer from asthma, according to the California Health Interview Survey. Health care costs resulting from being physically inactive, obese and overweight and from asthma cost our Southern California region billions of dollars annually in medical expenses, lost life and lost productivity, research shows.6 For example, one study showed that health care costs resulting from physical inactivity and obesity reached an estimated $41.2 billion in 2006 in California. A growing body of evidence shows that how a neighborhood is laid out and linked to transportation options can shape the lifestyles that people have— 6 Peck, C., Logan, J., Maizlish, N., & Van Court, J. (2013). The Burden of Chronic Disease and Injury: California. 2013. California Department of Public Health. 60 2016 RTP/SCS underway. These include initiatives such as the Safeguarding California12 plan, as well as Governor Brown’s Executive Order calling for new actions to mitigate and adapt to the impacts of climate change. These initiatives present regional agencies such as SCAG with opportunities to show leadership as the state confronts climate change challenges. Continued climate change will impact our region in various ways and we are now getting a clearer picture of how it will impact the day-to-day lives of those of us who are most vulnerable—such as the poor, the elderly and the disabled. Responding effectively to climate change requires us to cooperate more with one another, to use limited resources more wisely, and to think more creatively to align our goals. The impacts of climate change, like other environmental challenges, are expected to hit hardest those communities that are least equipped to handle them. Particularly in Southern California, public agencies must focus on safeguarding people who are most vulnerable to extreme heat and air pollution. The elderly and children under five years old are most vulnerable to heat-related illness.13 As our demographics change, proactive planning that ensures the health of these distinct populations will be increasingly important. Our region certainly cannot fight climate change alone. It will be a global effort. However, it is up to us to make sure we can adapt to climate change and mitigate its impacts in our own region. We cannot expect anyone else to do this work for us. Long-range regional planning inherently recognizes the relationship between today’s investments and tomorrow’s outcomes. Confronting climate change and building climate resilient communities is, at its core, an exercise in smart planning. We will need to build on actions we have already taken by integrating considerations of climate and sustainability into the approaches we take to grow our economy, protect the environment and public health, and plan for the future. 12 California Adaptation Planning Guide: Planning for Adaptive Communities. (2012). California Emergency Management Agency & California Natural Resources Agency. Accessed at http://resources.ca.gov/docs/climate/01APG_Planning_for_Adaptive_ Communities.pdf. 13 California Adaptation Planning Guide: Planning for Adaptive Communities. (2012). California Emergency Management Agency & California Natural Resources Agency. system will experience new challenges as well as the global and regional climate continues to change.8 Researchers project that both coastal and inland Southern California will see many more days of extreme heat, with temperatures exceeding 95 degrees Fahrenheit.9 This is expected to increase heat-related mortality, lower labor productivity and boost demands for energy. Meanwhile, changing patterns of rain and snowfall—including the amount, frequency and intensity of precipitation across the state—will have serious long-term impacts on the supply and quality of water in Southern California. It is clear that our region needs to prepare for these projected challenges and a big part of that effort is to make individual communities and the region as a whole more resilient to the consequences of climate change. “Climate resiliency” can be defined as the ability of a social or ecological system to absorb disturbances while retaining the same basic structure and ways of functioning, the capacity for self-organization and the capacity to adapt to stress and change.10 Without advance planning and effective action, the consequences of climate change will negatively impact our transportation system, our economy and our everyday lives. The state’s Adaptive Planning Guide encourages our region and others across California to evaluate the local impacts of climate change. These impacts include increased temperatures, reduced precipitation, rising sea levels, a fall in tourism, reduced water supplies, a heightened risk of wildfire, threats to public health related to degraded air quality and heat, stresses on endangered and threatened species, diminished snowpack and coastal erosion.11 Our region is still facing a serious drought that began in 2012 and its length and severity has led to mandatory water restrictions for the first time in state history. At the same time, state programs designed to meet future climate challenges proactively are 8 California Resources Agency. (n.d.) Fact Sheets on California Climate Risks [Fact Sheet]. Retrieved from http://resources.ca.gov/docs/climate/Safeguarding_Handout_All.pdf. 9 Rogers, J., Barba, J., & Kinniburgh, F. (2015). From Boom to Bust? Climate Risk in the Golden State. Risky Business Project. Accessed at http://riskybusiness.org/uploads/files/ California-Report-WEB-3-30-15.pdf. 10 Safeguarding California: Reducing Climate Risk. (2014). California Natural Resources Agency. Accessed at http://resources.ca.gov/docs/climate/Final_Safeguarding_CA_Plan_ July_31_2014.pdf. 11 California Adaptation Planning Guide: Planning for Adaptive Communities. (2012). California Emergency Management Agency & California Natural Resources Agency. Accessed at http://resources.ca.gov/docs/climate/01APG_Planning_for_Adaptive_ Communities.pdf. 6103 CHALLENGES IN A CHANGING REGION CONCLUSION We will now turn to a discussion of how SCAG developed the 2016 RTP/ SCS, with a particular emphasis on the extensive public outreach that SCAG conducted to develop the best Plan possible to address our challenges. The 2016 RTP/SCS, after all, is the region’s Plan for the future. By design, it reflects the region’s needs, priorities and desires—as well as the statutory requirements of the State of California and the federal government. 04 CHAPTER 4 HIGHLIGHTS GOALS AND GUIDING POLICIES 64 SEEKING PUBLIC INPUT TO REFINE SCENARIOS FOR OUR FUTURE 66 SCENARIOS FOR THE FUTURE: IT’S OUR CHOICE 68 The RTP/SCS is a long-range visioning plan that balances future mobility and housing needs with goals for the environment, the regional economy, social equity and environmental justice, and public health. Ultimately, the Plan is intended to help guide transportation and land use decisions and public investments. CREATING A PLAN FOR OUR FUTURE 64 2016 RTP/SCS 2016 RTP/SCS GOALS 1. Align the plan investments and policies with improving regional economic development and competitiveness. 2. Maximize mobility and accessibility for all people and goods in the region. 3. Ensure travel safety and reliability for all people and goods in the region. 4. Preserve and ensure a sustainable regional transportation system. 5. Maximize the productivity of our transportation system. 6. Protect the environment and health of our residents by improving air quality and encouraging active transportation (e.g., bicycling and walking). 7. Actively encourage and create incentives for energy efficiency, where possible. 8. Encourage land use and growth patterns that facilitate transit and active transportation. 9. Maximize the security of the regional transportation system through improved system monitoring, rapid recovery planning, and coordination with other security agencies.* *SCAG does not yet have an agreed-upon security performance measure. This update, the 2016 RTP/SCS, reflects goals and guiding policies and a vision developed through extensive outreach to the general public and numerous stakeholders across our region. SCAG values the region’s tremendous diversity and acknowledges that it cannot tackle challenges in the same way everywhere. This chapter discusses how the Plan was developed, and it offers an overview of SCAG’s “preferred scenario” for land use and transportation in our region in 2040. SCAG developed this preferred scenario to guide its update of the 2012 RTP/SCS and then settle on a final set of strategies, programs and projects that will place the region more firmly on the road toward achieving its goals. Those strategies, programs and projects are reviewed in Chapter 5. GOALS AND GUIDING POLICIES As SCAG updated the 2012 RTP/SCS, it evaluated its existing goals, guiding policies and performance measures to determine whether they should be refined. Since the adoption of the 2012 RTP/SCS, several developments have occurred that influenced the development of the 2016 RTP/SCS. These include: z A surface transportation funding and authorization bill known as “Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act” (MAP-21) was signed into law by President Obama on July 6, 2012. MAP- 21 includes specific goals for safety; improving the condition of transportation infrastructure; reducing congestion and making the transportation system more reliable; freight movement and economic vitality; and environmental sustainability. MAP-21 now requires that Metropolitan Planning Organizations such as SCAG set performance targets for improving transportation safety and system preservation in coordination with state departments of transportation. At the time this document was being prepared, the federal rulemaking process to implement MAP–21 was not yet complete. SCAG will continue to monitor rulemaking to understand the implications for the Plan, and take the necessary steps to fully evaluate the final rule. Also, in December 2015, the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act, or “FAST Act,” was signed in to law. The FAST Act is a five-year transportation funding and authorization bill that maintains many of the MAP-21 provisions, but also has new provisions including a national freight program. As with MAP-21, SCAG will monitor the rulemaking process to implement FAST Act provisions. 6504 CREATING A PLAN FOR OUR FUTURE z The rapid advancement of new technologies such as real-time traveler information, on-demand shared mobility services enabled by smartphone applications, car sharing and bike sharing is influencing how households travel and their choices about vehicle ownership. New technologies are encouraging more efficient transportation choices, which help public agencies manage the multimodal transportation system more efficiently. z There is a continuing emphasis on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, even after the adoption of Senate Bill 375. On April 29, 2015, Governor Brown issued Executive Order B-30-15, which establishes a California greenhouse gas reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Because the transportation sector is the largest contributor to California’s greenhouse gas emissions (more than 36 percent), SCAG anticipates updated and more stringent regional emissions reduction targets. This Plan’s goals are intended to help carry out our vision for improved mobility, a strong economy and sustainability. Based on our assessment of these developments, the goals of the 2016 RTP/SCS, which are represented graphically in this chapter, remain unchanged from those adopted in the 2012 RTP/SCS. The guiding policies for the 2016 RTP/SCS are intended to help focus future investments on the best-performing projects and strategies to preserve, maintain and optimize the performance of the existing transportation system. Two additional guiding policies have been added since 2012. The first addition (Guiding Policy 6) addresses emerging technologies and the potential for such technologies to lower the number of collisions, improve traveler information, reduce the demand for driving alone and lessen congestion related to road incidents and other non-recurring circumstances (a car collision, for example). The second addition (Guiding Policy 7) recognizes the potential for transportation investments to improve both the efficiency of the transportation network and the environment. 2016 RTP/SCS GUIDING POLICIES 1. Transportation investments shall be based on SCAG’s adopted regional Performance Indicators. 2. Ensuring safety, adequate maintenance and efficiency of operations on the existing multimodal transportation system should be the highest RTP/ SCS priorities for any incremental funding in the region. 3. RTP/SCS land use and growth strategies in the RTP/SCS will respect local input and advance smart growth initiatives. 4. Transportation demand management (TDM) and active transportation will be focus areas, subject to Policy 1. 5. HOV gap closures that significantly increase transit and rideshare usage will be supported and encouraged, subject to Policy 1. 6. The RTP/SCS will support investments and strategies to reduce non-recurrent congestion and demand for single occupancy vehicle use, by leveraging advanced technologies. 7. The RTP/SCS will encourage transportation investments that result in cleaner air, a better environment, a more efficient transportation system and sustainable outcomes in the long run. 8. Monitoring progress on all aspects of the Plan, including the timely implementation of projects, programs, and strategies, will be an important and integral component of the Plan. 66 2016 RTP/SCS SEEKING PUBLIC INPUT TO REFINE SCENARIOS FOR OUR FUTURE To develop a preferred scenario for the region at 2040, SCAG first generated four preliminary scenarios for our region’s future—each one representing a different vision for land use and transportation in 2040. More specifically, each scenario was designed to explore and convey the impact of where the region would grow, to what extent the growth would be focused within existing cities and towns, and how it would grow—in other words, the shape and style of the neighborhoods and transportation systems that would shape growth over the period. To help the agency refine these four scenarios, SCAG reached out extensively to the general public and numerous stakeholders to seek their views and input. Refining the scenarios was an important step on the road toward settling on a preferred scenario—which offers a comprehensive picture of what kind of future we want. The scenarios and the selected preferred scenario proved to be powerful planning tools to solidify our vision for our region at the middle of the century. These preliminary scenarios are not the ones modeled in the Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR). Public outreach was integral to the development of the entire RTP/SCS, but particularly during the refinement of scenarios. To ensure that the 2016 RTP/SCS was developed openly and inclusively, the agency implemented a comprehensive public outreach and involvement program. This was based on a Public Participation Plan adopted by SCAG’s Regional Council in April 2014. Specific public engagement strategies used during the development of the Draft 2016 RTP/SCS included: z Developing materials for public outreach in a variety of formats to reach broad audiences, including a short video, fact sheets, surveys, PowerPoint presentations and poster boards. z Centralizing RTP/SCS information on a new easy-to-use microsite, developed to be mobile/tablet friendly and compliant with the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act. z Supporting multiple committees, task forces and working groups made up of SCAG partners, stakeholders and interested groups to develop the key components of the Plan. z Holding multiple public open houses before the release of the Draft RTP/SCS, to allow direct and interactive participation with interested parties. OUR COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONS The SCAG region includes a total of six county transportation commissions (CTCs), one for each county—Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura. Each CTC is responsible for planning and implementing countywide transportation improvements, allocating locally- generated transportation revenues, state and federal funding, and, in some cases, operating transit services. During each RTP/SCS update, the CTCs provide SCAG with extensive project lists that are then incorporated into the Plan. The projects included on these lists are regarded as regionally significant and/or anticipated to receive (or already receiving) federal and state funds. In addition, the CTCs anticipate that these projects will be initiated or completed by the Plan’s horizon year (in this case, 2040). The 2016 RTP/SCS includes more than 4,000 projects—ranging from highway improvements, railroad grade separations, bicycle lanes, new transit hubs and replacement bridges. CTCs are a valuable resource for learning more about projects that are coming to your community by 2040. 6704 CREATING A PLAN FOR OUR FUTURE z Announcing the schedule for the open houses through a wide variety of means, including community calendars, distributing flyers at local events and libraries, email newsletters, social media and ethnic media. z Seeking the assistance of transit agencies, stakeholder organizations and their communication channels to maximize outreach opportunities. z Reaching out to traditionally underrepresented and/or underserved audiences. z Evaluating public participation activities to continually improve the outreach process. The overall Plan was developed with input from local governments, county transportation commissions (CTCs), tribal governments, non-profit organizations, businesses and local stakeholders within Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura counties. Outreach and coordination efforts also included work with providers of public transportation, county transportation commissions, and designated Consolidated Transportation Services Agencies (CTSAs) to ensure consistency with the plans and programs of these agencies, including short and long range plans of Coordinated Public Transit Human Services Transportation Plans. A fuller discussion of these plans can be found on pages 61–65 of the Transit Appendix. From past plan development cycles, SCAG had heard from many participants about the need for early engagement during the development of the RTP/SCS. For members of the public, SCAG conducted public engagement activities between May and July 2015, with 23 open house events held across six counties. These events helped educate residents on the goals of the Plan, explore topics included in the Plan and gather input on priorities with an electronic survey. Participants reviewed poster boards showing projected changes in population and demographics within their county and the region, and then were asked for their input on how the region could accommodate growth in a variety of areas. These include providing transportation options, improving public health, preserving natural lands and supporting economic opportunities. During discussion of the scenarios, major components were presented with maps, charts and figures. SCAG presented results associated with each scenario at public open houses held throughout the region to help stakeholders understand regional growth options. Participants learned about: CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION PLAN 2040 INTEGRATING CALIFORNIA’S TRANSPORTATION FUTURE The State of California, with direction from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), developed a statewide, long-range transportation plan with a 25-year planning horizon, the California Transportation Plan 2040 (CTP 2040). The Draft CTP 2040 provides a long-range policy framework to meet California’s future mobility needs and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Caltrans is required to develop this plan per Senate Bill 391 (2009). Specifically, emissions must be reduced to 1990 levels from current levels by 2020, and 80 percent below the 1990 levels by 2050 as described by Assembly Bill 32 (2006) and Executive Order S-03-05 (2015). The CTP 2040 will demonstrate how major metropolitan areas, rural areas, and state agencies can coordinate planning efforts to achieve critical statewide goals. Like the CTP 2040, the 2016 RTP/SCS aims to motivate the development of an integrated, multi-modal transportation system that is sustainable, improves mobility and enhances our quality of life. Though the CTP 2040 is not yet finalized (anticipated approval in the next year), it helped inform the goals, policies and strategies included in the 2016 RTP/SCS. 68 2016 RTP/SCS SCENARIOS FOR THE FUTURE: IT’S OUR CHOICE To refine the scenarios and ultimately develop a preferred scenario, SCAG gathered a large amount of feedback at the public meetings we have discussed. An important part of this process involved conducting comprehensive surveys. SURVEY PARTICIPATION Participants at public workshops were asked to complete a 37-question survey to provide input on their priorities, and open-ended feedback was encouraged. The survey was also available for completion on SCAG’s website. Survey questions and a summary of responses are included in Public Participation & Consultation Appendix. Between the 2016 RTP/SCS Open Houses and the 2016 RTP/SCS website, more than 650 residents from throughout the SCAG region participated in the survey. About 75 percent of open house attendees participated in the survey, indicating that stakeholders were engaged during the workshops and wanted to participate in a meaningful way. The majority of survey participants resided in Los Angeles County, making up 51 percent of the total, followed by Orange County at 15 percent and Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura Counties at nine percent each. Five percent of online participants did not state in which county they reside. SURVEY RESULTS Expanding transportation choices was clearly a priority for survey participants. Whether it is through public transportation, express lanes, bicycles or personal vehicles, our region wants as wide a range of choices as possible. When asked what our top priority should be for managing our regional highway and road system, the top two responses were almost evenly split. Most respondents wanted to protect and preserve existing transportation infrastructure— supporting a “Fix-it-First” policy—and they wanted to achieve maximum productivity through system management and demand management. Moreover, the general open-ended comments received suggested there should be less focus on constructing new roads and lanes to build capacity. When asked about transportation budget priorities, survey respondents primarily favored creating more public transportation options, followed closely z The impact that different options for growth would have on transportation, land use, the economy and the environment z The degree to which growth could be focused within the region’s local jurisdictions over the next 25 years z The potential shape and style of neighborhoods and transportation systems z How varying combinations of land use and transportation strategies lead to different land consumption, travel, energy, water and pollutant impacts Specific details on the scenarios can be found in the SCS Background Documentation Appendix. Recognizing that not all members of the public could attend the open houses, SCAG provided an opportunity to participate virtually by providing workshop materials and a survey online. Hundreds of Southern Californians participated online and gave input on transit accessibility, transportation investments and other topics. A summary report from the survey was presented at a special joint meeting of SCAG’s Regional Council and Policy Committees, and this report is also included in the Public Participation & Consultation Appendix. In addition to these outreach efforts, all regular and special meetings of SCAG’s Transportation Committee; Community, Economic and Human Development Committee; Energy and Environment Committee; Legislative/Communications and Membership Committee; Executive Administration Committee; and Regional Council were publicly noticed and opportunities for public comment were provided at each meeting. Federally required interagency consultation was done through the monthly meetings of the Transportation Conformity Working Group. Additional outreach strategies that were implemented are outlined in Public Participation & Consultation Appendix. SCAG is not an implementing agency, so it is not directly involved in the construction or operation of transportation projects and other infrastructure improvements discussed in this Plan. The significance of the 2016 RTP/SCS is that the vision contained within the Plan sets the tone for policy development by other government agencies throughout the region. The public involvement discussed in this chapter helped the SCAG board and staff members understand the needs and concerns of stakeholders, leading to a more meaningful collective vision for the region’s future. 6904 CREATING A PLAN FOR OUR FUTURE farmland; 80 percent of respondents preferred development in existing areas. For example, when asked where future residential development should mostly occur, the majority of participants said they preferred part mixed-use, part urban areas. Some suburban mixed-use areas were also desired, but strictly urban or suburban areas were least favored. When asked what type of housing should be built to accommodate our region’s future population, multifamily attached housing was the leading response. Small-lot detached homes and townhouses were somewhat favored, and large lot detached housing was least favored. About 90 percent of survey participants found protecting natural habitat areas to be important or very important. Collectively, the survey responses offered an invaluable guide to help finalize the Plan’s investments, strategies and priorities. They reflect how regional stakeholders want us to address priority areas such as transit and roadway investments, system management, active transportation, land use and public health. OUR PREFERRED SCENARIO The extensive public outreach, coupled with detailed analysis of each scenario and coordination with technical and policy committees, led to our selection of a preferred scenario for the 2016 RTP/SCS based upon SCAG’s “Policy Growth Forecast.” This preferred scenario also incorporated inputs from local jurisdictions, including the land use and transportation strategies, investments and policies reflected in the 2012 RTP/SCS. The preferred scenario envisions future regional growth that is well coordinated with the transportation system improvements of the approved 2012 RTP/ SCS, as well as anticipated new transportation projects planned by the region’s CTCs and transit providers. It also incorporates best practices for increasing transportation choices; reducing our dependence on personal automobiles; allowing future growth in walkable, mixed-use communities and in High-Quality Transit Areas (HQTAs); and further improving air quality. by constructing bikeways and then improving traffic flow. Regarding transit, feedback received from comment cards was particularly helpful. The most prevalent comments stated a desire for: z More efficient posting of time schedules z More accurate system maps z Better integration of fare systems z Increasing space for bicycles on public transit z Creating a comprehensive, efficient and regional-scale bus system z Exploring opportunities such as double-decker highways that explicitly allow transit operations on one level z Expanding transit commuter options Open-ended written comments provided helpful direction in the area of active transportation. Many commenters preferred enhancing non-motorized infrastructure such as bike lanes and sidewalks to improve access to transit and increasing transportation options for all. Suggested strategies included: z Simultaneously funding road improvements and prioritizing pedestrian infrastructure z Increasing resources for Complete Streets and protected bike lanes z Providing public education for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians to help everyone understand how roads are to be shared Survey participants recognized the connection between public health, active transportation and the environment. When asked about which areas of public health they were most concerned about, air quality was the top health concern among respondents. Having safe areas for walking, biking and physical activity was also a concern, as was access to healthy food. There is no “one size fits all” type of land use or density in a region as diverse as ours. However, it is fair to say that survey participants generally favored infill development rather than expanding our urban footprint into natural areas or 70 2016 RTP/SCS sub-jurisdictional forecasts are not adopted as part of the 2016 RTP/ SCS. TAZ level data may be used by jurisdictions in local planning as it deems appropriate. There is no obligation by a jurisdiction to change its land use policies, General Plan, or regulations to be consistent with the 2016 RTP/SCS. z Principle #5: SCAG will maintain communication with agencies that use SCAG sub-jurisdictional level data to ensure that the “advisory and non-binding” nature of the data is appropriately maintained. Consistent with the above stated principles, the preferred scenario and corresponding forecast of population, household and employment growth is adopted at the jurisdictional level as part of the 2016 RTP/SCS and sub- jurisdictional level data and/or maps associated with the 2016 RTP/SCS is advisory only. For purposes of qualifying for future funding opportunities and/ or other incentive programs, sub-jurisdictional data and/or maps used to determine consistency with the Sustainable Communities Strategy shall only be used at the discretion and with the approval of the local jurisdiction. However, this does not otherwise limit the use of the sub-jurisdictional data and/or maps by SCAG, CTCs, Councils of Governments, SCAG Subregions, Caltrans and other public agencies for transportation modeling and planning purposes. Any other use of the sub-jurisdictional data and/or maps not specified herein, shall require agreement from the Regional Council, respective policy committees and local jurisdictions. The preferred scenario improves the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the region and enhances public health and other co-benefits from large transportation investments and improvements in technology—particularly those that focus on transit and first/last mile strategies. Furthermore, the preferred scenario offers a vision for how we want our region to grow over the next quarter century and it gives us a clear-eyed view of what we want to achieve. Guided by goals and policies, built through analysis and refined with extensive public input, developing the preferred scenario set the stage for the hard work of building a comprehensive plan of land use and transportation strategies, programs and projects designed to confront our many challenges and move our region toward the vision embodied in the preferred scenario. Regional investments in making transit trips quicker and easier are expanded to increase transit ridership. New land use concepts such as “Livable Corridors” and “Neighborhood Mobility Areas” are also introduced. These are described in more detail later in the Plan. In the preferred scenario for the 2016 RTP/ SCS, new residential growth from 2012 to 2040 is split between multifamily housing (66 percent) and detached single-family homes (34 percent). The preferred scenario is the result of an investment plan that is assumed to be financially constrained. To help our regional partners envision how the preferred scenario fosters development on the ground, SCAG built upon its earlier outreach and solicited feedback from local jurisdictions on the distribution of new households and employment at the neighborhood level, through 2040. During the review of the draft policy growth forecast in summer 2015, jurisdictions were asked to provide input on the growth scenario, including information on specific planned development projects with entitlements, other planned projects, or recently completed developments. Accordingly, the following core principles provided the framework for the preferred scenario: z Principle #1: The preferred scenario will be adopted at the jurisdictional level, thus directly reflecting the population, household and employment growth projections derived from the local input process and previously reviewed and approved by local jurisdictions. The preferred scenario maintains these projected jurisdictional growth totals, meaning future growth is not reallocated from one local jurisdiction to another. z Principle #2: The preferred scenario at the Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) level is controlled to be within the density ranges* of local general plans or input received from local jurisdictions. z Principle #3: For the purpose of determining consistency for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), lead agencies such as local jurisdictions have the sole discretion in determining a local project’s consistency with the 2016 RTP/SCS. z Principle #4: TAZ level data or any data at a geography smaller than the jurisdictional level has been utilized to conduct required modeling analyses and is therefore advisory only and non-binding given that *With the exception of the six percent of TAZs that have average density below the density range of local general plans. The TAZs showing lower densities than GP designations are consistent with existing conditions and future land use and growth projections provided by local jurisdictions. SCAG did not lower the growth. 7104 CREATING A PLAN FOR OUR FUTURE Chapter 5 reviews those strategies, programs and projects that collectively will move the region toward realizing the outcomes seen in the preferred scenario— including more livable, healthy and economically strong communities and a more sustainable future. CHAPTER 5 HIGHLIGHTS 05 INTEGRATING TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE PLANNING: THE KEY TO ACHIEVING OUR GOALS 74 OUR STRATEGIES FOR TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE 74 CONCLUSION 125 At the beginning of Chapter 1, we reviewed several themes that resonate throughout the 2016 RTP/SCS. The first of these was: “Integrating strategies for land use and transportation.” This is SCAG’s overarching strategy for achieving its goals of regional economic development, maximized mobility and accessibility for all people and goods in our region, safe and reliable travel, a sustainable regional transportation system, a protected natural environment, health for our residents, and more. THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH 74 2016 RTP/SCS INTEGRATING TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE PLANNING: THE KEY TO ACHIEVING OUR GOALS By integrating our strategies for transportation with our strategies for using land—in other words, considering in tandem how we grow and how we get around—we can build the communities that we want. Planning that does not strive for this close integration can result in sprawling suburbs connected haphazardly to poorly managed highways and isolated communities that lack easy access to public transportation connecting people from home to work, school and other destinations. Precious resources are squandered: time, energy, money, productivity, clean air and good health, among others. As the region’s transportation planning agency, SCAG has long promoted the concept of integrating transportation planning and land use planning. Since 2002, with the Southern California Compass and Shared Growth Vision for the region and the subsequent Compass Blueprint program (now the Sustainability Planning Grant Program), SCAG has promoted integrated planning tools for local governments that want their residents to have more mobility options, make their communities more livable, increase prosperity among all people and strive for sustainability. Subsequent policies adopted at the regional level in 2004, 2008 and 2012 have supported and advanced the integration of transportation and land use planning. With the passage of Senate Bill 375 in 2008, the State of California formalized the idea of integrating planning statewide when the California Air Resources Board (ARB) set regional targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and required every Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) in the state to develop an SCS that charted a course toward reduced emissions and a more sustainable future. A central tenet of the SCS requirement is for MPOs to integrate land use and transportation planning. Here is one example: High Quality Transit Areas (HQTAs) are places where people live in compact communities and have ready access to a multitude of safe and convenient transportation alternatives to driving alone—including walking and biking, taking the bus, light rail, commuter rail, the subway and/ or shared mobility options. Along high quality bus corridors, for instance, a bus arrives at least every 15 minutes. Residential and commercial development is integrated with plans for transit, active transportation and other alternatives to driving alone. The integrated strategies, programs and projects reviewed in this chapter are designed to improve a region with very specific changes underway: Over the next 25 years, our region’s population is projected to grow by more than 20 percent, from about 18 million people to more than 22 million people. Diverse households will reside in all types of communities, including urban centers, cities, towns, suburban neighborhoods and rural areas. Much of the region will continue to be populated by households living in detached single-family dwellings located in lower-density suburban areas. However, 67 percent of new residences will be higher density multifamily housing, built as infill development within HQTAs. Households will demand more direct and easier access to jobs, schools, shopping, healthcare and entertainment, especially as Millennials mature and seniors grow in number. Concurrently, our Southern California region will remain a vital gateway for goods and services, an international center for innovation in numerous industries and a place that offers its residents a high standard of living. We know that our future growth will add new pressures to our transportation system and to our communities. However, through long- term planning that integrates strategies for transportation and land use, we can ensure that our region grows in ways that enhance our mobility, sustainability and quality of life. OUR STRATEGIES FOR TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE In the discussion that follows, transportation and land use strategies are grouped separately, but it will nevertheless become clear how closely they are related to one another. The section that follows is the heart of the 2016 RTP/ SCS, and by the end of the chapter our region’s course toward a more mobile and sustainable future should be evident. Serving as an MPO, Regional Transportation Planning Agency and Council of Governments, SCAG has an essential responsibility to develop an RTP/SCS that is dedicated to detailing recommended regional transportation investments and strategies. The agency has developed these transportation strategies in the context of how we are projected to grow and live as a region in coming decades. In this chapter we will first review regional strategies for growth and land use and then move into a comprehensive review of the agency’s plans for the region’s multi-faceted transportation system. 7505 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH LAND USE STRATEGIES The land use strategies included in this Plan are built on a foundation of contributions from communities, cities, counties and other local agencies across our region. The land use patterns reviewed here, for example, are based on local general plans as well as input from local governments. For this Plan update, SCAG was committed to preserving the growth forecasts provided by local jurisdictions at the jurisdictional level. At the same time, Senate Bill 375 requires that SCAG, as the region’s MPO, strive to develop a vision of regional development patterns that integrate with and support planned transportation investments. As part of that mandate, an overall land use pattern has been developed that respects local control, but also incorporates best practices for achieving state-mandated reductions in greenhouse gas emissions through decreases in per capita vehicle miles traveled (VMT) regionally. 2016 RTP/SCS LAND USE POLICIES The 2016 RTP/SCS reaffirms the 2008 Advisory Land Use Policies that were incorporated into the 2012 RTP/SCS. These foundational policies, which have guided the development of this Plan’s strategies for land use, are: z Identify regional strategic areas for infill and investment z Structure the plan on a three-tiered system of centers development1 z Develop “Complete Communities” z Develop nodes on a corridor z Plan for additional housing and jobs near transit z Plan for changing demand in types of housing z Continue to protect stable, existing single-family areas z Ensure adequate access to open space and preservation of habitat z Incorporate local input and feedback on future growth. 2016 RTP/SCS LAND USE STRATEGIES For this Plan, land use strategies are described in this section. 1 Complete language: “Identify strategic centers based on a three-tiered system of existing, planned and potential relative to transportation infrastructure. This strategy more effectively integrates land use planning and transportation investment.” A more detailed description of these strategies and policies can be found on pps. 90–92 of the SCAG 2008 Regional Transportation Plan, adopted in May 2008. Reflect The Changing Population And Demands The SCAG region, home to about 18.3 million people in 2012, currently features 5.9 million households and 7.4 million jobs. By 2040, the Plan projects that these figures will increase by 3.8 million people, with nearly 1.5 million more homes and 2.4 million more jobs. HQTAs will account for three percent of regional total land, but will accommodate 46 percent and 55 percent of future household and employment growth respectively between 2012 and 2040. The 2016 RTP/SCS land use pattern contains sufficient residential capacity to accommodate the region’s future growth, including the eight-year regional housing need, as shown in TABLE 5.1. The land use pattern accommodates about 530,000 additional households in the SCAG region by 2020 and 1.5 million more households by 2040. The land use pattern also encourages improvement in the jobs-housing balance by accommodating 1.1 million more jobs by 2020 and about 2.4 million more jobs by 2040. This 2016 RTP/SCS reflects a continuation of the shift in demographics and household demand since 2012. This shift is apparent in the land use development pattern, which assumes a significant increase in small-lot, single-family and multifamily housing that will mostly occur in infill locations near bus corridors and other transit infrastructure. In some cases, the land use pattern assumes that more of these housing types will be built than currently anticipated in local General Plans. This shift in housing type—especially the switch from large-lot to small-lot single-family homes—is already occurring as developers respond to new demands. In 2008, 45 percent of all housing units were multifamily homes. From 2012 through 2040, the Plan projects that 66 percent of the 1.5 million new homes expected to be built in the SCAG region will be multifamily units, reflecting demographic shifts and anticipated market demand. This will result in an increase of multifamily units in the region to 49 percent of all housing units in the region. Combating Gentrification and Displacement The 2012 RTP/SCS discussed strategies to combat gentrification and displacement, a continuing challenge that we discussed in Chapter 3. Jurisdictions in the SCAG region should continue to be sensitive to the possibility of gentrification and work to employ strategies to mitigate its potential negative community impacts. Generally, the SCAG region will benefit from higher-density infill development, which means that neighborhoods will be adding to the local housing stock rather than maintaining the current stock and simply changing the residential population. In addition, local jurisdictions are encouraged to pursue the production of permanent affordable housing through deed restrictions or development by non-profit developers, which will ensure that some units will remain affordable to lower-income households. SCAG will 76 2016 RTP/SCS COUNTY NUMBER OF VERY LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS NUMBER OF LOW INCOME HOUSEHOLDS NUMBER OF MODERATE INCOME HOUSEHOLDS NUMBER OF ABOVE MODERATE INCOME HOUSEHOLDS TOTAL Imperial 4,194 2,553 2,546 7,258 16,551 Los Angeles 45,672 27,469 30,043 76,697 179,881 Orange 8,734 6,246 6,971 16,015 37,966 Riverside 24,117 16,319 18,459 42,479 101,374 San Bernardino 13,399 9,265 10,490 24,053 57,207 Ventura 4,516 3,095 3,544 8,003 19,158 SCAG 100,632 64,947 72,053 174,505 412,137 Projection period 2014–2021 work with local jurisdictions and community stakeholders to seek resources and provide assistance to address possible gentrification impacts of new development on existing communities and vulnerable populations. Focus New Growth Around Transit The 2016 RTP/SCS overall land use pattern reinforces the trend of focusing new housing and employment in the region’s HQTAs (see EXHIBIT 5.1). While maintaining jurisdictional totals, the overall land use pattern moves new development from areas outside of HQTAs into these areas. SCAG incorporated land use plans provided by local jurisdictions into this pattern. While many residents and employees within half a mile of a transit stop or corridor can walk or bike to transit, not all of these areas are targeted for new growth and/ or land use changes. The 2016 RTP/SCS assumes that 46 percent of new housing and 55 percent of new employment locations developed between 2012 and 2040 will be located within HQTAs, which comprise only three percent of the total land area in the SCAG region. Since adoption of the 2012 RTP/SCS, jurisdictions have referenced HQTAs in their planning documents and have positioned themselves to compete for California’s Cap-and-Trade auction proceeds to support Transit Oriented Development (TOD) and active transportation infrastructure. HQTAs are a cornerstone of land use planning best practice in the SCAG region because they concentrate roadway repair investments, leverage transit and active transportation investments, reduce regional life cycle infrastructure costs, improve accessibility, avoid greenfield development, create local jobs, and have the potential to improve public health and housing affordability. Here, households have expanded transportation choices with ready access to a multitude of safe and convenient transportation alternatives to driving alone—including walking and biking, taking the bus, light rail, commuter rail, the subway and/or shared mobility options. Households have more direct and easier access to jobs, schools, shopping, healthcare and entertainment, especially as Millennials form households and the senior population increases. Moreover, focusing future growth in HQTAs can provide expanded housing choices that nimbly respond to trends and market demands, encourage adaptive reuse of existing structures, revitalize main streets and increase Complete Street investments. Additional local policies that ensure that development in HQTAs achieve the intended reductions in VMT and greenhouse gas emissions include: TABLE 5.1 REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT, ADOPTED 2012 Exhibit 5.1 titLE Camarillo Moorpark Ojai Simi Valley Thousand Oaks Oxnard Arcadia Azusa Burbank Carson Downey El Monte Glendale Glendora La Mirada Los Angeles Monrovia Monterey Park Norwalk Pasadena Pomona Torrance Walnut West Covina Whittier Calabasas Long Beach Adelanto Apple Valley Barstow Chino Chino Hills Colton Fontana Hesperia Highland Loma LindaOntario Rancho Cucamonga Redlands Rialto San Bernardino Upland Victorville Yucaipa Yucca Valley Lancaster Palmdale Santa Clarita Eastvale Lake Elsinore Hemet Indio Indian Wells Temecula Perris Moreno Valley Murrieta Wildomar Rancho Mirage Corona Jurupa Valley Desert Hot Springs San Jacinto Beaumont Banning Calimesa Palm Desert Riverside Menifee Norco La Quinta Palm SpringsAnaheim Brea Buena Park Costa Mesa Fullerton Garden Grove Huntington Beach Irvine Laguna Niguel Mission Viejo Newport Beach Orange San Clemente Santa Ana Seal Beach Tustin Yorba Linda 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 Riverside County 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Exhibit5-1_HighQualityTransitAreaInTheSCAGregionFor2040Plan.mxd | Date: 2/16/2016Map Title: High Quality Transit Areas in the SCAG Region (2012 – 2040) (Source: SCAG) 8 10 10 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County 0 5 102.5 Miles High Quality Transit Areas (including rail stations and qualifying bus corridors, see glossary for definition) (Note: 2040 Plan Rail Station Alternatives shown as )2040 Plan 2012 Base Year EXHIBIT 5.1 HIGH QUALITY TRANSIT AREAS IN THE SCAG REGION FOR 2040 PLAN (Source: SCAG) 78 2016 RTP/SCS z Affordable housing requirements z Reduced parking requirements z Adaptive reuse of existing structures z Density bonuses tied to family housing units such as three- and four- bedroom units z Mixed-use development standards that include local serving retail z Increased Complete Streets investments around HQTAs. Complete Streets are streets designed, funded and operated to enable safe access for roadway users of all ages and abilities, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit riders. The State of California is also trying to encourage growth around transit with the passage of Senate Bill 743 (SB 743), which seeks to facilitate transit-oriented projects in existing urbanized areas. The bill creates a new exemption from CEQA for certain projects that are residential or employment centers or mixed- used projects located within a Transit Priority Area (TPA), a part of a specific plan with a certified EIR and consistent with the SCS or APS. Transit Oriented Development, HQTAs and Local Air Quality Impacts The 2016 RTP/SCS recognizes guidance from the 2005 ARB air quality manual, which recommends limiting the siting of sensitive uses within 500 feet of highways and urban roads carrying more than 100,000 vehicles per day. This ARB guidance is carefully applied in areas that support Transit Oriented Development. Less than 10 percent of HQTAs planned in the 2016 RTP/SCS would fall within 500 feet of highways and highly traveled corridors, according to geographic information system (GIS) analyses. While density is increased in some areas of HQTAs, growth remains constant in areas within 500 feet of highways and urban roads to reflect local input, thereby balancing the growth distribution. Plan for Growth Around Livable Corridors The Livable Corridors strategy seeks to revitalize commercial strips through integrated transportation and land use planning that results in increased economic activity and improved mobility options. Since 2006, SCAG has provided technical assistance for 19 planning efforts along arterial roadway corridors. These corridor planning studies focused on providing a better understanding of how corridors function along their entire length. Subsequent research has distinguished the retail density and the specific kinds of retail needed to make these neighborhood nodes destinations for walking and biking. From a land use perspective, Livable Corridors strategies include a special emphasis on fostering collaboration between neighboring jurisdictions to encourage better planning for various land uses, corridor branding, roadway improvements and focusing retail into attractive nodes along a corridor. Livable Corridors Network SCAG identified 2,980 miles of Livable Corridors along arterial roadways discussed in corridor planning studies funded through the Sustainability Planning Grant program and along enhanced bus transit corridors identified by regional partners. However, the land use strategies proposed in the 2016 RTP/SCS are not tied to a specific corridor. Livable Corridors are predominately a subset of the HQTAs, however 154 miles are not designated as HQTAs. These miles were identified in Sustainability Planning Grant projects and are proposed for active transportation improvements and the land use planning strategies described below. Livable Corridors Strategies The Livable Corridors concept combines three different components into a single planning concept to model the VMT and greenhouse gas emission reduction benefits: z Transit improvements: The associated county transportation commissions (CTCs) have identified some of these corridors for on-street, dedicated lane Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) or semi-dedicated BRT-light. The remaining corridors have the potential to support other features that improve bus performance. These other features include enhanced bus shelters, real-time travel information, off-bus ticketing, all door boarding and longer distances between stops to improve speed and reliability. z Active transportation improvements: Livable Corridors should include increased investments in Complete Streets to make these corridors and the intersecting arterials safe for biking and walking. z Land use policies: Livable Corridor strategies include the development of mixed-use retail centers at key nodes along the corridors, increasing neighborhood-oriented retail at more intersections and zoning that allows for the replacement of under-performing auto- oriented strip retail between nodes with higher density residential and employment. These strategies will allow more context sensitive density, improve retail performance, combat blight and improve fiscal outcomes for local communities. 7905 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH Support Local Sustainability Planning To implement the SCS, SCAG supports local planning practices that help lead to a reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Many local governments in the SCAG region serve as models for implementing the SCS. Sustainable Planning & Design, Zoning Codes and Climate Action Plans are three methods that local agencies have been adopting and implementing to help meet the regional targets for greenhouse gas emission reductions outlined in the SCS. Sustainable Planning & Design Many of the local policy documents that SCAG has reviewed are based on best practices that encourage infill and mixed-use development. Mixed-use design guidelines embrace and encourage increased densities and a mixing of uses, while also reflecting community character. For example, numerous suburban specific plans in the SCAG region encourage the revitalization of traditional main streets, downtowns and corridors. Other plans provide guidance for converting single-use office parks and industrial districts into mixed employment, retail and residential districts. Sustainable Zoning Codes Many cities and counties in the SCAG region have adopted form-based zoning codes that are tailored to local conditions, such as specifying building size and design parameters but allowing for more flexibility regarding use. Moreover, several cities and counties are updating their zoning codes to make development standards more environmentally friendly and equitable. One example is the City of San Gabriel’s “Greening the Code” strategy, which identifies ways for the city’s existing development code to facilitate more sustainability. New policies can involve coordinating landscaping practices with water conservation, best management practices for stormwater management and capture, creating better pedestrian connectivity, allowing more flexibility for mixed-use development and promoting energy efficient designs. Climate Action Plans SCAG is supporting several local governments throughout the region in the formation of Climate Action Plans (CAP). CAPs outline strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in a cost effective manner. This is done by creating greenhouse gas inventories so that local governments can efficiently target their emission reduction practices to sources that pollute the most. Strategies outlined by CAPs in the SCAG region include Green Building guidelines for municipal buildings and facilities, implementing public electric vehicle charging stations and establishing energy retrofit incentive programs for residents. Provide More Options For Short Trips Thirty-eight percent of all trips in the SCAG region are less than three miles. The 2016 RTP/SCS includes land use strategies, Complete Streets integration and a set of state and local policies to encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation for short trips in new and existing Neighborhood Mobility Areas (NMAs) and Complete Communities. In addition to the active transportation strategies that will be discussed below, land use strategies include pursuing local policies that encourage replacing motor vehicle use with Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) use. NEVs are a federally designated class of passenger vehicle rated for use on roads with posted speed limits of 35 miles per hour or less. Neighborhood Mobility Areas NMAs have a high intersection density, low to moderate traffic speeds and robust residential retail connections. These areas are suburban in nature, but can support slightly higher density in targeted locations. The land use strategies include shifting retail growth from large centralized retail strip malls to smaller distributed centers throughout an NMA. This strategy has shown to improve the use of active transportation or NEVs for short trips. Steps needed to support NEV use include providing state and regional incentives for purchases, local planning for charging stations, designating a local network of low speed roadways and adopting local regulations that allow smaller NEV parking stalls. NMAs are applicable in a wide range of settings in the SCAG region. The strategies associated with this concept are intended to provide sustainable transportation options for residents of the region who do not have convenient access to high- frequency transit options. Complete Communities Development of “complete communities” can provide households with a range of mobility options to complete short trips. The 2016 RTP/SCS supports the creation of these mixed-use districts through a concentration of activities with housing, employment, and a mix of retail and services, located in close proximity to each other. Focusing a mix of land uses in strategic growth areas creates complete communities wherein most daily needs can be met within a short distance of home, providing residents with the opportunity to patronize their local area and run daily errands by walking or cycling rather than traveling by automobile. 2016 RTP/SCS Strategy The SCAG region is crisscrossed by long arterial corridors, many of which are a legacy of Spanish colonial routes that linked the early missions and post-colonial ranchos. The suburban communities that developed rapidly after World War II were formed between these corridors, on a large (often one square mile) grid system. The inland portions of the South Bay, the Gateway Cities, the San Fernando and San Gabriel valleys, as well as the northern portions of Orange County follow this pattern. SCAG’s Livable Corridors Strategy considers these suburban development patterns and proposes to encourage development along the boulevards that not only serve as major travel routes, but also destinations. As the region transitions to higher investments in infill development and high quality, high frequency transit, these arterials are well suited to connect the region. The Livable Corridor Strategy specifically advises local jurisdictions to plan and zone for increased density at key nodes along the corridor and replacement of single-story under-performing strip retail with well-designed higher density housing and employment centers. This development along key corridors, when coordinated with improvements to the frequency and speed of buses along the corridors, will make transit a more convenient and viable option. Additionally, enhanced roadway designs to accommodate active transportation will also increase the vibrancy along these boulevards. Several important transit investments in the SCAG region will help encourage this land use strategy. The Santa Ana Harbor Blvd Specific Plan incorporates the improved Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Bravo! Route 543 and the planned OC Streetcar into its vision of the future. In Rancho Cucamonga, the City received a SCAG grant to reconcile the various specific plans along Foothill Blvd in anticipation of a future extension of the Omnitrans SbX. Across Los Angeles County, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) is planning for a high frequency network of buses with fewer stops. And the City of Los Angeles incorporated a “Transit Enhanced Network” as part of its General Plan Mobility Element to complement these investments. LIVABLE CORRIDORS Enhancing the Connection Between Transit and Land Use higher density housing/employment pedestrian enhancements protectedbicycle laneshigh frequency bus service ramps to assist wheelchairs/strollers Image courtesy of National Association of City Transportation Officials Example of a Livable Corridor 2016 RTP/SCS Strategy About 38 percent of all trips in the region are three miles or less. That is a short enough distance that can be covered by walking or biking, but more than 78 percent of these trips are made by driving. While convenient, driving for short trips can cause unnecessary congestion and pollution. What can be done to make it more convenient for people to walk, bike or even skate instead of driving, when practical? The Neighborhood Mobility Areas strategy represents a set of state and local policies to encourage the use of active and other non-automobile modes of transportation, particularly for short trips in many suburban areas in Southern California developed between the late 1890s and the early 1960s. These suburban developments often were designed for streetcars and walking, in addition to automobiles and are characterized by small to medium lot single-family homes, a denser grid network of local roads, a higher density of intersections and accessibility to neighborhood retail establishments. By employing Complete Streets strategies, such as bike lanes, roundabouts, wider sidewalks or better lighting, the neighborhood design could encourage a return to greater active transportation use for those short trips. Similarly, planning a connected network of dedicated lanes and roadways with speed limits 35 mph and under can encourage more use of Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEV) for short trips. NEVs produce negligible greenhouse gas missions (based on energy production) and zero local pollution. In addition, NEVs take up less roadway capacity, less parking area at both the origin and destination and reduce the probability of an injury or fatality in the event of a collision with a pedestrian or bicyclist. The Neighborhood Mobility Area concept is not new. Across the country, they are referred to as streetcar suburbs, first generation suburbs or suburban villages. But its application here in Southern California, when coupled with the renaissance some parts of the region are experiencing with transit and active transportation, would provide residents with greater mobility choices and an alternative to driving short distances. NEIGHBORHOOD MOBILITY AREAS Encouraging Active Transportation for Short Trips high-visibility crosswalks bulb-outs to make intersections saferramps to assist wheelchairs/strollers street lighting for better visibility and safety trees and landscaping to provide shade/improve walkability Image courtesy of National Association of City Transportation Officials Example of a Neighborhood Mobility Area 84 2016 RTP/SCS z Aligning with funding opportunities and pilot programs to begin implementation of the Natural Lands Conservation Plan through acquisition and restoration z Providing incentives to jurisdictions that cooperate across county lines to protect and restore natural habitat corridors, especially where corridors cross county boundaries. TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIES The strategies for land use are tightly integrated with considerations for transportation, and that relationship is vital for our region to achieve its long- term regional goals. The same applies to our discussion of transportation strategies. The success of strategies related to transportation can only be achieved if they are tied closely to how we use land—how and where we grow, where we live, work, go to school, shop and so on. SCAG is pursuing numerous strategies divided into two broad categories: Maximizing Our Current System and Completing Our System. In all, the 2016 RTP/SCS includes $556.5 billion in transportation system investments through 2040. MAXIMIZING OUR CURRENT SYSTEM Working to make sure our existing transportation system is operating at maximum efficiency is a leading regional priority—and doing this is critical for the land use strategies discussed above to be effective. Over the past half century, the SCAG region has invested hundreds of billions of dollars into building and expanding the multimodal transportation system that we rely on today. Our investments must be protected and properly maintained to ensure that maximum productivity and efficiency are gained from the system. Under the system management approach, priority is given to maintaining and preserving the system, as well as ensuring that it is being operated as safely, efficiently and effectively as possible. This approach is illustrated in the system management pyramid (FIGURE 5.1). Protecting our previous investments and getting the most out of every component is the highest priority for our region. Preserve Our Existing System Southern California’s transportation system is becoming increasingly compromised by decades of underinvestment in maintaining and preserving our infrastructure. These investments have not kept pace with the demands placed on the system and the quality of many of our roads, highways, bridges, transit, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities are continuing to deteriorate. Unfortunately, the longer they deteriorate the more expensive they will be to fix in the future. Even worse, deficient conditions compromise the safety of users throughout the Protect Natural and Farm Lands Many natural and agricultural land areas near the edge of existing urbanized areas do not have plans for conservation and they are susceptible to the pressures of development. Many of these lands, such as riparian areas, have high per-acre habitat values and are host to some of the most diverse yet vulnerable species that play an important role in the overall ecosystem. Developing Conservation Strategies Local land use decisions play a pivotal role in the fate of some of the region’s most valuable habitat and farm lands. Many local governments have taken steps toward planning comprehensively for conserving natural lands and farm lands, while also meeting demands for growth. Across the region, transportation agencies and local governments have used habitat conservation plans and other tools to link land use decisions with comprehensive conservation plans in order to streamline development. To support those and other comprehensive conservation planning efforts and to inform the local land use decision making process, SCAG studied regional scale habitat values, developed a conservation framework and assembled a natural resource database.2 To coordinate with and support the viability of the Livable Corridors and HQTA land use strategies, this Plan suggests redirecting growth away from high value habitat areas to existing urbanized areas. SCAG is engaging numerous stakeholders as it creates a Natural Lands Conservation Plan. Building on this effort may lead to a regional conservation program that CTCs, jurisdictions, agencies and non-profits can align with and support. This strategic and comprehensive approach allows the region to meet its housing and transportation needs, while ensuring that important natural lands, farm lands and water resources are protected. The 2012 RTP/SCS committed to a regional mitigation plan for inclusion in the 2016 RTP/SCS. With that as the foundation, the following are next steps for further developing a conservation strategy. More information can be found in the Natural & Farm Lands Appendix. z Expanding upon the Open Space Conservation Database and Framework by incorporating strategic mapping layers to build the database and further refine the priority conservation areas z Encouraging CTCs to develop advanced mitigation programs and/or include them in future transportation measures 2 SCAG 2014 Inventory of Natural Resources Databases in SCAG region. Accessed at http:// sustain.scag.ca.gov/Sustainability%20Portal%20Document%20Library/SCAG%20 Inventory%20Natural%20Resources%20GIS%20Databases.pdf. 8505 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH network. For all of these reasons, system preservation and achieving a state of good repair are top priorities of the 2016 RTP/SCS. About $275.5 billion, or nearly half of all of the 2016 RTP/SCS proposed expenditures through 2040, is allocated to system preservation and operation (see FIGURE 5.2). Chapter 6 reflects the allocation of these expenditures for the transit and passenger rail systems, the State Highway System, and regionally significant local streets and roads within the 2016 RTP/SCS. Note that the allocation for the State Highway System includes bridges; the allocation for transit includes funding to both preserve and operate the transit system; and the allocation for regionally significant local streets and roads includes bridges and active transportation safety improvements. The 2016 RTP/SCS system preservation strategies include: z Protecting and preserving what we have first, supporting a “Fix-it- First” principle. z Considering life-cycle costs beyond construction. z Continuing to work with stakeholders to identify and support new sustainable funding sources and/or increased funding levels for preservation and maintenance. Manage Congestion Congestion Management Process (CMP) Federal regulations for Metropolitan Transportation Planning and Programming require the development, establishment and implementation of a CMP that is fully integrated into the regional planning process.3 The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) defines the CMP as a “systematic approach . . . that provides for effective management and operation, based on a cooperatively developed and implemented metropolitan-wide strategy, of new and existing transportation facilities eligible for funding under title 23 U.S.C. and title 49 U.S.C., through the use of operational management strategies.” In compliance 3 23 CFR 450.320. P R E V E N T I O N & S A F E T Y PREVENTIO N & S A F E T Y PREV E N T I O N & S A F E T Y Intelligent Transportation Systems Traveler Information/Traffic ControlIncident Management System Monitoring an d E v a l u a t i o n Maintenance and Pr e s e r v a t i o n Operational Improvements Sys tem Completionand Expansion Smart Land Us eDemand Management / Val u e P r i c i n g FIGURE 5.1 SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PYRAMID FIGURE 5.2 PRESERVATION AND OPERATIONS EXPENDITURES Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding. Transit Passenger Rail State Highways Regionally Significant Local Streets & Roads TOTAL OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURES $275.5 BILLION 57% 6% 24% 14% 86 2016 RTP/SCS with federal law,4 SCAG has made the CMP an integral part of the regional transportation planning process, including the 2016 RTP/SCS and the Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP). The CMP is part of SCAG’s integrated approach to improving and optimizing the transportation system, to provide for the safe and effective management of the regional transportation system through the use of monitoring and maintenance, demand reduction, land use, operational management strategies and strategic capacity enhancements. SCAG undertakes eight actions that are considered by FHWA to be the core of the CMP. These include developing regional objectives for congestion management; using performance measures and monitoring to understand the causes of congestion; identifying problems and needs; developing alternative strategies; and evaluating effectiveness. A more complete discussion of SCAG’s CMP is provided in the Congestion Management Appendix. The CMP requires that roadway projects that significantly increase the capacity for single-occupancy vehicles (SOVs) be addressed through a CMP that provides appropriate analysis of reasonable, multimodal travel demand reduction and operational management strategies for the corridor. If alternative strategies are neither practical nor feasible, appropriate management strategies must be considered in conjunction with roadway capacity improvement projects that would increase SOV capacity. SCAG previously used a $50 million threshold to identify SOV capacity-enhancing projects, but the agency is replacing this criterion with a project distance-based length criterion of one mile or more for the 2017 FTIP. Further details of this process are included in the upcoming 2017 FTIP. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) The 2016 RTP/SCS commits $6.9 billion toward TDM strategies throughout the region. There are three main areas of focus: z Reducing the number of SOV trips and overall vehicle miles traveled (VMT) through ridesharing, which includes carpooling, vanpooling and supportive policies for shared ride services such as Uber and Lyft. z Redistributing or eliminating vehicle trips from peak demand periods through incentives for telecommuting and alternative work schedules. z Reducing the number of SOV trips through the use of other modes of travel such as transit, rail, bicycling and walking. In addition, the following strategies expand and encourage the implementation of TDM strategies to their fullest extent: 4 23 USC 134 and 49 USC 5303-5305. z Rideshare incentives and rideshare matching. z Parking management and parking cash-out policies. z Preferential parking or parking subsidies for carpoolers. z Intelligent parking programs. z Promotion and expansion of Guaranteed Ride Home programs. z Incentives for telecommuting and flexible work schedules. z Integrated mobility hubs and first/last mile strategies. z Incentives for employees who bike and walk to work. z Investments in active transportation infrastructure. z Investments in Safe Routes to School programs and infrastructure. Transportation Systems Management (TSM) The 2016 RTP/SCS includes $9.2 billion for TSM improvements. These include extensive advanced ramp metering, enhanced incident management, bottleneck removal to improve flow (e.g., auxiliary lanes), expansion and integration of the traffic signal synchronization network, data collection to monitor system performance, and other Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) improvements. The 2016 RTP/SCS identifies a comprehensive set of strategies that work in concert to optimize the performance of the transportation system. This set of strategies does not focus solely on expanding the system, but also considers how we operate the system; how we coordinate land use planning with transportation planning; how we deal with incidents such as collisions or special events; how we provide information to the traveling public so people can make informed decisions about how, where and when to travel; and how we maintain the system. All of these strategies are based on a foundation of comprehensive system monitoring so that we can understand how the transportation system is performing and where we need improvement. This approach is based in part on work that California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has done for many years to optimize the performance of the State Highway System. Two important categories for TSM strategies are: 1. Corridor Mobility and Sustainability Improvement Plans: Caltrans, SCAG and county partners in the past have worked together to improve the efficiency of our highways and arterials through the development of Corridor System Management Plans (CSMPs). Since the passage of Proposition 1B in November 2006 and with the creation Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA), which 8705 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH served to improve mobility on the State Highway System, several CSMPs have been developed for various corridors throughout the SCAG region. Historically, the response to congestion has been to add additional capacity. However, CSMPs have provided a lower cost, higher benefit option toward making highways and parallel arterial systems, transit and incident response management more efficient and were designed to focus primarily on operational strategies to optimize corridor performance through ITS strategies, in conjunction with operational and capacity improvements towards improving productivity along highway corridors. SCAG recognizes the efforts taken thus far under the current CSMP framework to improve mobility, but believes that CSMPs can be further improved upon. SCAG encourages the development of Corridor Sustainability Studies (CSS) which will build upon the existing CSMP framework by analyzing the corridor from a multimodal perspective. More specifically, these studies will include a focus on newer planning priorities such as Complete Streets and a Smart Mobility Framework (not addressed by current CSMPs). SCAG recognizes that the region could benefit from a site specific CSS focused on improving mobility for all modes of travel throughout the region. 2. Integrated Corridor Management (ICM): The ICM Initiative was first introduced by the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) back in 2006. Under the ICM approach, all elements within a corridor are considered to evaluate opportunities that move people and goods in the most efficient manner possible, while simultaneously ensuring that the greatest operational efficiencies are achieved. Since the introduction of ICM, great progress has been made. In Los Angeles, Caltrans (in coordination with Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority or Metro) and various cities have embarked on the first Integrated Corridor Management pilot project on Interstate 210. This project aims to minimize congestion due to collisions and is also referred to as the Connected Corridors initiative. Over the next ten years, Caltrans plans to implement similar projects on 25 additional congested corridors statewide. ICM strategies to be considered as part of the Interstate 210 project include: „Integration of highway ramp meters and arterial signal systems „Arterial signal coordination „Traffic re-routing due to incidents or events „Transit signal priority on arterials and on-ramps „Parking management „Traveler communication (via changeable message signs, 511, radio, social networks, mobile app) of traffic conditions, transit services, parking, alternate route/trip/mode options „System coordination/communication between Caltrans (highway operator) and local jurisdictions (arterial operators). Additional System Management Initiatives include: z Arterial Signal Synchronization projects that have been completed on various arterials through the region to optimize traffic flow z The Dynamic Corridor Congestion Management (DCCM) initiative in Los Angeles County, in which Caltrans is developing a corridor management initiative on Interstate 110 to coordinate highway ramp metering with arterial signals. Various efforts have been completed to inform the traveling public of expected travel times to various destinations and in some cases provide travel time comparisons with transit. z The Caltrans Advanced Traffic Management (ATM) study for Interstate 105 and the Regional Integration of ITS Projects (RIITS) and IEN data exchange efforts at Los Angeles Metro. Promote Safety and Security Ensuring the safety and security of our transportation network for residents and visitors is a top priority. SCAG supports the implementation of the Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP), which has an overarching goal of Toward Zero Deaths. The state’s short-term goals are to reduce the number and rate of fatalities by three percent per year and to reduce the number and rate of severe injuries by 1.5 percent per year. SCAG is continuing to work with Caltrans and the CTCs toward identifying other means of improving the safety and security of our transportation system. Regarding our transportation network’s security, there are numerous agencies that participate in the response to incidents and assist with hazard preparations for individual jurisdictions. These include the California Emergency Management Agency, county offices of emergency management, fire departments, police departments and the California Highway Patrol. Collaboration among many of these agencies is essential when addressing incidents regionwide. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) oversees this coordination. However, FEMA defines metropolitan areas differently than the U.S. DOT, so this limits SCAG’s ability to participate at an agency level. Nevertheless, SCAG seeks to use its strengths and organization to assist first responders, recovery teams and planners alike in a supporting role. BENEFITS OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT/TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TSM/TDM)FOCUS Advanced Ramp Metering Alleviates congestion and reduces collisions at on-ramps and highway-to-highway interchanges Enhanced Incident Management Reduces incident-related congestion, which is estimated to represent half of the total congestion in urban areas Improved Data Collection Allows implementing agencies and operators to monitor system performance and optimize the impact of transportation investments Traffic Signal Synchronization Minimizes wait times at traffic signals and therefore reduces travel time Universal Transit Fare Cards (Smart Cards) Reduces time required to purchase transit tickets and allows interoperability among transit providers Advanced Traveler Information Provides real-time traffic conditions and alternative routing, and therefore allows the public to make more informed travel decisions Transit Automatic Vehicle Location Enables monitoring of transit vehicles and ensures on-time performance Historically, efforts to reduce congestion have focused solely on individual networks, in which underutilized capacity in parallel highway lanes, arterial lanes and transit services were often not considered. In recent years, TSM/ TDM strategies have been developed to increase efficiency through the use of technologies. The application of these technologies, such as intelligent transportation systems (ITS), and a commitment by Caltrans and its partner agencies to work together have the potential to transform the ways that corridors are currently operated. In 2012, Caltrans, with assistance from Metro and California Partners for Advanced Transportation Technology (PATH) at UC Berkeley, developed the first Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) pilot project within the SCAG region along the Interstate 210 (I-210) corridor. The purpose of the pilot is to look at all opportunities to move people and goods in the most efficient manner possible, to ensure the greatest potential gains in operational performance. This includes seeking ways to improve how arterials, highways, transit and parking systems work in conjunction with one another. Strategies to be considered as part of the project include: z Integration of highway ramp meters and arterial signal systems z Arterial signal coordination z Traffic re-routing due to incidents or events z Transit signal priority on arterials and on-ramps z Parking management (e.g., smart parking—locating available parking spaces at transit stations and private parking garages) z Variable lane configuration systems z Traveler communication (via changeable message signs, 511, radio, social networks, mobile app) of traffic conditions, transit services, parking, alternate route/trip/mode options z System coordination/communication between Caltrans and local jurisdictions The pilot is still under development, but it has already changed the way state and local transportation agencies work together in managing transportation systems. Caltrans aims to eventually expand the application of ICM concepts to other corridors over the next ten years. In this context, the Interstate 210 Pilot is a test bed to demonstrate how an ICM project can be developed by engaging and building consensus among corridor stakeholders, to address congestion for the betterment of an entire network. Case Study: Interstate 210 Pilot Project 8905 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH SCAG continues to pursue the following strategies toward ensuring safety and security: z Ensure transportation safety, security and reliability for all people and goods throughout the region. z Prevent, protect, respond to and recover from major human-caused or natural events in order to minimize the threat and impact to lives, property, the transportation network and the regional economy. z Provide a policy forum to help develop regional consensus and education on security policies and emergency responses. z Assist in expediting the planning and programming of transportation infrastructure repairs from major disasters. z Encourage the integration of transportation security measures into transportation projects early in the development process by leveraging SCAG’s relevant plans, programs and processes (including regional Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) architecture). For more details on safety and security and additional policies and strategies, please review the Transportation Safety & Security Appendix. COMPLETING OUR SYSTEM Strategies for improving and expanding the many modes of transportation that make up the regional network must be integrated closely with our strategies for how we use land. The success of transit; passenger rail; walking, biking and other forms of active transportation; our highways and arterials; the efficient movement of goods; and our regional airport system all depend on a close relationship with how our region uses land and how we grow. This is particularly true when it comes to improving and building a transit system that can best serve people in communities throughout our region. It is the first transportation category for which numerous strategies are reviewed. Transit Since 1991, the SCAG region has spent more than $50 billion dollars on public transportation. This includes high profile investments in rail transit and lower profile, vital investments in operations and maintenance. Looking toward 2040, the 2016 RTP/SCS maintains a significant investment in public transportation across all transit modes and also calls for new household and employment growth to be targeted in areas that are well served by public transportation to maximize the improvements called for in the Plan. This investment package includes a selection of major capital investments described in TABLE 5.2, which displays all locally notable transit capital projects and additional capital investment packages totaling more than $500 million. These investments include new rail transit facilities, vehicle replacements, bus system improvements and capitalized maintenance projects. When these projects are completed, the region will have a greatly expanded urban rail network, including ten light rail projects and three heavy rail projects on the Metro Rail system. New BRT and rapid bus routes will provide additional higher speed bus service in Los Angeles and Orange Counties and the Inland Empire. Orange County will add new streetcar services to link major destinations in Anaheim, Santa Ana and Garden Grove to the Metrolink system. Riverside County will extend Metrolink to San Jacinto and San Bernardino County will connect Metrolink to Ontario International Airport and to Redlands via Downtown San Bernardino. In addition, the 2016 RTP/SCS includes extensive local bus, rapid bus, BRT and express service improvements. An expanded point-to-point express bus network will take advantage of the region’s carpool and express lane network. New BRT service, limited-stop service and increased local bus service along key corridors, in coordination with transit-oriented development and land use, will encourage greater use of transit for short local trips. See EXHIBIT 5.2. Also included in the investment package are renewed commitments to asset management and maintaining a state of good repair. TABLE 5.3 describes all transit operations and maintenance investments over $500 million. This list includes bus, urban rail and paratransit operations, the implementation of the Orange County Transportation Authority’s (OCTA’s) Short Range Transit Plan, expanded bus service on targeted corridors, preventative maintenance and an increased commitment on asset preservation funded from innovative revenue sources. Aside from capital projects, there are many improvements that can help make transit operate more efficiently and effectively, make it more accessible to more travelers and increase ridership. The 2016 RTP/SCS recommends additional transit initiatives. Among them: 90 2016 RTP/SCS COUNTY PROJECT Los Angeles Airport Metro Connector Los Angeles Crenshaw LAX Transit Corridor Los Angeles East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor Los Angeles Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 Los Angeles Exposition Transit Corridor, Phase 2 to Santa Monica Los Angeles Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Phase 2A Los Angeles Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension: Azusa to County Line Los Angeles Purple Line Extension to La Cienega, Century City, Westwood Los Angeles Regional Connector Los Angeles Sepulveda Pass Corridor Los Angeles South Bay Metro Green Line Extension Los Angeles West Santa Ana Branch Transit Corridor Los Angeles Bus & Rail Capital—LA County Near Term Los Angeles Countywide Bus System Improvement–Metro Fleet Los Angeles Countywide Bus System Improvement—LA County Muni Fleet Los Angeles Metro Rail System Improvements (Capital Costs Only) Los Angeles Metro Rail Rehabilitation and Replacement (Capital Costs Only) Los Angeles Transit contingency/new rail yards/additional rail cars (Capital costs only)— LA County Los Angeles Vermont Short Corridor Los Angeles Metro Red Line Extension: Metro Red Line Station North Hollywood to Burbank Bob Hope Airport Los Angeles Metro Green Line Extension: Metro Green Line Norwalk Station to Norwalk Metrolink Station Los Angeles Slauson Light Rail: Crenshaw Corridor to Metro Blue Line Slauson Station Orange Anaheim Rapid Connection Orange Countywide Fixed-Route, Express and Paratransit Capital (Baseline)— Orange County Orange OC Streetcar Riverside Coachella Valley Bus Rapid Service Riverside Perris Valley Line Riverside Perris Valley Line Extension to San Jacinto San Bernardino Foothill/5th Bus Rapid Transit San Bernardino Gold Line Phase 2B to Montclair San Bernardino Metrolink San Bernardino Line Double tracking San Bernardino Passenger Rail Service from San Bernardino to Ontario Airport San Bernardino Redlands Rail San Bernardino West Valley Connector Bus Rapid Transit TABLE 5.2 SELECTED TRANSIT CAPITAL PROJECTS Source: 2016 RTP/SCS Project List TABLE 5.3 MAJOR TRANSIT OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PROJECTS AND INVESTMENTS (Over $500 Million) Source: 2016 RTP/SCS Project List COUNTY PROJECT Los Angeles Access Services Incorporated (Paratransit)—Metro subsidy Los Angeles Preventive Maintenance (Capital & Operating Maintenance Items Only)—LA County Orange Countywide Fixed-Route, Express and Paratransit Operations—Orange County Orange OCTA SRTP Implementation Orange Metrolink Operations—Orange County Orange Transit Extensions to Metrolink–Go Local Operations—Orange County San Bernardino San Bernardino Countywide Local Transit Service Operations Regionwide Regionwide Transit Operations and Maintenance—Preservation Regionwide Expand Bus Service: Productive Corridors Regionwide Expand Bus Service: BRT Regionwide Expand Bus Service: Point-to-Point Exhibit 5.1 titLE (Source: SCAG) O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Exhibit5-2_2040TransitNetworkPlannedAndExisting.mxd | Date: 11/19/2015Map Title: 2040 Transit Network Planned and Existing SCAG Region Kern San Diego 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 San Bernardino County Riverside County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County °0 4.5 92.25 Miles 8 10 10 San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Commuter Rail 2012 Base Year 2040 Plan Urban Rail 2012 Base Year 2040 Plan Rapid Bus and Bus Rapid Transit 2012 Base Year 2040 Plan Bus Routes (2012 Base Year & 2040 Plan)Urban Rail Alternatives EXHIBIT 5.2 2040 TRANSIT NETWORK PLANNED AND EXISTING 92 2016 RTP/SCS Expand and Improve Real-Time Passenger Information Systems: Most medium to large size transit agencies now offer up-to-the-minute updates on arrival and departure times. This allows passengers to make more informed travel decisions and improve the overall travel experience. Implement First/Last Mile Strategies to Extend the Effective Reach of Transit: This is an area of study with recent focus. Making transit more accessible for biking or walking that first mile to a transit station, or from a transit station, or both, will encourage more transit use and reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. More than 90 percent of Metrolink riders drive to their origin station, representing a significant potential for providing alternatives. As mentioned before, several cities in Orange County are planning streetcar services to connect Metrolink riders to their final destinations. Implement Local Circulators: Many jurisdictions in the region already have networks of local community circulators and fixed-route systems. Implementing more of these services would provide alternatives for residents of increasingly compact communities. Passenger Rail The 2016 RTP/SCS proposes three main passenger rail strategies that will improve speed, service and safety and provide an attractive alternative to driving alone. They are: z Improving the Los Angeles–San Diego–San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor (LOSSAN Corridor) z Improving the existing Metrolink system z Implementing Phase One of the California High-Speed Train The state’s High-Speed Train will provide an additional intrastate transportation option in California, offering an alternative to air and auto travel and providing new capacity for travel on the state’s highways and airports. The California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA), in partnership with the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), which has provided $3.6 billion in High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail funding, have chosen to begin construction in the San Joaquin Valley. The system will then be built south to our region, connecting to Palmdale, Burbank Bob Hope Airport, Los Angeles Union Station and Anaheim by 2029. This is consistent with the CHSRA’s adopted 2014 Business Plan and Draft 2016 Business Plan. Implement and Expand Transit Priority Strategies: Transit priority strategies include transit signal priority, queue jumpers and bus lanes. Signal priority is a highly effective treatment that speeds up bus service and attracts new transit riders. The Metro Rapid program in Los Angeles County has increased speeds by more than 20 percent, compared with the local service on the same street. It also has brought new riders to its system. Bus lanes are even more effective at increasing speeds, however in our region there is a dearth of such lanes. SCAG encourages transit agencies and local jurisdictions to implement them, where appropriate. Implement Regional and Inter-County Fare Agreements and Media: Implementing additional inter-jurisdictional fare agreements and media, such as Los Angeles County’s EZ Pass, will make transit more attractive and accessible. A pass that would cover all transit services in Los Angeles and Orange counties, or the whole SCAG region, is an example. OCTA, the LOSSAN Managing Agency, recently secured a California Cap-and-Trade grant to establish fare agreements between the Pacific Surfliner and local transit operators along its corridor where an Amtrak ticket will be good for a connecting transit fare. Implement New BRT and Limited-Stop Bus Service: BRT service provides frequent, high quality bus service and is characterized by features such as dedicated lanes, traffic signal priority, limited stops, pre-boarding fare payment and unique branding. BRT is about 20 percent faster than traditional local bus service. It is a premium service and has proven to attract new riders to transit. BRT implementation does require some capital investment, but it is scalable so that transit agencies can implement a range of elements to improve bus service depending upon the resources available. In an environment of scarce funding, offering limited-stop service is also an excellent alternative to BRT because it involves strategically reducing the number of stops a bus would serve along a given route. Limited-stop service has been shown to be about 15 percent faster than traditional local service. Increase Bicycle Carrying Capacity on Transit and Rail Vehicles: Bicycling is becoming more popular and our transit system can do more to accommodate bicyclists. Many buses have bike racks with capacity for only two bikes. Meanwhile, Metro and Metrolink are now allowing more bicycles on their railcars and providing bicycle lockers at rail and fixed guideway bus stations. Allowing more bikes on transit vehicles, to a reasonable point, will increase transit ridership. 9305 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH SCRIP is number one on the list because it will deliver regional benefits for all counties. Los Angeles Union Station was originally designed as a “stub” rail facility, with tracks only leaving the station in a northerly direction and no through-train operation capability. Up to six tracks will be built to extend out of the south of Union Station and across U.S. Route 101 to connect with the main tracks along the Los Angeles River. These additional tracks will increase Union Station’s capacity by 40 to 50 percent, enabling the scheduling of many more through trains with improved running times. They will also result in sharply reduced air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions from idling locomotives. Several additional strategies are designed to increase rail ridership in our region by making rail travel more attractive as an alternative to commuting alone by car. These strategies will serve three distinct rail markets: commuter, intercity and interregional. The first is served by Metrolink, the second by Amtrak and the third will be served by California High-Speed Train service. However, the three carriers can be attractive to multiple rail travel markets. Passenger rail strategies for these markets include: Increase Speed and Service: As noted above, the high-speed rail system MOU partners are in the process of planning and implementing the MOU capital projects to improve capacity, speed and service, bringing at least some segments of our rail network up to the federally defined high speed of 110 miles per hour or greater and to implement a blended system of rail services. In addition to the MOU project list, these projects are detailed in the LOSSAN Strategic Implementation Plan for 2030 and the Metrolink 2015 Strategic Assessment that looks out 10 years to 2025. As speeds and service levels improve, these services will become more competitive with SOV travel and as a result ridership will continue to grow. Further, their schedules should be adjusted once the state’s High-Speed Train project is implemented, so that all rail services complement and feed one another. Improve Accessibility and Connectivity: This strategy includes establishing rail connections to our region’s airports, and improving transit, bicycling and walking accessibility and connectivity to rail stations. Burbank Bob Hope Airport is presently the region’s best-served airport by rail, and will soon host two rail stations in the near future with service provided by two Metrolink lines, Amtrak and the state’s High-Speed Train in the future. Ontario International Airport (ONT) is not directly served by rail, although SCAG together with Metro, SANBAG and CHSRA are studying various options to provide direct rail service Existing passenger rail facilities in Southern California and the Bay Area (the “bookends” of the Phase One system) will also be improved to provide immediate, near-term benefits while laying the groundwork for future integration with High-Speed Train. This “blended approach” to deliver the full integrated system, through phased implementation over time, will help reduce costs and environmental impacts. With the adoption of the 2012 RTP/SCS, the region and the CHSRA committed to spending $1 billion in Prop. 1A funds and other fund sources on these early investments in the “bookends.” This commitment by CHSRA and the transportation agencies was formalized in the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between CHSRA, Metrolink, SCAG, San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), Metro, Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) and the City of Anaheim. The MOU includes a candidate project list to which $1 billion will be programmed in order to provide interconnectivity to the California High-Speed Train project and improve the speed, capacity and safety of our existing passenger rail network. The list includes 74 projects totaling nearly $4 billion and it shows the need for capital investments to improve the speed and service of the existing rail network regionwide. The top six projects on this list are each of the five county’s (Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego) top projects—plus the Southern California Regional Interconnector Project (SCRIP, formerly called the Los Angeles Union Station Run-Through Tracks). See TABLE 5.4. TABLE 5.4 TOP SIX MOU PROJECTS CP = A track switch, or the location of a track signal or other marker with which dispatchers can specify when controlling trains. Los Angeles Southern California Regional Interconnector Project Los Angeles CP Brighton to CP Roxford Double Track Orange State College Blvd. Grade Separation Riverside McKinley St. Grade Separation San Bernardino CP Lilac to CP Rancho Double Track San Diego San Onofre to Pulgas Double Track 94 2016 RTP/SCS to the airport. LAX is also currently not served by any rail, but will be within the next decade via the Crenshaw Line and the Airport Metro Connector. Improving transit bicycling and walking accessibility to our region’s passenger rail stations is also critical. Increasing rail feeder bus services in our region to passenger rail stations would reduce the incentive for SOV travel. Establishing more transit services such as OCTA’s Stationlink service would provide this incentive. Finally, there is still little BRT or BRT-Lite service in our region outside of Los Angeles County, and establishing more BRT routes to serve rail stations such as the current Omnitrans sbX Green Line and the Riverside Transit Agency’s future RapidLink Line 1 will help meet this goal. Secure Increased Funding and Dedicated Funding Sources: Passenger rail has traditionally lacked dedicated funding streams. Amtrak is funded annually by the U.S. Congress, usually resulting in funding amounts insufficient to meet state of good repair needs or to increase Amtrak’s levels of service and expand the network. With local control of the Pacific Surfliner now complete, the State of California has guaranteed funding levels to maintain current service levels (but not to increase service levels) for the first three years. One new funding source is California’s Cap-and-Trade Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program, which received $25 million in FY2014-15 and 10 percent of annual Cap-and- Trade auction proceeds beginning in FY2015-16. This FY2015-16 allocation is currently estimated to be more than $200 million. Similarly, the CHSRA has been given a dedicated Cap-and-Trade funding stream of 25 percent of funds, beginning in FY2015-16 (for FY2014-15 CHSRA received $250 million). FY2015-16 funding is estimated at more than $600 million. Support Increased TOD and First/Last Mile Strategies: Increased TOD and first/last mile planning and investments are crucial to passenger rail station area planning. Increased and effective TOD improves our region’s jobs/housing balance, and it reduces VMT, air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. First/last mile investments also reduce VMT, air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions and encourage rail users to access rail stations with options other than driving alone. Implement Cooperative Fare Agreements and Media: Cooperative fare agreements and media also offer opportunities for increasing rail ridership and attracting new riders. For example, the Rail2Rail pass allows Metrolink monthly pass riders who have origin and destination points along the LOSSAN corridor to ride Amtrak. In 2014, the North County Transit District (NCTD) reached an agreement with Caltrans Division of Rail (DOR), in which five daily Pacific Surfliner trains stop at all non-Pacific Surfliner Amtrak (Coaster) stops in San Diego County. This service has proven quite popular and successful. Agreements like this one could be expanded once the California High- Speed Train is built. Active Transportation The 2016 RTP/SCS includes $12.9 billion for active transportation improvements, including $8.1 billion in capital projects and $4.8 billion as part of the operations and maintenance expenditures on regionally significant local streets and roads. The Active Transportation portion of the 2016 Plan updates the Active Transportation portion of the 2012 Plan, which has goals for improving safety, increasing active transportation usage and friendliness, and encouraging local active transportation plans. It proposes strategies to further develop the regional bikeway network, assumes that all local active transportation plans will be implemented, and dedicates resources to maintain and repair thousands of miles of dilapidated sidewalks. To accommodate the growth in walking, biking and other forms of active transportation regionally, the 2016 Active Transportation Plan also considers new strategies and approaches beyond those proposed in 2012. Among them: z Better align active transportation investments with land use and transportation strategies to reduce costs and maximize mobility benefits z Increase the competitiveness of local agencies for federal and state funding z Develop strategies that serve people from 8–805 years old to reflect changing demographics and make active transportation attractive to more people z Expand regional understanding of the role that short trips play in achieving RTP/SCS goals and performance objectives, and provide a strategic framework to support local planning and project development geared toward serving these trips z Expand understanding and consideration of public health in the development of local plans and projects. 5 8–80 years old is an age span that is used as a shorthand to refer to expanding the potential for all people to use active transportation. The term refers to addressing the needs school aged children who would be conceivably allowed to walk or bike to school unaccompanied if the environment were safer and older senior citizens who prefer physical separation from the noise and speed of vehicles. 9505 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH Active Transportation has 11 specific strategies to maximize active transportation in the SCAG region. These are grouped into four broad categories: regional trips, transit integration, short trips and education/encouragement. All 11 strategies are based on a comprehensive local bikeway and pedestrian network that uses Complete Streets principles. These strategies include: Regional Trips Strategies: 1. Regional Greenway Network 2. Regional Bikeway Network 3. California Coastal Trail Access Transit Integration Strategies: 4. First/last mile (to transit) 5. Livable Corridors 6. Bike Share Services Short Trips Strategies: 7. Sidewalk Quality 8. Local Bikeway Networks 9. Neighborhood Mobility Areas Education/Encouragement Strategies: 10. Safe Routes to School 11. Safety/Encouragement Campaigns Regional Trips Strategies Developing the following networks will serve those longer trips that people make less frequently, but add to total miles traveled. They are primarily biking trips for commuting and recreation. Although trips covering the full length of these corridors may be a small percentage of active transportation travel, the networks provide a backbone for shorter trips, much in the way the Interstate Highway System is used by many people as a bypass for short trips from one on-ramp to the next off-ramp. Completing the following networks are key strategies for promoting regional trips: 1. Regional Greenway Network (RGN): The planned RGN is a 2,200- mile system of separated bikeways mostly using riverbeds, drainage channels and utility corridors. The RGN connects to the regional bikeway network. This strategy provides the opportunity to better integrate urban green space, active transportation and watershed management, providing new urban green space for residents to go to for travel and recreation, including low-stress access to the California Coastal Trail. Benefits include increased health, improved safety and enhanced quality of life. These low-stress bikeways, connected to the regional bikeway network and local bikeways, should provide an attractive option for those bicyclists who do not wish to ride along roadways with motor vehicles. They include the High Desert Corridor; Santa Ana River Trail; OC Loop; Los Angeles River; San Gabriel River; San Jose Creek; Rio Hondo River; Ballona Creek; Bike Route 33; and CVLink. 2. Regional Bikeway Network (RBN): The planned RBN consists of 2,220 miles of interconnected bikeways that connect to jurisdictions, local bikeways and destinations. It connects to the RGN and has designated routes and wayfinding signage that help bicyclists easily understand the route structure and destinations. The primary purpose is to serve regional trips, commuting and recreational bicycling. Using locally existing and planned local bikeways as the foundation, the RBN closes gaps, connects jurisdictions, and provides a regional backbone for local bikeways and greenways. By having assigned route names/numbers, bicyclists can more easily travel across jurisdictions without having to frequently consult maps or risk having bikeways end on busy streets. It is anticipated that trips longer than three miles will likely be used in part on the RBN. SCAG has identified 12 regionally significant bikeways that connect the region. These include Bike Route 66; Bike Route 10; Bike Route 126; Pacific Coast Bike Route; Bike Route 5; Santa Ana River Trail; High Desert Corridor; Bike Route 33; Los Angeles River; San Gabriel River; Bike Route 86; and Bike Route 76 (see EXHIBIT 5.3). 3. California Coastal Trail (CCT)Access: Trails along the coast of California have been utilized as long as people have inhabited the region. The CCT was established by the Coastal Act of 1976 to develop a “continuous public right-of-way along the California coastline; a trail designed to foster appreciation and stewardship of the scenic and natural resources of the coast through hiking and other complementary modes of non-motorized transportation.” The 2016 RTP/SCS Active Transportation Appendix identifies the improvements necessary to help complete the portions of the CCT in Ventura, Los Angeles and Orange counties and to provide biking and walking access to the CCT. Exhibit 5.1 titLE Kern San Diego Santa Barbara NEVADA ARIZONA MEXICO San Bernardino County Riverside County Imperial County Orange County Los Angeles County Ventura County Regional Bikeway Network Regional Greenway Network Local Bikeway Networks (Source: SCAG) O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Exhibit5-3_RegionalBikewayNetwork.mxd | Date: 11/19/2015Map Title: Regional Bikeway Network °0 10 205 Miles EXHIBIT 5.3 REGIONAL BIKEWAY NETWORK 9705 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH Transit Integration Strategies Transit Integration refers to a suite of strategies designed to better integrate active transportation and transit by improving access for pedestrians, bicyclists and other people traveling under their own power around transit stations. Active transportation projects that fall within this suite of strategies are particularly competitive for Cap-and-Trade funding programs. Cap-and- Trade funding programs include the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program (AHSC), which aims to better link housing, transit and active transportation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. With this in mind, the strategies detailed below will be most successful if they are coordinated with land use strategies such as TOD and providing affordable housing. 4. First/Last Mile (to rail): This strategy uses a Complete Streets approach to maximize the number of people walking or biking to rail. By 2040, 11 percent of people will live within one half mile of a rail station, and 27 percent will live within one mile of a rail station. By increasing the comfort and removing barriers to walking or biking, more people will walk or bike to transit stations. These stations include all Los Angeles County light rail, subway and fixed guideway bus stations and Metrolink stations; all Orange County Metrolink Stations and OC Bravo busways; all San Bernardino County Metrolink stations and SBx busways; all Riverside County Metrolink stations; and all Ventura County Metrolink stations. The existing transit access “shed” is considered the half-mile radius around a station (requiring a 10-minute walk), although in many cases the access shed is much smaller due to barriers in the built environment (a lack of crosswalks, long blocks, unsafe overpasses or underpasses). The strategy of developing first/last mile solutions will increase the number of people walking within and beyond one half mile, by creating the conditions that allow people to travel a longer distance in the same amount of time (10 minutes). The number of bicyclists accessing transit is also anticipated to increase, both within the one-mile bike access shed and beyond to a new bike access shed of three miles (requiring a 15-minute bike ride). Infrastructure improvements may include dedicated bike routes, sidewalk enhancements, mid-block crossings (short-cuts), reduced waiting periods at traffic signals, bicycle parking, signage and wayfinding, and others. In Los Angeles County, Metro has proposed an extensive active transportation network to support first/last mile access, including pathways that extend one half mile around each of the Metro stations. The pathways are envisioned to provide facilities and design elements that are consistent across the transit system, enabling seamless and intuitive door-to-door journeys. Pathways will be established along the most heavily traveled routes to transit stations, connecting riders to and from population and employment centers and other major destinations. They will improve and shorten the time it takes to access transit, enhancing the overall transit experience. The pathways will also facilitate transfers between modes, including traditional modes such as buses and park and ride lots, as well as new mobility options such as bike share and car share that can be integrated throughout active transportation networks. First/last mile plans that include many of the same investments as outlined in Metro’s first/last mile plan have been completed in Orange and San Bernardino counties as well. The regional strategy builds upon these planned investments, proposing enhancements at 224 rail stations by 2040. 5. Livable Corridors: From an active transportation standpoint, this strategy is similar to the first/last mile strategy noted above, but it targets high-quality bus corridors rather than the rail and fixed guideway system. (Planning for growth around Livable Corridors is also an important land use strategy) Livable Corridors share many of the same characteristics as transit-oriented rail corridors, but they have lower density development. Active transportation investments focus on sidewalk maintenance/enhancement, intersection improvements, bicycle lanes and bicycle boulevards to facilitate safe and easy access to mixed-use commercial nodes where residents can meet most of their daily needs and access bus service. In addition, this strategy promotes the inclusion of bike lanes, shared bus-bike lanes or separated bikeways. These run along or parallel to the main corridor to promote inter-regional connectivity. In developing the 2016 RTP/SCS, SCAG identified just under 3,000 miles of potential Livable Corridors. However, the investments proposed in the Plan under this strategy are not tied to a specific corridor; rather, the Plan assumes resources to support 670 miles accessing and along 154 miles of corridor. The Plan also provides policy language to support a much broader rollout of Livable Corridors to inspire and support local planning for projects. Having plans prepared with shovel-ready projects will allow our region to effectively compete for Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program Inter-Connected Projects. ACTIVE TRANSPORTATIONFOCUS Across the SCAG region, the nature of streets and types of travel on them is changing dramatically. Bicycling is growing in popularity and the expansion of transit and explosion of new mobility services, like Uber and Lyft, means more people are walking and biking to make connections. However, as more people bicycle and walk, safety for these modes becomes increasingly important. In the SCAG region in 2012, 27 percent and five percent of all traffic fatalities were pedestrians and bicyclists, respectively. Funded by a $2.3 million grant from the 2014 California Active Transportation Program, SCAG and its partners launched Go Human, a campaign to promote traffic safety and encourage people to walk or bike. Go Human is a reminder to all that people on the road are not just objects that get in our way—they are human beings. In late September 2015, messaging encouraging drivers to slow down and look for pedestrians and cyclists was distributed across all six counties in both English and Spanish. Advertisements appeared on local transit buses, bus shelters, Facebook, Pandora and local radio stations throughout the region. The launch date coincided with the decline in daylight hours, a period when pedestrian collisions begin to peak. Go Human is a collaborative effort with county transportation commissions, county health departments and local cities and jurisdictions across the region. SCAG has worked with partners to expand the initial advertising purchases through partner newsletters, advertisements on websites, posters in local facilities and on social media. For example, the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works donated advertising space at 100 bus shelters. SCAG’s funding also includes the production of toolkits and trainings to promote active transportation and the implementation of open streets and temporary events starting in spring 2016. For more information on the campaign, visit www.gohumansocal.org. Go Human and Traffic SafetyBiking & Walking in the Region VERY URBAN MOSTLY URBAN SEMI URBAN SUBURBAN SEMI RURAL RURAL 1.4% 3.4%1.9% 3.6% 1.4%2.2%1.2%1.9%1.0%1.2%1.2%1.6% 16.7% 22.4% 14.5% 18.4% 11.5% 16.9% 10.6% 14.7% 7.0%6.9% 9.8%8.9% VERY URBAN MOSTLY URBAN SEMI URBAN SUBURBAN SEMI RURAL RURAL WALK TRIPS 2012 BASE YEAR 2040 PLAN 2012 BASE YEAR 2040 PLAN BIKE TRIPS VERY URBAN MOSTLY URBAN SEMI URBAN SUBURBAN SEMI RURAL RURAL 1.4% 3.4%1.9% 3.6% 1.4%2.2%1.2%1.9%1.0%1.2%1.2%1.6% 16.7% 22.4% 14.5% 18.4% 11.5% 16.9% 10.6% 14.7% 7.0%6.9% 9.8%8.9% VERY URBAN MOSTLY URBAN SEMI URBAN SUBURBAN SEMI RURAL RURAL WALK TRIPS 2012 BASE YEAR 2040 PLAN 2012 BASE YEAR 2040 PLAN BIKE TRIPS 28% INCREASE IN WALKING REGIONWIDE 71% INCREASE IN BIKING REGIONWIDE 9905 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH 6. Bike Share Services: Bike share is a point-to-point service combining the convenience of a bicycle with the accessibility of public transportation.6 Using closely packed bike rental kiosks in heavily urbanized areas, bike share is designed to replace short-distance motor vehicle trips, reduce parking demand and complement local bus services such as DASH in the City of Los Angeles. Most importantly, bike share acts as a first/last mile strategy and it will be closely integrated with high quality transit stations. Los Angeles Metro, Santa Monica and Long Beach are currently implementing bike share within Los Angeles County. Bike share is anticipated to grow beyond these initial areas over the course of the Plan. A pilot program was recently completed in the City of Fullerton, in Orange County. The University of California, Irvine already has a bike share system in place for students and faculty. The regional bike share system will be comprised of about 8,800 bikes and 880 stations/kiosks. Short Trips Strategies For the purposes of this RTP/SCS, SCAG considers short trips as any trip less than three miles. These trips are primarily the utilitarian trips we take every day to the store, school or a restaurant. Planning policy objectives, including reducing VMT and greenhouse gas emissions and improving public health, depend highly on our region’s ability to address these short trips. That’s because trips less than three miles account for 38 percent of all trips in the region. Short trips can easily be taken by walking or biking. The land use strategies described earlier in this chapter and promoted by the 2016 RTP/SCS seek to improve location efficiency—in other words, minimize the distance between origins and destinations to create even more short trips in the future. The short trip strategies described below aim to ensure that the roadway network evolves to help realize the walkable/bikeable vision advanced by land use strategies in regional and local plans, and improve mobility and reduce travel times in locations that are already considered location-efficient. 7. Sidewalk Quality: The Plan calls for 10,500 miles of sidewalks to be repaired or improved. This includes making them Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant and adding amenities such as exercise spots (logs or other no-maintenance objects that can be used for sitting, stretching or mild exercise) and rest seats for older walkers. 6 King County Bike Share Business Plan. (2012). The Bike Share Partnership. Accessed at http://altaplanning.com/wp-content/uploads/King_County_Bike_Share_Business_Plan_0. pdf. These improvements are in addition to sidewalk enhancements incorporated into the other active transportation strategies. 8. Local Bikeway Networks: The region’s Local Bikeway Networks promote local mobility, while also providing the needed bikeway density to interconnect with the regional bikeway network. The Plan proposes expanding the local bikeway network by an additional 6,016 miles. This is in addition to the 2,760 additional bikeway miles incorporated into other active transportation strategies, bringing total regional, local and greenway bikeway mileage to 12,700. 9. Neighborhood Mobility Areas: This strategy is targeted to locations that have a high proportion of short trips due to the mix of land uses, a fairly dense street grid pattern and the presence of locally serving retail destinations. These locations, however, do not benefit from high quality transit. Where Livable Corridors focus on connections to a corridor, Neighborhood Mobility Areas focus on connections within the neighborhood—to schools, places of worship, parks or greenways, and other destinations. SCAG has identified potential locations in the region to establish Neighborhood Mobility Areas. However, the investments proposed in the Plan under this strategy are not tied to a specific community. Some of the practices that inform this concept include: Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) bicycle planning, NEV planning, Plug-in Vehicle (PEV) readiness planning and a geographic analysis of commute trip lengths. These planning practices are based on the idea that non-auto trips increase as the perceived danger and anxiety for the user decreases. Education/Encouragement Strategies Getting more people to bike and walk is not just about building the infrastructure. Individuals must feel safe biking and walking. The 2016 RTP/ SCS Safety campaigns have two strategies: Safe Routes to School, which focuses on instilling safe habits at a young age while encouraging walking and biking to school; and a Safety/Encouragement campaign, which aims to reach all roadway users through a mix of education and training seminars and encouragement strategies. 10. Safe Routes to School: Safe Routes to School is a comprehensive TDM strategy aimed at encouraging children to walk and bicycle to school. It includes a wide variety of implementation strategies centered on the “6 Es”—Education, Encouragement, Engineering, Exhibit 5.1 titLE ###### ###### ## ## 4 4 4 4 44 %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&' |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' (/ |}ÿ (/ |}ÿ %&' %&' %&' |}ÿ %&'|}ÿ |}ÿ |}ÿ San Bernardino County Riverside CountyOrange County Los Angeles County Ventura County 91 14 60 126 71 57 60 73 241 101 101 15 215 10 15 10 210 405 5 605 710 5 15 405 110 (Source: SCAG) O:\=RTP\=rtp2016\mxds\=Main_Report\Exhibit5-4_MajorHighwayProjectsProposedByCounties.mxd | Date: 2/24/2016Major Highway Projects °0 5 102.5 Miles %&' %&' %&' 8 10 10 Riverside County Imperial County Express Lanes Toll Lanes Mixed-Flow Lanes Freight Corridors HOV Lanes Improvement TBD ##Proposed HOV-to-Express Lane Direct Connector Conversions##Planned/Proposed Express Lane Direct Connectors 4 HOV Lane Connectors EXHIBIT 5.4 MAJOR HIGHWAY PROJECTS 10105 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH Our region boasts one of the most comprehensive High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) systems in the nation and heavy investments have been made to expand it. As part of the Plan, strategic HOV gap closures, highway-to-highway direct HOV connectors, and HOV direct access ramps need to be proposed as a strategy to complete the system. In addition, it should be noted that various highways within Orange County feature continuous access on certain HOV lanes. Studies have shown that continuous access HOV lanes do not perform any worse compared with limited access HOV lanes. TABLE 5.6 highlights some of the Plan’s major HOV projects. Our region’s arterial system is comprised of local streets and roads that serve many different functions. One is to link our region’s residents with schools, jobs, healthcare, recreation, retail and other destinations. Our region’s arterials account for more than 80 percent of the total road network and they carry a majority of overall traffic. A number of arterials run parallel to major highways and they can provide alternatives to them. Beyond motor vehicles, our arterials serve other modes of travel, including transit and active transportation. The 2016 RTP/SCS proposes a variety of arterial projects and improvements throughout the region. Operational and technological improvements can maximize system productivity through various cost-effective and non-labor intensive means—beyond improvements to expand capacity. These include signal synchronization, spot widening and adding grade separations at major intersections. In addition, as part of the Complete Streets Deputy Directive7 (DD- 64-R2), improvements such as bicycle lanes, lighting, landscaping, sidewalk widening and ADA compliance measures have shifted the focus of arterials toward considering multiple users—while also providing a greater sense of place. The 2016 RTP/SCS highways and local arterials framework and guiding principles are summarized here: z Focus on achieving maximum productivity through strategic investments in system management and demand management. z Focus on adding capacity primarily (but not exclusively) to: „Close gaps in the system. „Improve access where needed. z Support policies and system improvements that will encourage the seamless operation of our roadway network from a user perspective. 7 Complete Streets – Integrating the Transportation System. (2014) [Deputy Directive]. California Department of Transportation. Accessed at: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/ offices/ocp/docs/dd_64_r2.pdf. Enforcement, Evaluation and Equity. When implemented, the 6 Es improve safety, reduce congestion and VMT, improve air quality and increase the physical activity of students and their parents— which improves public health outcomes. SCAG works with each county through SCAG’s sustainability joint work programs, which are collaborative planning programs designed to support regional sustainability goals through local projects. Each joint-work program includes a Safe Routes to School program component. 11. Education/Encouragement Campaigns: Safety campaigns that employ advertising, public service announcements and media kits are designed to educate the public on the importance of safety. Other efforts aim to educate bicyclists, pedestrians and motorists on the rights and responsibilities of sharing the road. The 2016 RTP/SCS anticipates that these campaigns will be conducted every five years during the course of the Plan. Highways and Arterials The majority of trips in our region today is still made on our region’s highways and arterials. Yet, the expansion of our highways and arterials has slowed down over the last decade. Revenue from traditional sources to fund transportation improvements is declining and costly expansions to address congestion may not be financially feasible. However, given that critical gaps and congestion chokepoints still exist within the network, improvements beyond TSM and TDM strategies need to be considered. Closing these gaps to complete the system will allow residents and visitors alike to enjoy improved access to opportunities such as jobs, education, recreation and healthcare. Our highways and arterials serve as a crucial backbone of our overall regional transportation network. As part of the 2016 RTP/SCS, SCAG continues to advocate for a comprehensive solution based on a system management approach to manage and maintain our highway and arterial network. Although we recognize that we can no longer rely on system expansion alone to address our mobility needs, critical gaps and congestion chokepoints in the network still hinder access to certain parts of the region. County transportation plans have identified projects to close these gaps, eliminate congestion chokepoints and complete the system. Such improvements are included in the 2016 RTP/SCS. EXHIBIT 5.4 and TABLE 5.5 highlight some of the proposed highway completion projects. For projects that are currently or will be going through environmental clearance, SCAG would update the list as part of future RTP amendments if warranted by the nature of the project changes. A comprehensive list of projects is provided in the Project List Appendix. 102 2016 RTP/SCS COUNTY ROUTE DESCRIPTION COMPLETION YEAR COST ($1,000s) MI X E D - F L O W L A N E S Imperial SR-98 Widen and improve SR-98 or Jasper Rd to 4/6 lanes 2025 $1,170,483 Imperial SR-111 Widen and improve to a 6-lane highway with interchanges to Heber, McCabe, and Jasper, and overpass at Chick Rd 2030 $999,136 Los Angeles SR-57/SR-60 Improve the SR-57/SR-60 interchange 2029 $475,000 Orange I-5 Add one mixed-flow lane in each direction from SR-57 to SR-91 2040 $305,924 Orange SR-55 Add one mixed-flow lane in each direction and fix chokepoints from I-405 to I-5 and add one auxiliary lane in each direction between select on/off ramps and operational improvements through project limits 2030 $274,900 Orange SR-91 Add one eastbound mixed-flow lane on SR-91 from SR-57 to SR-55 and one westbound mixed-flow lane from Kraemer to State College 2030 $425,000 Orange I-405 Add one mixed-flow lane in each direction from I-5 to SR-55 2030 $374,540 Orange I-405 Add one mixed-flow lane in each direction from SR-73 and I-605 2022 $1,300,000 Ventura SR-118 Add one mixed-flow lane in each direction from Tapo Canyon Rd to LA Avenue 2025 $216,463 EX P R E S S LA N E S Los Angeles I-110 Construct express lane off-ramp connector from 28th St to Figueroa St 2023 $55,000 Riverside I-15 Add one express lane in each direction from Cajalco Rd to SR-7 2029 $453,174 San Bernardino I-15 Add two express lanes in each direction from US-395 to I-15/I-215 interchange 2030 $687,994 HO V L A N E S Los Angeles I-5 Add one HOV lane in each direction from Weldon Canyon Rd to SR-14 2017 $410,000 Los Angeles SR-14 Add one HOV lane in each direction from Ave P-8 to Ave L 2027 $120,000 Los Angeles SR-71 Convert expressway to highway-add one HOV lane and one mixed-flow lane 2028 $13,392 Orange I-5 Add one HOV lane in each direction from Pico to SD County Line 2040 $237,536 Riverside I-15 Add one HOV lane in each direction from SR-74 to I-15/I-215 interchange 2039 $375,664 San Bernardino I-10 Add one HOV lane in each direction from Ford to RV County Line 2030 $126,836 San Bernardino I-215 Add one HOV lane in each direction from SR-210 to I-15 2035 $249,151 San Bernardino I-210 Add one HOV lane in each direction from I-215 to I-10 2040 $178,780 Ventura US-101 Add one HOV lane in each direction from LA/VEN County Line to SR-33 2029 $132,000 TABLE 5.5 SAMPLE MAJOR HIGHWAY PROJECTS COMMITTED BY THE COUNTIES 10305 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH TABLE 5.6 MAJOR HOV LANE PROJECTS COUNTY ROUTE FROM TO COMPLETION YEAR Los Angeles I-5 Weldon Canyon SR-14 2017 Los Angeles I-5 Pico Canyon Parker Rd 2025 Los Angeles SR-14 Ave P-8 Ave L 2027 Los Angeles SR-71 Mission Blvd Rio Rancho Rd 2028 Orange I-5 Pico SD County Line 2040 Orange I-5 SR-55 SR-57 2018 Orange SR-73 I-405 MacArthur 2040 Riverside I-15 SR-74 I-15/I-215 Interchange 2039 Riverside I-215 Nuevo Rd Box Springs Rd 2030 San Bernardino I-10 Ford St RV/SB County Line 2030 San Bernardino I-215 SR-210 I-15 2035 San Bernardino I-210 I-215 I-10 2040 Ventura US-101 Moorpark Rd SR-33 2029 HIGHWAY TO HIGHWAY HOV CONNECTORS Los Angeles I-5/I-405 Connector (partial)2029 Los Angeles I-405/I-110 Connector Improvements 2021 Orange I-405/SR-73 Connector 2040 San Bernardino I-10/I-15 Connector (partial)2035 104 2016 RTP/SCS TABLE 5.7 REGIONAL EXPRESS LANE NETWORK Notes: * Dual express lanes for entire length ** Dual express lanes for a section COUNTY ROUTE FROM TO EX P R E S S L A N E A D D I T I O N S Los Angeles I-10 I-605 San Bernardino County Line Los Angeles I-105*I-405 I-605 Los Angeles I-405**I-5 Orange County Line Los Angeles I-605 I-10 Orange County Line Orange SR-55 SR-91 I-405 Orange SR-73 I-405 MacArthur Boulevard Orange I-405**Los Angeles County Line SR-55 Orange I-605 Los Angeles County Line I-405 Riverside I-15**San Bernardino County Line SR-74 Riverside SR-91*Orange County Line I-15 San Bernardino I-10**Los Angeles County Line Ford Street San Bernardino I-15**High Desert Corridor Riverside County Line EX P R E S S L A N E D I R E C T C O N N E C T O R S Los Angeles I-405/I-110 I-405 NB to I-110 NB and I-110 SB to I-405 SB Orange I-5/SR-55 Existing HOV to proposed express lane direct connector Orange SR-91/SR-55 Existing HOV to proposed express lane direct connector Orange SR-91/SR-241 SR-241 NB to SR-91 EB and SR-91 WB to SR-241 SB Orange I-405/SR-55 Existing HOV to proposed express lane direct connector Orange I-405/SR-73 Planned HOV to proposed express lane direct connector Orange I-405/I-605 Existing HOV to proposed express lane direct connector Riverside SR-91/I-15 SR-91 EB to I-15 SB and I-15 NB to SR-91 WB 10505 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH z Any new roadway capacity project must be developed with consideration and incorporation of congestion management strategies, including demand management measures, operational improvements, transit and ITS, where feasible. z Focus on addressing non-recurring congestion with new technology. z Support Complete Streets opportunities where feasible and practical. Regional Express Lane Network Consistent with our regional emphasis on the system management pyramid, recent planning efforts have focused on enhanced system management, including the integration of value pricing to better use existing capacity and offer users greater travel time reliability and choices. Express lanes that are appropriately priced to reflect demand can outperform non-priced lanes in terms of throughput, especially during congested periods. Moreover, revenue generated from priced lanes can be used to deliver the needed capacity provided by the express lanes sooner and to support complementary transit investments. The regional express lane network included in the 2016 RTP/SCS builds on the success of the State Route 91 express lanes in Orange County, as well as the Interstate 10 and Interstate 110 express lanes in Los Angeles County. Additional efforts underway include the extension of the State Route 91 express lanes to Interstate 15, as well planned express lanes on Interstate 15 in Riverside County. Express lanes are also planned for Interstate 15 and Interstate 10 in San Bernardino County and Interstate 405 in Orange County. TABLE 5.7 displays the segments in the proposed regional express lane network. Goods Movement Recent regional efforts have focused on strategies to develop a coherent, refined and integrated regional goods movement system that would address expected growth trends. Key strategies are highlighted below. Regional Clean Freight Corridor System The 2016 RTP/SCS continues to envision a system of truck-only lanes extending from the San Pedro Bay Ports to downtown Los Angeles along Interstate 710, connecting to the State Route 60 east-west segment and finally reaching Interstate 15 in San Bernardino County. Such a system would address the growing truck traffic and safety issues on core highways through the region and serve key goods movement industries. Truck-only lanes add capacity in congested corridors, improve truck operations and safety by separating trucks and autos, and provide a platform for the introduction of zero- and near zero-emission technologies. Ongoing evaluation of a regional freight corridor system is underway, including recent work on an environmental impact report (expected to be recirculated in 2016) for the Interstate 710 segment. Additionally, as a part of the 2016 RTP/SCS, SCAG continues to refine the east-west corridor component of the system along the State Route 60 corridor. Current efforts have focused on working to identify an initial operating segment. Additional study is underway to evaluate the East-West Freight Corridor project concept. The East-West Freight Corridor would carry between 58,000 and 78,000 clean trucks per day that would be removed from adjacent general-purpose lanes and local arterial roads. The corridor would benefit a broad range of goods movement markets, both port-related and local goods movement-dependent industries. Truck delay would be reduced by up to 11 percent. Truck traffic on State Route 60 general purpose lanes would be reduced by 42 to 82 percent, depending on location; it would be reduced by as much as 33 percent on Interstate 10 and as much as 20 percent on adjacent arterials. Separating trucks and autos would also reduce truck-involved collisions on east-west highways that currently have some of the highest collision levels in the region (20–30 collisions a year on certain segments). The regional freight corridor system also includes an initial segment of Interstate 15 that would connect to the East-West Freight Corridor, reaching just north of Interstate 10. Additional study is anticipated for this segment. Truck Bottleneck Relief Strategy In 2013, the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI) identified the Los Angeles Metropolitan Area as leading the nation in costs to the trucking industry caused by traffic congestion, with nearly $1.1 billion in added operational costs to truckers.8 The SCAG region had five of the top 100 truck bottlenecks in the U.S. in 2014—identified by ATRI as follows: #8 State Route 60 at State Route 57 in Los Angeles County #17 Interstate 710 at Interstate 105 in Los Angeles County #37 Interstate 10 at Interstate 15 in San Bernardino County #39 Interstate 15 at State Route 91 in Riverside County #55 Interstate 110 at Interstate 105 in Los Angeles County.9 8 Cost of Congestion to the Trucking Industry. (2014). American Transportation Research Institute. 9 Congestion Impact Analysis of Freight Significant Highway Locations. (2014). American Transportation Research Institute. 405 405 110 5 5 605 210 210 710105 101 101 15 15 215 21557 60 6060 55 10 10 118 91 91 91 241 261 241 73 23 VENTURA COUNTY LOS ANGELES COUNTY ORANGE COUNTY RIVERSIDE COUNTY SAN DIEGO COUNTY SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY Existing Express LanesPlanned Express NetworkExisting Toll RoadsPlanned Dual-Lane Segment REGIONAL EXPRESS LANE NETWORK 405 405 110 5 5 605 210 210 710105 101 101 15 15 215 21557 60 6060 55 1010 118 9191 91 241 261 241 73 23 VENTURA COUNTYLOS ANGELES COUNTY ORANGE COUNTY RIVERSIDE COUNTY SAN DIEGO COUNTY SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY Existing Express Lanes Planned Express Network Existing Toll Roads Planned Dual-Lane Segment LEGEND Regional Express Lane Network Concept of Operations SCAG, in partnership with the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG), and the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC) collaborated on the development of a regional concept of operations for a regional express lane network. The Concept of Operations provides a blueprint for a regional express lane network that integrates express lane facilities into a regional system with consistent or compatible operating, design and policy rules. This development process also resulted in the recommended regional express lane network (illustrated here). 10705 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH With driver wages and fuel costs representing more than 50 percent of total motor carrier costs, truck congestion has major impacts on the bottom line of the trucking industry. Truck bottlenecks are also emission “hot spots” that generally have significantly degraded localized air quality because of increased idling from passenger vehicles and trucks. In past RTPs, SCAG directly addressed truck bottlenecks by developing a coordinated strategy to identify and mitigate the top-priority truck bottlenecks. This analysis has been updated for the 2016 RTP/SCS and includes a “refresh” of truck bottleneck delays for the locations where congestion data were available. It also identifies potential new truck bottlenecks. The 2016 RTP/SCS allocates an estimated $5 billion toward strategies to relieve goods movement bottlenecks. Examples of bottleneck relief strategies include ramp meterings, extending merging lanes, improving ramps and interchanges, improving capacity and adding auxiliary lanes. Additional information is provided in the Goods Movement Appendix. Rail Strategy The region’s railroad system provides critical connections between the largest port complex in the country and producers and consumers throughout the U.S. More than half of the international cargo arriving at the San Pedro Bay Ports uses rail. Railroads also serve domestic industries, predominantly for long-haul freight leaving the region. The extensive rail network in the SCAG region offers shippers the ability to move large volumes of goods over long distances at lower costs, compared with other transportation options. The 2016 RTP/SCS continues to incorporate the following rail strategies for goods movement: z Mainline Rail Improvements and Capacity Expansion: This includes double or triple tracking certain rail segments, implementing new signal systems, building universal crossovers and constructing new sidings. These improvements would benefit both freight rail and passenger rail service, depending on their location. z Rail Yard Improvements: This includes upgrades to existing rail yards, as well as construction of new yards to handle the projected growth in cargo volumes. z Grade Separations of Roads From Rail Lines: These projects reduce vehicular delay, improve emergency vehicle access, reduce the risk of accidents and lower emissions levels. z Rail Operation Safety Improvements: This includes technology such as Positive Train Control (PTC) that can greatly reduce the risk of rail collisions. The benefits of the rail strategies to the region are considerable and include mobility, safety and environmental gains. These strategies could eliminate nearly 5,500 hours of vehicle delay per day at grade crossings, decrease emissions (NOx, CO2 and PM 2.5) by nearly 44,000 lb. per day, and reduce overall train delay to the year 2000 level. Goods Movement Environmental Strategy Along with growth in the region’s population and economy comes a growing demand to deliver goods in areas where people live and work. As a result, goods movement transportation has been a major source of emissions that contributes to regional air pollution problems, as well as localized air pollution “hot spots” that can have adverse health impacts. Moreover, much of the SCAG region (and nearly all of the urbanized area) does not meet federal ozone and fine particulate (PM 2.5) air quality standards. The transportation of goods is also a major source of greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global climate change. Because of the need to maintain and improve our quality of life, economically and environmentally, SCAG proposes the environmental strategy below to address the air quality impacts of goods movement, while also allowing for the efficient and safe goods movement flow throughout the region. A critical component of this strategy, as described below, is the integration of advanced technologies that have co-benefits such as air quality, energy security and economic growth opportunities. The 2016 RTP/SCS focuses on a two-pronged approach for achieving an efficient freight system that reduces environmental impacts. For the near term, the regional strategy supports the deployment of commercially available low- emission trucks and locomotives while centering on continued investments into improved system efficiencies. For example, the region envisions increased market penetration of technologies already in use, such as heavy-duty hybrid trucks and natural gas trucks. Applying ITS solutions to improve operational efficiency is also recommended. In the longer term, the strategy focuses on advancing technologies—taking critical steps now toward the phased implementation of a zero- and near zero-emission freight system. SCAG is cognizant of the need to incorporate evolving technologies with plans for new infrastructure. These include technologies to fuel vehicles, as well as to charge batteries and provide power. The plan to develop and deploy advanced technologies includes phased implementation, during which technology needs are defined, prototypes are tested and developed, and efforts are scaled up. FIGURE 5.3 illustrates this process. The phases are summarized as follows: 108 2016 RTP/SCS PHASE I Project Scoping and Evaluation of Existing Work: Continue to build on current regional research and technology testing efforts to further define the needs that the new technology must provide and to better understand the current capabilities, costs and stage of development of potential technologies. PHASE II Evaluation, Development and Prototype Demonstrations: Evaluate, develop and test initial vehicle prototypes. Work with public and private sector partners to secure funding commitments for the development of new technology prototypes and demonstrations. PHASE III Initial Deployment and Operational Demonstration: Initially deploy potential technologies, preferably with industry partners who can evaluate and report on their performance in the real world. Funding may be used for incentives for initial deployment and the continued evaluation and development of technologies. PHASE IV Full-Scale Demonstrations and Commercial Deployment: Scale up deployment of viable technologies and implement needed regulatory and market mechanisms to launch them commercially. The Phase IV time frame accommodates the readiness of different levels of technology for various applications. FIGURE 5.3 PHASES OF TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT AND DEPLOYMENT PHASE Evaluation, Development & Prototype Demonstrations PHASE Initial Deployment & Operational Demonstration Project Scoping & Evaluation of Existing Work PHASE Full Scale Demonstrations, Commercial Deployment & Infrastructure Construction PHASE PHASESI II 2012-2016 • Formation of Zero-Emissions Trucks Collaborative • Definition of Desired Technology Characteristics • Initiation of Several Technology Development and Demonstration Projects • Continue Deployment of Existing Near Zero-Emissions Truck Technologies • Continue Evaluation of Zero-Emissions Truck Technologies in Operational Service • Deployment of Tier 4 Engines and Other Existing Clean Rail Technologies • Continue Work with OEMS to Develop and Demonstrate Rail Technologies • Full Deployment of All Commercially Viable Truck and Rail Technologies PHASESI II 2015-2025 PHASESI II III 2016-2025 PHASESI II III IV 2020-2040 FIGURE 5.4 TRUCK AND RAIL TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT AND DEPLOYMENT TIMELINE 10905 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH Phases of New Technology Development and Deployment The time frames illustrated in FIGURE 5.4 suggest a path toward implementing the phases described above. This cycle of technology development is continuous, and it will renew itself as new innovations emerge and technologies continue to evolve. The timelines presented are broad, to capture the breadth of technologies in various stages of development and to allow for further innovation in this sector. This path is discussed in greater detail in the Goods Movement Appendix. Since SCAG adopted the 2012 RTP/SCS, the region has attracted outside funding and committed its own funding to support research and development efforts. Several studies have been conducted to date that contribute to “project scoping” by providing a greater understanding of the regional truck market and how truck use defines key performance parameters such as range and power needs. To evaluate and develop prototypes, three large-scale research and development efforts are underway to develop and test zero-emission trucks and charging infrastructure. These projects require continuing collaboration between original equipment manufacturers and public sector agencies. Meeting Airport Demand As discussed in Chapter 2, our region is served by a multiple airport system that includes commercial airports, military airfields and general aviation airports. All of these airports function as part of a system that provides a high level of air service to our residents and to visitors. Services that are not practical or financially viable at one airport in the system can be provided at an alternative facility. In addition, many of our airports function as relievers for other airports in case of emergencies or irregular operations due to inclement weather or other unusual events. The commercial passenger and cargo airports in our region, especially those in the urbanized areas, each face constraints on their operations. At each airport, these constraints may include airspace conflicts, runway configurations, terminal capacity, ground access congestion and legal restrictions such as noise control ordinances. Because of the varying constraints on individual airports, it is important to maintain a diverse group of airports to serve the overall air travel demand of the region extending into the future. Accommodating the future demand for air passenger and air cargo is critical to the economic health of the region. The economic impact of air travel to the region is expected to increase from $27.4 billion in 2012 to $43.8 billion in 2040 (in 2012 dollars), an increase of nearly 60 percent. The number of jobs supported by visitors arriving by air is expected to increase from 275,000 to 452,000. If the region’s aviation system and supporting ground access network cannot accommodate the expected demand, some of this potential economic activity could be lost to other regions. Forecasting Air Passenger Demand Based on the historical relationship between economic activity and the demand for air travel, as well as expected future economic conditions in our and other regions, total air passenger demand in our region is expected to increase from 91.2 million annual passengers (MAP) in 2014 to 136.2 MAP in 2040. This represents a 1.6 percent annual growth rate over the forecast period. This regional demand forecast for air passenger travel is strong and reflects the potential for the region to have long-term economic recovery and growth. More detail about the forecast methodology is presented in the Aviation & Airport Ground Access Appendix. Some of the airports in our region benefit from having long runways, uncongested airspace and spacious, modern terminals. Airports with these benefits are expected to be able to accommodate any growth in demand foreseeable through 2040. However, four of the commercial airports in urban parts of the region face physical or policy constraints that may limit their capacity to accommodate increases in demand by 2040. The individual airport demand forecasts reflect the following constraints: z Burbank Bob Hope Airport: 7.3 MAP (airfield capacity) z Los Angeles International Airport: 82.9–96.6 MAP (airfield capacity) z Long Beach Airport: 5.0 MAP (noise compatability ordinance) z John Wayne Airport: 12.5 MAP (settlement agreement adopted by Board of Supervisors) An analysis of these constraints is included in the Aviation & Airport Ground Access Appendix. Several recent trends in the airline industry were considered in the capacity analyses. For example, the average number of seats on commercial flights in and out of airports in our region increased from 107 in 2007 to 119 in 2014, so each “operation” (take-off or landing) on the airfield and each “turn” (arrival and departure) of a gate can include more passengers. Therefore, as a result of airline industry trends, the estimated capacity of several constrained airports has increased compared to prior analyses, although there may not have been any physical change at the airport itself. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY RIVERSIDE COUNTY LOS ANGELESCOUNTY VENTURACOUNTY ORANGECOUNTY IMPERIAL COUNTY Imperial County Airport 0.2 MAP Palm Springs Int’l Airport 3.7 MAPMarch Inland Port 0.2 MAP San Bernardino Int’l Airport 0.2–1.5 MAP Southern California Logistics Airport 0.2 MAP Oxnard Airport 0.2 MAP Palmdale Airport 0.5–2.5 MAP Burbank Bob Hope Airport 7.3 MAP Ontario Int’l Airport 11.0–19.0 MAP John Wayne Airport 12.5 MAP Long Beach Airport 5.0 MAP Los Angeles Int’l Airport 82.9–96.6 MAP 2040 AIR PASSENGER FORECAST Airport Specific Demand, Million Annual Passengers (MAP) 136.2 MAP Midpoint of 2040 Total Regional Aviation Demand: 11105 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH Based on the overall forecast regional demand for air travel, the origins and destinations of trips within the region and the capacity constraints of individual airports, the figure “2040 Airport Demand Forecasts” on the previous page presents the anticipated air travel demand at each commercial airport in our region in 2040. Forecasting Air Cargo The development of the air cargo demand forecasts is similar to that of the air passenger forecasts. The demand for air cargo is driven largely by the economic interrelationship of our region and other regions around the world. Because of its high cost, shipment by air is used primarily for time-sensitive and high-value goods. Total air cargo transported through our region’s airports has experienced an uneven recovery since the recession of 2007, but remained below year 2000 levels even in 2014. Based on the historical relationship between economic activity and the demand for air cargo, as well as expected future economic conditions in our and other regions, total air cargo demand in our region is expected to increase from 2.43 million metric tons in 2014 to 3.78 million metric tons in 2040. This represents a 1.8 percent annual growth rate over the forecast period. In 2014, more than 99 percent of air cargo in our region was handled at five airports: Los Angeles International Airport (77 percent), Ontario International Airport (19 percent), Burbank Bob Hope Airport (2 percent), John Wayne Airport (0.7 percent) and Long Beach Airport (0.6 percent). Air cargo can be classified as “belly” cargo (carried in the bellies of passenger airplanes) or full-freighter cargo (carried in dedicated freighter aircraft). LAX handled nearly 99 percent of the region’s belly cargo and 70 percent of the full-freighter cargo. Following the 2012 RTP/SCS, the air cargo forecasts assume some redistribution of air cargo across the airports in the region. Cargo carried on passenger airlines or by their cargo divisions is unlikely to be redistributed because these carriers benefit from consolidation of their passenger and cargo facilities at the same airport. Cargo carried by integrated delivery services, such as FedEx and UPS, is also unlikely to be redistributed because of the major investments these companies have made in facilities at individual airports (primarily, Ontario International Airport). Therefore, only cargo carried by charter airlines or all-cargo airlines would potentially diversify to other airports and, of the cargo that could potentially diversify, only some actually will. Airport Ground Access The ground access network serving the region’s airports is critical to both the aviation system and the ground transportation system. Passengers’ choice of airports is based in part on the travel time to the airport and the convenience of access, so facilitating airport access is essential to the efficient functioning of the aviation system. In addition, airport related ground trips can contribute to local congestion in the vicinity of the airports. Currently, more than 200,000 air passengers arrive at or depart from the region’s airports every day. By 2040, this number is forecast to increase to more than 330,000. Passenger surveys indicate that three percent of passengers take transit to LAX and one percent take transit to Burbank Bob Hope Airport. Surveys are not available at other airports, but because these two airports have the best transit access in the region it is likely that the transit share at the remaining airports is significantly below one percent. The large majority of air passengers use a motor vehicle, either their own or a rental vehicle, to get to and from the airport. About half of all air passengers in the region are picked up or dropped off at the airport by a friend or relative. Each end of these pick-up/drop-off air trips results in two ground trips: one to the airport followed by one returning from the airport. Therefore, taking steps to encourage travelers to use transit or other modes of shared transportation is vital. To reduce ground transportation congestion related to air passenger travel, the 2016 RTP/SCS includes the following strategies: z Support the regionalization of air travel demand z Continue to support regional and inter-regional projects that facilitate airport ground access (e.g., High-Speed Train, High Desert Corridor) z Support ongoing local planning efforts by airport operators, CTCs and local jurisdictions z Encourage the development and use of transit access to the region’s airports z Encourage the use of modes with high average vehicle occupancy (AVO) z Discourage the use of modes that require “deadhead” trips to/from airports In recent years, airport operators, CTCs and SCAG have all undertaken their own initiatives to improve ground access at the region’s aviation facilities. The sections below discuss recent efforts and recommended strategies to improve ground access at three existing commercial airports in the region that have invested considerably in improving ground access. A more detailed discussion 112 2016 RTP/SCS proprietary department of the City of Los Angeles. In December 2014, LAWA’s Board of Airport Commissioners approved a plan to overhaul and modernize LAX’s ground access and transportation connections for arriving and departing passengers. The approved program includes: z The LAX Train (Automated People Mover System) z Intermodal Transportation Facilities (ITF) z Consolidated Rent-A-Car Center (CONRAC) z Central terminal area improvements z Connection with the under-construction Metro Crenshaw Line The CONRAC will consolidate the numerous off-site rental car facilities in the surrounding area into one convenient location 1.5-miles east of LAX and adjacent to Interstate 405 for convenient regional highway access. Two ITFs are included in the program offering airport travelers locations for parking, passenger pick-up and drop off, and flight check-in outside the terminal and away from the congested World Way roadway within LAX. The eastern ITF will include Metro facilities to connect with Metro’s planned 96th Street/Aviation Boulevard Station serving the under-construction Metro Crenshaw/LAX Transit Project and existing Metro Green Line, as well as a bus plaza for Metro and municipal buses. The LAX Train will be an elevated automated people mover system with six stations connecting the CONRAC, both ITFs and Metro facilities to the LAX passenger terminals. The environmental review process for this project began in 2015 and construction is expected to begin in 2017. Key 2016 RTP/SCS projects for LAX include: z New Crenshaw/Green Line station at 96th/Aviation z Automated People Mover Additional strategies include: z Support construction of Automated People Mover (APM) with connection to Metro Crenshaw Line z Support construction of Consolidated Rental Car facility and Intermodal Transportation Facilities to reduce private vehicles and shuttles in Central Terminal Area z Support expansion of FlyAway service to new markets z Support ability of ride-hailing services to pick up passengers, to reduce deadhead trips in the central terminal area of ground access improvement strategies at airports across the region is included in the Aviation & Airport Ground Access Appendix. Burbank Bob Hope Airport Burbank Bob Hope Airport is the only airport in the region with a direct rail- to-terminal connection, via the recently completed Regional Intermodal Transportation Center (RITC). The RITC serves multiple modes, including public parking, a consolidated rental car facility, regional bus service and bicycles, and commuter rail at the Metrolink Ventura line station. A pedestrian bridge currently in design will further facilitate access between the train station and the airport. In addition, a second rail station is currently planned on the Metrolink Antelope Valley line. BurbankBus has recently begun operating all-day bus service between the North Hollywood Metro Red Line Station and the airport, utilizing the RITC. Key 2016 RTP/SCS projects for Burbank Bob Hope Airport include: z Increased Metrolink service systemwide z Metro Red Line extension from North Hollywood to Burbank Bob Hope Airport z New east-west BRT service from Orange Line/North Hollywood to Pasadena (no direct connection to Burbank Bob Hope Airport) Additional strategies include: z Construct new Metrolink Station on Antelope Valley Line z Support increased Metrolink service to stations on Ventura Line and Antelope Valley Line z Support recommendations of recent Ground Transportation and Land Use Study: „Improve transit connection to North Hollywood Red/Orange Line Station „Improve transit connection to Pasadena and Glendale z Support the development of a High-Speed Train station on Hollywood Way and provide convenient access between the station and the airport Los Angeles International Airport LAX is owned and operated by Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA), a 11305 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH sharing and bike sharing concepts have been in development since the 1980s, but only in recent years has the ubiquity of cellular phones with Internet access, precise geographic mapping and the ability to instantly approve payments between users and providers made these systems more useful to a wider audience. The 2016 RTP/SCS uses the term “mobility innovations” to characterize the new technologies that help us move about the region. MOBILITY INNOVATIONS The 2016 RTP/SCS includes policies and analyzes the market growth of four key new mobility innovations: Zero-Emissions Vehicles, Neighborhood Electric Vehicles, Car sharing services and Ridesourcing (also known as Transportation Network Companies or TNCs). Please see the Mobility Innovations Appendix for policy recommendations and additional information. Zero-Emissions Vehicles While SCAG’s policies are technology neutral with regard to supporting zero- and/or near zero-emissions vehicles, this section will focus on zero-emissions vehicles. Since SCAG adopted the 2012 RTP/SCS, the Governor’s Office released the Zero Emissions Vehicle (ZEV) Action Plan for 2013 and 2015. These plans identified state level funding to support the implementation of Plug-in Electric Vehicle (PEV) and Hydrogen Fuel Cell refueling networks. As part of the 2016 RTP/SCS, SCAG modeled PEV growth specific to Plug- in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV) in the SCAG region. These are electric vehicles that are powered by a gasoline engine when their battery is depleted. The 2016 RTP/SCS proposes a regional charging network that will increase the number of PHEV miles driven on electric power. In many instances, these chargers may double the electric range of PHEVs. A fully funded regional charging network program would result in a reduction of one percent per capita greenhouse gas emissions. Neighborhood Electric Vehicles (NEVs) Neighborhood Mobility Areas reflect state and local policies to encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation for short trips. In the SCAG region, about 38 percent of all trips are three miles or less, but nearly 78 percent of these trips are made by driving full-sized cars. These short trips can easily be taken using an NEV. Policies to increase the purchase and roadway designs that increase the use of NEVs for short trips in Neighborhood Mobility Areas would result in a reduction of 0.1 percent per capita greenhouse gas emissions. Shared Mobility (Includes the concept of Ridesourcing) Shared Mobility refers to new mobility paradigms as well as old models that Ontario International Airport The 2014 SANBAG Ontario Airport Rail Access Study examined six alternatives to connect Ontario Airport to the regional rail system. One of these alternatives is the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Phase 2C that would extend the eastern terminus of the Metro Gold Line to the airport. However, Phase 2C is not funded at this time. Improved transit access from the Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink Station is included in the 2016 RTP/SCS project list. Key 2016 RTP/SCS projects for Ontario Airport include: z New Rancho Cucamonga Metrolink to ONT rail connection z Numerous local highway interchange, arterial and grade separation improvements Additional strategies include: z Support recommendations of SANBAG Ontario Airport Rail Access Study to initiate transit connection to Metrolink and build transit market z Continue analysis of transit options in upcoming SCAG Inter-County Transit and Rail Study z Support development of intermodal transportation center z Explore possibility of direct access from future Interstate 10 Express Lanes z Consider focus on tourist charters that can attract passengers and use high-capacity vehicles for ground access z Continue improvements to highways and arterials For more details on how the region is expected to meet demands for airport service in the future, see the Aviation & Airport Ground Access Appendix. TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION AND 21ST CENTURY TRANSPORTATION Since SCAG adopted the 2012 RTP/SCS, technology and innovation have emerged as major themes of this Plan update. Technology as a concept is a very broad topic. The term has myriad connotations and encompasses products such as smart phones and electric cars; advancements in software development such as real-time travel information and online banking; and new service paradigms such as ride sourcing and peer-to-peer home sharing. Some of these so-called “new” concepts have actually been around for a long time, but only recently have they scaled up because of technological innovations. For example, car 114 2016 RTP/SCS car sharing platforms. These developments point to a very different vehicle ownership paradigm 25 years from now. Automated/Connected Vehicle (ACV) innovations cover a range of enabling advancements that allow vehicles to operate with less driver input and coordinate with other vehicles to achieve improvements in safety, throughput and user experience. The term ACV covers on-board sensing capabilities, data integration and vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication. ACV covers two distinct innovation paths: autonomous operation, where vehicles rely on digital maps and on-board sensing to operate without any driver input; and connected vehicle operation, where vehicles communicate with one another as well as the roadways they are traveling on. However, these two paths are being developed simultaneously and they may need to be integrated to achieve full benefits in terms of safety and reducing congestion, as promised by researchers. Vehicle to Infrastructure (V2I) communication is another aspect that is covered under roadway ITS operations. It is important to note that vehicles capable of partially automated operation, such as the top-of-the-line Mercedes S-Class and Infiniti Q35, are already available to the public. The California and Nevada Departments of Motor Vehicles (DMV) have already licensed manufacturers for on-road testing and those agencies will be releasing consumer model permitting rules by 2016. Due to the uncertainty of deployment timelines and operational characteristics, initial research shows inconsistent impacts on travel behavior and locational choice. Some traffic simulations show that in the initial phases ACVs may increase congestion, especially if safety features are mandated at the expense of system operational efficiency. On the other hand, if fully automated vehicles change the vehicle ownership paradigm, they may facilitate more on-demand transportation services and an increased reduction in household vehicle ownership. In the long term, ACVs have the ability to dramatically increase the carrying capacity of the regional roadway network. PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT Integrating the many transportation and land use strategies discussed in this chapter will help protect the region’s natural environment—in numerous ways. SCAG has been committed to this integration, as well as protecting the environment, for years. However, environmental protection is now a major requirement of Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21). Pursuant to Section 23 U.S. Code Section 134, “a long-range transportation plan shall include a discussion of types of potential environmental mitigation activities and potential areas to carry out these activities, including are finding new markets and methods of delivery, thanks to new technology platforms. Shared Mobility encompasses a wide range of services including: z Return Trip Car Sharing z Point-to-Point Car Sharing z Peer-to-Peer Car Sharing z Ridesourcing (also known as Transportation Network Companies) z Dynamic On-Demand Private Transit z Vanpool and Private Employer Charters For all these services, mobile computing and payment systems are reducing transaction costs and opening up traditional mobility services to a wider population of producers and consumers. The net effect of these services on transportation mode choices and per capita VMT is still to be determined. However, preliminary research shows that the availability and use of these services correlates with a reduction in individual vehicle ownership. This reduction in ownership, meanwhile, results in an increase in non-motor vehicle modes for discretionary trips. In other words, people who no longer own a car will be more selective in their car trips. In developing the 2016 RTP/SCS, SCAG looked at areas in which shared mobility services are expected to increase. The Plan anticipates robust growth in car sharing and ridesourcing. Ridesourcing is a term coined by researchers to refer to mobile phone-based applications that put riders in touch with drivers for a fee. Some drivers on one platform are professionals, while many other drivers are non-professionals earning income from giving rides. Policies to increase the use of car sharing and ridesourcing would result in a combined reduction of 0.9 percent greenhouse gas emissions. ANTICIPATING CAR-TO-CAR COMMUNICATION AND AUTOMATED VEHICLE TECHNOLOGIES Automakers already are manufacturing and installing advanced driver assist systems that can automatically center, reduce speed and brake in anticipation of vehicles ahead. Trucking companies are road testing automated driving and “platooning”—in which automated trucks safely follow or draft each other at very close distances to conserve fuel. Global corporations and research labs are testing small, fully automated vehicles on public roads. Certain automakers have begun experimenting with new service models like “fractional ownership” in which targeted customers collectively lease and share a vehicle. Locking and ignition packages are being offered to simplify the use of peer-to-peer GHG REDUCTIONS FROM MOBILITY INNOVATIONS 2040 ZERO-EMISSIONS VEHICLE (ZEV) 1.0% NEIGHBORHOOD ELECTRIC VEHICLE (NEV) 0.1% CARSHARING/ RIDESOURCING 0.9% 11505 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH It should be clearly noted that the 2016 RTP/SCS itself leads to improved environmental outcomes for per capita greenhouse gas emissions, the preservation of natural lands, recreational and active transportation opportunities and improved public health, among other key environmental indicators compared to the No Project Alternative. Nevertheless, the implementation of Plan programs, policies and strategies may lead to environmental impacts compared to the existing conditions. As such, program-level performance-based mitigation measures designed to offset any identified potentially significant adverse programmatic level environmental effects are summarized below. Project-level environmental mitigation should be appropriately identified and prepared by implementing agencies on a project-by-project or site-by-site basis as projects proceed through the design and decision-making process. Transportation project implementation and development decisions are subject to their own environmental review process and are expected to implement project-specific mitigation measures to minimize environmental impacts. This section, along with more detailed information in the PEIR, provides a framework that identifies feasible measures as resources which lead agencies can and should implement when they identify and mitigate project-level environmental impacts. MITIGATION STRATEGIES The PEIR provides a list of mitigation measures, which would be implemented by SCAG on a regional level, in order to assist in reducing environmental impacts related to implementation of the 2016 RTP/SCS. SCAG is also responsible for developing a plan to monitor mitigation activities to track progress on implementation of these measures at the regional level. SCAG’s mitigation is consistent with the general role played by a Metropolitan Planning Organization, including developing and sharing information, collaborating with partners and developing regional policies. SCAG works with member agencies and stakeholders but it does not identify, evaluate or implement projects or project-specific mitigation. In addition, the PEIR includes a “catch-all” mitigation measure for each of the CEQA resource categories, stating that lead agencies “can and should” comply with generally applicable performance standards that are linked to existing statutes, regulations and adopted general plans, where available and appropriate. They are not intended to supersede compliance with existing law, regulations and adopted general plans. Instead, they help explain to lead agencies that the existing regulatory framework that could assist in mitigating potential environmental impacts at the project level. activities that may have the greatest potential to restore and maintain the environmental functions affected by the plan.” The 2016 RTP/SCS also considers and is consistent with the provisions of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act). The 2016 RTP/SCS, therefore, includes a discussion of mitigation measures consistent with these requirements. As a public agency in California, SCAG first and foremost fulfills mitigation requirements by complying with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), so this section of the Plan includes a summary of mitigation as laid out in the Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) accompanying the 2016 RTP/SCS. In addition, as part of the planning process, MPOs “shall consult, as appropriate, with State and local agencies responsible for land use management, natural resources, environmental protection, conservation and historic preservation concerning the development of the transportation plan.” They also must consider, if available, “State conservation plans or maps” and “inventories of natural or historic resources.” California law requires SCAG to prepare and certify a PEIR prior to adopting the 2016 RTP/SCS. The PEIR evaluates potential environmental impacts of the 2016 RTP/SCS when compared with existing conditions, and proposes measures at the program level to mitigate impacts to the maximum extent feasible for those resource areas that would be affected by the Plan (and associated induced growth). These impact areas include Aesthetics; Agriculture and Forestry Resources; Air Quality; Biological Resources; Cultural Resources; Energy; Geology and Soils; Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change; Hazards and Hazardous Materials; Hydrology and Water Quality; Land Use and Planning; Mineral Resources; Noise; Population, Housing and Employment; Public Services; Recreation; Transportation, Traffic and Safety; and Utilities and Service Systems. The 2016 RTP/SCS also acts as a “self-mitigating” plan in certain impact areas, in that its policies and strategies lead to improved environmental outcomes for air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, public health, congestion and other indicators, while accommodating existing and projected population growth. The section below summarizes the mitigation program contained within the PEIR for this Plan. The general purpose of the mitigation measures included in the PEIR is to identify how to protect the environment, and natural and cultural resources; improve the linkage between transportation and environmental planning; and enhance public health in concert with the proposed transportation improvements and related land use planning strategies. 116 2016 RTP/SCS CONSERVATION PLANNING POLICY Long-range transportation plans are required to discuss the types of potential environmental mitigation activities and potential areas to carry out these activities. This includes activities that may have the greatest potential to restore and maintain the environmental functions affected by the Plan [23 U.S. Code Sec. 134]. As such, this is being addressed in the 2016 RTP/SCS and is separate and distinct from the mitigation measures addressed in the PEIR. SCAG could approach federal requirements for mitigation by continuing and expanding the efforts already undertaken since the adoption of the 2012 RTP/ SCS. Those efforts included mapping potential priority conservation areas, engaging partners, and developing regional mitigation policies and approaches for this plan. As outlined in the 2012 RTP/SCS, the goal of these efforts is the development of a program of large-scale acquisition and management of important habitats lands to mitigate impacts related to future transportation projects. In the 2016 RTP/SCS, regional goals also include supporting local land use strategies that reduce the demand for building outside of the existing development footprint, especially in important habitat areas. Building on this effort has the potential to create a regional conservation program that stakeholders such as CTCs, local jurisdictions, agencies, and non-profits can align with and support. SCAG has already engaged many of these stakeholders by convening a working group. This strategic and comprehensive approach allows for regional growth and progress, while at the same time ensuring that important natural and working lands and water resources are protected in perpetuity. With that as the foundation, the following suggested next steps for further development of a conservation policy could include the following: • Expanding on the Natural Resource Inventory Database and Conservation Framework and Assessment by incorporating strategic mapping layers to build the database and further refine the priority conservation areas • Encouraging CTCs to develop advance mitigation programs or include them in future transportation measures • Aligning with funding opportunities and pilot programs to begin implementation of the Conservation Plan through acquisition and restoration • Providing incentives to jurisdictions that cooperate across county lines to protect and restore natural habitat corridors, especially where corridors cross county boundaries Please see the Natural & Farm Lands Appendix for additional detail. SUMMARY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION PROGRAM The 2016 RTP/SCS includes an environmental mitigation program that links transportation planning to the environment. Building on its strong commitment to the environment as demonstrated in the 2012 RTP/SCS, SCAG’s mitigation program is intended to function as a resource for lead agencies to consider in identifying mitigation measures to reduce impacts anticipated to result from future projects as deemed applicable and feasible by such agencies. This mitigation discussion also utilizes documents created by federal, state and local agencies to guide environmental planning for transportation projects. The following discussion focuses on specific resource areas and example mitigation measures to avoid or substantially reduce the significant environmental impacts in these areas. AESTHETICS The SCAG region includes several highway segments that are recognized by the State as designated scenic highways or are eligible for such designation. Construction and implementation of projects in the 2016 RTP/SCS could impact designated scenic highways and restrict or obstruct views of scenic resources such as mountains, ocean, rock outcroppings, etc. In addition, some transportation projects could add urban visual elements, such as transportation infrastructure (highways, transit stations) to previously natural areas. Mitigation measures developed by SCAG to minimize impacts to Aesthetics include, but are not limited to, information sharing regarding the locations of designated scenic vistas, and regional program development as part of SCAG’s ongoing regional planning efforts, such as web-based planning tools for local government and direct technical assistance efforts such as the Toolbox Tuesday Training series and the sharing of associated online training materials. Consistent with the provisions of Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines and review of county and city general plans and Caltrans designated scenic vistas, aesthetics performance standards-based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Encourage the implementation of design guidelines by counties and cities, local policies, and programs aimed at protecting views of scenic corridors and avoiding visual intrusions in design of projects to minimize contrasts in scale and passing between the project and surrounding natural forms and developments. z Design landscaping along highway corridors to add significant natural elements and visual interest to soften the hard-edged, linear transportation corridors. 11705 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH z Establish conservation easements consistent with the recommendations of the Department of Conservation, Farmland Security Zones, Williamson Act contracts, or other conservation tools. AIR QUALITY The 2016 RTP/SCS includes programs, policies and measures to address air emissions. Measures that help mitigate air emissions are comprised of strategies that reduce congestion, increase access to public transportation, improve air quality, and enhance coordination between land use and transportation decisions. In order to disclose potential environmental effects of the 2016 RTP/ SCS, SCAG has prepared an estimated inventory of the region’s emissions, and identified mitigation measures. The mitigation measures seek to achieve the maximum feasible and cost-effective reductions in emissions. Mitigation measures developed by SCAG to minimize impacts to Air Quality include, but are not limited to, the determination as part of its conformity findings, pursuant to the federal CAA, that the Plan and its subsequent updates provided for the timely implementation of transportation control measures (TCM). Demonstration of TCM timely implementation including a list of these TCMs is documented in the Transportation Conformity Analysis Appendix. Additionally, during the 2016 to 2040 planning period, SCAG shall pursue activities to reduce the impacts associated with health risks for sensitive receptors within 500 feet of highways and high-traffic volume roadways. Consistent with the provisions of Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, and within the responsibility and jurisdiction of ARB, air quality management districts and other regulatory agencies, air quality performance standards- based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Reduce emissions with the use of clean fuels and reducing petroleum dependency. z Use watering trucks to minimize dust; watering should be sufficient to confine dust plumes to the project work areas. z Revegetate disturbed lands, including vehicular paths created during construction to avoid future off-road vehicular activities. z As appropriate, require that portable engine-driven equipment units used at the project work site, with the exception of on-road and off- road motor vehicles, obtain ARB Portable Equipment Registration with the state or local district permit. z Remove blight or nuisances that compromise visual character or visual quality of project areas including graffiti abatement, trash removal, landscape management, maintenance of signage and billboards in good condition, and replacing compromised native vegetation and landscape. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES Approximately 2.6 million acres of important agricultural lands in the SCAG region currently exists. Out of the 2.6 million acres, 1.1 million acres are designated as Important Farmland and the other 1.5 million acres are designated as grazing land. With respect to forests and timberlands, forest lands include the Angeles National Forest, Cleveland National Forest, Los Padres National Forest, and San Bernardino National Forest, as well as forest lands with open space zones in Imperial and Los Angeles counties. No Timberland Production Zone exists within the SCAG region. However, the harvesting of timberland is only permitted in two agricultural zones, with one limited to Christmas tree harvesting. The 2016 RTP/SCS includes transportation projects and strategies that would have the potential to convert some Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, and Unique Farmland in all six counties and affect Local Farmland and Grazing land in five of the six counties. Forest and timberland zones would result in less than significant impacts. SCAG-developed mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, coordination among applicable resource agencies, information sharing, and regional program development as part of SCAG’s ongoing regional planning efforts, such as web-based planning tools for local government including CA LOTS, and other GIS tools and data services, including, but not limiting to, Map Gallery, GIS library, and GIS applications; and direct technical assistance efforts such as the Toolbox Tuesday Training series and sharing of associated online Training materials. Lead agencies, such as county and city planning departments, shall be consulted during this update process. Consistent with the provisions of Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, review of county and general plans and consistent with the Farmland Protection Policy Act of 1981 and the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, agriculture and forestry resource performance standards-based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Encourage enrollments of agricultural lands that have Williamson Act programs. z Develop project relocation realignment to avoid lands in Williamson Act contracts. 118 2016 RTP/SCS include substantial adverse changes to historical and archaeological resources and direct or indirect changes to unique paleontological resources or sites or unique geological features. These impacts can occur at the localized scale and in relation to existing conditions, as the Plan itself does not affect the total amount of growth in the region. Adverse changes include the destruction of culturally and historically (recent or geologic time) significant and unique historical, archaeological, paleontological, and geological features. Mitigation measures developed by SCAG to minimize impacts to Cultural resources include, but are not limited to, sharing of information and SCAG’s ongoing regional planning efforts such as web-based planning tools for local government including CA LOTS, and direct technical assistance efforts such as the Toolbox Tuesday series. Resource agencies, such as the Office of Historic Preservation shall be consulted during this process. Consistent with the provisions of Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, and review of county and city general plans, cultural resources performance standards-based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) including, but not limited to, projects for which federal funding or approval is required for the individual project. z Employ design measures to avoid historical resources and undertake adaptive reuse where appropriate and feasible. If resources are to be preserved, as feasible, project sponsors should carry out the maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation or reconstruction in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings. z Comply with California Health and Safety Code, Section 7050 and Sections 18950–18961, in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains during construction or excavation activities associated with the project, in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, ceasing further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until the coroner of the county has been informed and has determined that no investigation of the cause of death is required. ENERGY California consumes more energy than any other state except Texas. However, in terms of energy consumption per person, California ranks 49th among the 50 states and District of Columbia. Current annual energy consumption in BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The 2016 RTP/SCS seeks to minimize transportation-related impacts on wildlife, and also better integrate transportation infrastructure into the environment. Impacts to biological resources generally include displacement of native vegetation and habitat on previously undisturbed land; habitat fragmentation and decrease in habitat connectivity; and displacement and reduction of local, native wildlife including sensitive species. Building new transportation routes and facilities through undisturbed land or expanding facilities and increasing the number of vehicles traveling on existing routes will directly injure wildlife species, cause wildlife fatalities, and disturb natural behaviors such as breeding and nesting. Without appropriate mitigation, this will result in the direct reduction or elimination of species populations (including sensitive and special- status species) and native vegetation (including special-status species and natural communities) as well as the disruption and impairment of ecosystem services provided by native habitat areas. Mitigation measures developed by SCAG to minimize impacts to biological resources include, but are not limited to, consultation with resource agencies, as well as local jurisdictions to incorporate any local HCPs or other similar planning documents. Development of a conservation strategy with local jurisdictions and agencies and maintaining a list/map of potential conservation opportunity areas based on the most recent land use data. Consistent with the provisions of Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, within county and city general plans, the responsibility and jurisdiction of the USFWS, the CDFW, and other applicable agencies, biological resources performance standards-based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Design projects to avoid sensitive natural communities and riparian habitats. z Install fencing and/or mark sensitive habitat to be avoided during construction activities. z Salvage and stockpiling topsoil and perennial plants for use in restoring native vegetation to all areas of temporary disturbance within the project area. CULTURAL RESOURCES Impacts to cultural resources, inclusive of tribal cultural resources, generally 11905 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH such as web-based planning tools for local government including CA LOTS, and direct technical assistance efforts such as the Toolbox Tuesday series. Resource agencies, such as the U.S. Geology Survey shall be consulted during this update process. Based on County and City General Plans, geology and soils performance standards-based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Comply with Section 4.7.2 of the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act, requiring a geologic investigation to demonstrate that proposed buildings would not be constructed across active faults. z Comply with the CBC and local regulatory agencies with oversight of development associated with the project, ensuring that projects are designed in accordance with county and city code requirements for seismic ground shaking. z Adhere to design standards described in the California Building Code and all standard geotechnical investigation, design, grading, and construction practices to avoid or reduce impacts from earthquakes, ground shaking, ground failure, and landslides. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AND CLIMATE CHANGE California is the fifteenth largest emitter of greenhouse gases on the planet. The transportation sector, primarily cars and trucks that move goods and people, is the largest contributor with 37 percent of the state’s total greenhouse gas emissions in 2013. On road emissions (from passenger vehicles and heavy duty trucks) constitute 90 percent of the transportation sector total. In order to disclose potential environmental effects of the 2016 RTP/SCS, SCAG has prepared an estimated inventory of the region’s existing greenhouse gas emissions, identified mitigation measures, and compared alternatives in the PEIR. Although the 2016 RTP/SCS demonstrates a reduction in per capita greenhouse gas emissions and meets Senate Bill 375 targets, mitigation is identified here in summary form, and in the PEIR, to provide information on how greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced from other sectors as well as through subsequent planning and implementation. SCAG developed mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, updating any future RTP/SCS to incorporate polices and measures that lead to reduced greenhouse gas emissions in accordance with Assembly Bill 32; coordination with ARB and air districts in efforts to implement the Assembly Bill 32 plan; continuing the coordination with other metropolitan planning organizations regarding statewide strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and facilitate the implementation of Senate Bill 375. Additional measures include, California (including transportation) is approximately 7,641 trillion Btu, which represents approximately 7.9 percent of the nation’s energy consumption. Transporting water into California is also a very energy intensive process. The California State Water Project (SWP) is the single largest user of energy in the state. The SWP uses approximately 5 billion kWh/year of electricity which is equal to 2 to 3 percent of the total electricity consumed in California. Water-related energy consumes approximately 20 percent of the total electricity in California. Implementation of the 2016 RTP/SCS would result in an increase in energy use due to the increase in households and transportation projects in the SCAG region. SCAG developed mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, working with local jurisdictions and energy providers, through its Energy and Environment Committee, and administration of the Clean Cities program, Sustainability Planning grants program, and other SCAG energy-related planning activities, to encourage energy efficient building development. Additional measures include, pursuing partnerships with Southern California Edison, municipal utilities, and the California Public Utilities Commission to promote energy efficient development in the SCAG region, through coordinated planning, data and information sharing activities Consistent with the provisions of Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, county and city form-based zoning codes and future updated zoning codes, energy performance standards-based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Using energy efficient materials in building design, construction, rehabilitation, and retrofit. z Reduce lighting, heating, and cooling needs by taking advantage of light colored roofs, trees for shade, and sunlight. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Impacts to geological resources generally include the disturbance of unstable geologic units (rock type) or soils, causing the loss of topsoil and soil erosion, slope failure, subsidence, project-specific seismic activity and structural damage from expansive soils. These activities, in addition to building projects on and around Alquist-Priolo Fault Zones and other local faults, could expose people and/or structures to the risk of loss, injury, or death. Mitigation measures developed by SCAG to minimize impacts to Geology and Soils include, but are not limited to, sharing of information, and regional program development as part of SCAG’s ongoing regional planning efforts, 120 2016 RTP/SCS SCAG developed mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, coordination efforts with the United States Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT), the Office of Emergency Services, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the private sector to continue to conduct driver safety training programs. Additionally, SCAG shall encourage the U.S. DOT and the California Highway Patrol to continue to enforce speed limits and existing regulations governing goods movement and hazardous materials transportation. Consistent with the provisions of Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, provisions of the Hazardous Waste Control Act, the Unified Hazardous Waste and Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program, the Hazardous Waste Source Reduction and Management Review Act of 1989, and the California Vehicle Code, hazards and hazardous materials standards-based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Provide a written plan of proposed routes of travel demonstrating use of roadways designated for the transport of hazardous materials. z Follow the manufacturer’s recommendations on use, storage, and disposal of chemical products used during construction. z During routine maintenance of construction equipment, properly contain and remove grease and oils. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Impacts to hydrology and water quality from the 2016 RTP/SCS include potential water quality impairment from increased impervious surfaces. Increased impervious surfaces in water recharge areas potentially impact groundwater recharge and groundwater quality. Cumulative impacts include increased impervious surfaces; increased development in alluvial fan floodplains; and increased water demand and associated impacts, such as drawdown of groundwater aquifers. These impacts can occur at the localized scale and in relation to existing conditions, as the Plan itself does not affect the total amount of growth in the region. Increased output of greenhouse gases from the region’s transportation system impacts the security and reliability of the imported water supply. SCAG developed mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, working with local jurisdictions and water quality agencies, to encourage regional- scale planning for improved water quality management/demand and pollution prevention, providing opportunities for information sharing with respect to wastewater treatment and regional program development to promote Low Impact Development (LID) and reduce hydromodification. working with utilities, sub-regions, and other stakeholders to promote an accelerated penetration of zero (and/or near zero) emission vehicles in the region, including developing a strategy for the deployment of public charging infrastructure. Consistent with the provisions of Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, and within the responsibility and jurisdiction of ARB, local air districts, and/or lead agencies, greenhouse gas emissions and climate change standards-based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Reduce emissions resulting from a project through implementation of project features, project design, or other measures. z Incorporate Best Available Control Technology (BACT) during design, construction and operation of projects to minimize greenhouse gas emissions. z Adopt plan or mitigation program for the reduction of emissions that are required as part of the Lead Agency’s decision. z Use energy and fuel efficient vehicles and equipment. z Use the minimum feasible amount of greenhouse gas emitting construction materials that is feasible. z Incorporate design measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from solid waste management through encouraging solid waste recycling and reuse. z Incorporate design measures to reduce energy consumption and increase use of renewable energy. z Plant shade trees in or near construction projects where feasible. z Construct buildings to Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified standards. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Implementation of the 2016 RTP/SCS would affect the transportation and handling of hazardous materials in the SCAG region. Expected significant impacts include risk of accidental releases due to an increase in the transportation of hazardous materials and the potential for such releases to reach neighborhoods and communities adjacent to transportation facilities. The hazardous materials mitigation program aims to minimize the significant hazard to the public or the environment that involves the release of hazardous materials into the environment. 12105 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH z Ensure that the project is consistent with the applicable goals and policies of the adopted general plan where the project is located. z Where an inconsistency is identified, determine if the environmental, social, economic, and engineering benefits of the proposed land use strategy or transportation improvement warrant a variance from adopted zoning or an amendment to the general plan. z Wherever feasible incorporate direct crossings, overcrossings, or undercrossings at regular intervals for multiple modes of travel (e.g., pedestrians, bicyclists, vehicles). MINERAL RESOURCES Transportation projects as well as Land Development Category development patterns influenced by land use strategies identified in the 2016 RTP/SCS would require substantial amounts of aggregate resources to construct facilities. This would result in a significant impact. The six-county and 191 cities SCAG region has about 1,446 million tons of permitted aggregate reserves. The California Geological Survey (CGS) estimates that the SCAG region would need about 4,728 million tons of aggregate over the next 50 years. The difference of 3,282 million tons in demand could result in a shortage of aggregate supply. Based on this anticipated shortage of aggregate supply over the next 50 years, there would be an anticipated shortage during the next 25 years during implementation of the 2016 RTP/SCS. SCAG developed mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, the coordination with the Department of Conservation, the CGS to maintain a database of (1) available mineral resources in the SCAG region including permitted and un-permitted aggregate resources and (2) the anticipated 50- year demand for aggregate and other mineral resources. Based on the results of this survey, SCAG shall work with local agencies on strategies to address anticipated demand, including identifying future sites that may seek permitting and working with industry experts to identify ways to encourage and increase recycling to reduce the demand for aggregate. Based on County and City General Plans, mineral resources standards-based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Recycle and reuse building materials resulting from demolition, particularly aggregate resources, to the maximum extent practicable. z Identify and use building materials, particularly aggregate materials, resulting from demolition at other construction sites in the SCAG region, or within a reasonable hauling distance of the project site. Consistent with the provisions of Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, and within the jurisdiction and authority of the Regional Water Quality Control Boards and other regulatory agencies, hydrology and water quality standards- based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Complete, and have approved, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to initiation of construction. z Complete, and have approved, a Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan, prior to occupancy of residential or commercial structures. z Incorporate as appropriate, treatment and control features such as detention basins, infiltration strips, and porous paving, other features to control surface runoff and facilitate groundwater recharge into the design of new projects early on in the process to ensure that adequate acreage and elevation contours are provided during the right-of-way acquisition process. LAND USE AND PLANNING The 2016 RTP/SCS contains transportation projects to help more efficiently distribute population, housing, and employment growth, as well as a forecasted Land Development Category pattern of development described in detail in the SCS. These transportation projects and land use strategies are generally consistent with the county- and regional-level general plan data available to SCAG; however, general plans are not updated consistently. The Plan includes a projected Land Development Category pattern of development that, in order to maximize the effectiveness of the transportation system differs from local General Plan land uses beyond 2020. SCAG developed mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, coordinate with member cities and counties to encourage that general plans consider and reflect as appropriate RTP/SCS policies and strategies. Other measures include infill, mixed-use, higher density and other sustainable development, and work with partners to identify incentives to support the creation of affordable housing in mixed-use zones. Additionally, SCAG shall work with its member cities and counties to encourage that transportation projects and growth are consistent with the RTP/SCS and general plans. Consistent with the provisions of Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines and review of county and city general plans, land use and planning standards- based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: 122 2016 RTP/SCS POPULATION, HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT Transportation projects and land use strategies including new and expanded infrastructure are necessary to improve travel time and can enhance quality of life for those traveling throughout the region. The package of transportation improvements in the 2016 RTP/SCS is designed to accommodate total growth while maintaining or improving for mobility. The Plan would not affect the total growth in population in the region. The 2016 RTP/SCS can affect the distribution of that growth. Land use and housing impacts associated with transportation projects and development influenced by land use strategies, such as dividing established communities through right-of-way acquisition, can occur at a localized scale. SCAG developed mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, working with member agencies to encourage and assist growth strategies to create an urban form designed to focus development in HQTAs in accordance with the polices, strategies and investments contained in the 2016 RTP/SCS, enhancing mobility and reducing land consumption. Consistent with the provisions of Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines and review of county and city general plans, population, housing and employment standards-based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Evaluate alternate route alignments and transportation facilities that minimize the displacement of homes and businesses. Use an iterative design and impact analysis where impacts to homes or businesses are involved to minimize the potential of impacts on housing and displacement of people. z Prioritize the use of existing ROWs, wherever feasible. z Develop a construction schedule that minimizes potential neighborhood deterioration from protracted waiting periods between right-of-way acquisition and construction. z Construct affordable housing units, deed restricted to remain affordable for an appropriate period of time, as feasible or payment of fee, with the appropriate nexus to the impact, where such fees were established to address loss of affordable housing. PUBLIC SERVICES Any impacts to public services are identified only in relation to existing conditions or at a localized scale. These impacts generally include additional z Design transportation network improvements in a manner (such as buffer zones or the use of screening) that does not preclude adjacent or nearby extraction of known mineral and aggregate resources following completion of the improvement and during long-term operations. NOISE Some of the principal noise generators within the SCAG region are associated with transportation (i.e., airports, highways, arterial roadways, seaports, and railroads). Additional noise generators include stationary sources, such as industrial manufacturing plants and construction sites. Noise impacts resulting from the 2016 RTP/SCS generally include exposure of sensitive receptors to noise in excess of normally acceptable noise levels or substantial increases in noise as a result of the operation of expanded or new transportation facilities. SCAG developed mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, the coordination with member agencies as part of SCAG’s outreach and technical assistance to local governments under Toolbox Tuesday Training series, to encourage that projects involving residential and commercial land uses are encouraged to be developed in areas that are normally acceptable to conditionally acceptable, consistent with the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research Noise Element Guidelines. Consistent with the provisions of Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines and review of county and city general plans, noise standards-based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Install temporary noise barriers during construction. z Include permanent noise barriers and sound-attenuating features as part of the project design. z Schedule construction activities consistent with the allowable hours pursuant to applicable general plan noise element or noise ordinance where construction activities are authorized outside the limits established by the noise element of the general plan or noise ordinance; notify affected sensitive noise receptors and all parties who will experience noise levels in excess of the allowable limits for the specified land use, of the level of exceedance and duration of exceedance; and provide a list of protective measures that can be undertaken by the individual, including temporary relocation or use of hearing protective devices. 12305 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH development in order to ensure consistency with planning for expansion of new neighborhood parks within or in nearby accessible locations to HQTAs in funding opportunities and programs administered by SCAG. Consistent with the provisions of Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines and review of county and city general plans, recreation standards-based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Where projects require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities or the payment of equivalent Quimby fees, consider increasing the accessibility to natural areas and lands for outdoor recreation from the proposed project area, in coordination with local and regional open space planning or management agencies. z Where construction or expansion of recreational facilities is included in the project or required to meet public park service ratios, apply necessary mitigation measures to avoid or reduce significant environmental impacts associated with the construction or expansion of such facilities, through the imposition of conditions required to be followed to avoid or reduce impacts associated with air quality, noise, traffic, biological resources, greenhouse gas emissions, hydrology and water quality, and others that apply to specific construction or expansion of new or expanded public service facilities. TRANSPORTATION, TRAFFIC AND SAFETY The 2016 RTP/SCS takes into account the population, households, and employment projected for 2040, and therefore the largest demand on the transportation system expected during the lifetime of the plan. In accounting for the effects of regional population growth, the model output provides a regional, long-term and cumulative level of analysis for the impacts of the 2016 RTP/SCS on transportation resources. The regional growth, and thus, cumulative impacts, is captured in the vehicle miles traveled (VMT), vehicle hours traveled (VHT), and heavy-duty truck VHT data. Consistent with Senate Bill 375 Regional Target Advisory Committee’s final report to the California Air Resources Board, the 2016 RTP/SCS includes projects and strategies to reduce congestion and promote friendly speeds on the roadways. A subset of projects included in the 2016 RTP/SCS reduces greenhouse gas emissions by providing relief of existing and projected congestion. Those include toll roads, express lanes, high occupancy vehicle lanes, and dedicated truck toll lanes. Congestion pricing is a transportation demand management tool incorporated into the 2016 RTP/SCS that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions in addition to more efficient utilization of existing facilities. The SCAG region is vulnerable to demands on fire and police services, schools and landfills. Additional police and fire personnel would be needed to adequately respond to emergencies and routine calls, particularly on new or expanded transportation facilities. Other potential impacts at a localized scale could entail demands on public schools, solid waste facilities and disposal facilities. SCAG developed mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, supporting local jurisdictions and other service providers in their efforts to develop sustainable communities and provide, equally to all members of society, accessible and effective services such as: public education, housing, health care, social services, recreational facilities, law enforcement, and fire protection. Consistent with the provisions of Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines and review of county and city general plans, public services standards-based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Coordinate with local public protective security services to ensure that the existing public protective security services would be able to handle the increase in demand for their services. If the current levels of services at the project site are found to be inadequate, provide fair share contributions towards infrastructure improvements and/or personnel requirements for the appropriate public services z Identify projects that have the potential to generate the need for expanded emergency response services. Where such services and related staffing needs exceed the capacity of existing facilities, provide for the construction of new facilities directly as an element of the project or through a dedicated fair share contributions toward infrastructure improvements. RECREATION Impacts to recreation from the 2016 RTP/SCS would result from an increase in population. The use of regional parks and other recreational facilities are expected to increase and result in a substantial physical deterioration of facilities at an accelerated rate. Additionally, transportation projects included in the 2016 RTP/SCS could result in potentially significant impacts to recreational facilities which include closures to gaps in the highway network through areas that currently service as open space lands. SCAG developed mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, facilitating the reduction of impacts as a result of increased use in recreational facilities through cooperation with member agencies, information sharing, and program 124 2016 RTP/SCS numerous threats that include both natural and human caused incidents. As such, a mitigation program related to safety is included in the PEIR. SCAG developed mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, the facilitation of minimizing impacts to emergency access through ongoing regional planning efforts such as meetings with local member agencies, maintain forums with policy makers, and workshops with local, regional, and state partners such as Department of Transportation, Congestion Management Agencies, Fire Department, and other local enforcement agencies during consultation on development and maintenance of the Regional Transportation Plan. Consistent with the provisions of Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, county and city general plans and congestion management programs, transportation standards-based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Promote ride sharing programs e.g., by designating a certain percentage of parking spaces for high-occupancy vehicles, providing larger parking spaces to accommodate vans used for ride-sharing, and designating adequate passenger loading and unloading and waiting areas. z Encourage bicycling to transit facilities by providing additional bicycle parking, locker facilities, and bike lane access to transit facilities when feasible. z Encourage the use of public transit systems by enhancing safety and cleanliness on vehicles and in and around stations, providing shuttle service to public transit, offering public transit incentives and providing public education and publicity about public transportation services. z Encourage bicycling and walking by incorporating bicycle lanes into street systems in regional transportation plans, new subdivisions, and large developments, creating bicycle lanes and walking paths directed to the location of schools and other logical points of destination and provide adequate bicycle parking, and encouraging commercial projects to include facilities on-site to encourage employees to bicycle or walk to work. z Build or fund a major transit stop within or near transit, or transit- oriented development. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Impacts to utilities and service systems from the 2016 RTP/SCS include the potential for the construction of new utility infrastructure or expansion of existing infrastructure. Additional impacts could result in an increased amount of pollutants in urban runoff attributed to landscape irrigation, highway runoff, and illicit dumping. As mentioned previously, implementation of the Plan would increase impervious surfaces in the SCAG region through a combination of transportation projects and development influenced by land use strategies. Additional impacts such as insufficient water supply, strain to wastewater and solid waste treatment plants could also occur. SCAG developed mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, working with local jurisdictions and water quality agencies, to encourage regional- scale planning for improved water quality management/demand and pollution prevention, providing opportunities for information sharing with respect to wastewater treatment and program development in the region. Consistent with the provisions of Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines, and within the responsibility of local jurisdictions including the Imperial, Riverside, San Bernardino, Los Angeles, Ventura and Orange Counties Flood Control District, utilities and service systems standards-based mitigation measures may include, but are not limited to: z Reduce exterior consumptive uses of water in public areas, and should promote reductions in private homes and businesses, by shifting to drought-tolerant native landscape plantings (xeriscaping), using weather-based irrigation systems. z Reuse and minimize construction and demolition (C&D) debris and diversion of C&D waste from landfills to recycling facilities. z Implement or expand city or county-wide recycling and composting programs for residents and businesses. 12505 THE ROAD TO GREATER MOBILITY & SUSTAINABLE GROWTH CONCLUSION These transportation and land use strategies, programs and projects are ambitious, but based on our history SCAG is confident that together they will advance our movement toward a more mobile and sustainable region that achieves our long-term goals for people across our region. By closely integrating transportation and land use planning, the 2016 RTP/ SCS places the region firmly on that path. For more details on the planned investments reviewed in this chapter, including a project list, please see the Project List Appendix. The following chapter, “Paying for Our Plan,” presents a review of how we expect to fund our ambitious list of transportation investments—that is, where the money will come from and what economic and policy developments could impact the availability of public funds needed to realize our goals. CHAPTER 6 HIGHLIGHTS 06 INTRODUCTION 128 ECONOMIC OUTLOOK AND KEY FINANCIAL ASSUMPTIONS 128 REVENUE & EXPENDITURE CATEGORIES 131 CORE REVENUES 131 REASONABLY AVAILABLE REVENUES 133 SUMMARY OF REVENUE SOURCES AND EXPENDITURES 133Image courtesy of Samer Momani In accordance with federal fiscal constraint requirements, this chapter and a more detailed appendix on our financial plan identify how much money SCAG reasonably expects will be available to support our region’s surface transportation investments. PAYING FOR THE PLAN 128 2016 RTP/SCS ECONOMIC OUTLOOK AND KEY FINANCIAL ASSUMPTIONS SCAG’s financial model reflects historical growth trends and reasonable future expectations for key revenue sources. The inability of existing excise taxes to keep pace with increasing transportation needs and the impacts of increasing fuel efficiency on traditional revenue sources are key considerations in the financial plan. INFLATION Inflation can have a profound impact over the long-term time horizon of our Plan. SCAG’s revenue model accounts for historical inflation trends, as measured by the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Price Deflator. FIGURE 6.1 shows the trends in inflation by the GDP Price Deflator. Although inflation rates have varied considerably over time, they have generally trended between two and four percent. Accordingly, a 2.4 percent inflation rate is used to adjust constant dollar (revenue) forecasts into nominal (year-of- expenditure) dollars. CONSTRUCTION COST INCREASES The rise in construction costs can further erode the purchasing power of transportation revenues. FIGURE 6.2 shows the increase and decline in California highway construction costs since the early 1970s. While recent corrections have slowed the longer-term increase in costs, the growth still remains above general inflation. The financial plan uses a 3.2 percent annual inflation factor to estimate future and nominal (year-of-expenditure) costs. RETAIL SALES GROWTH Changes in personal consumption patterns and the overall population are main contributors to the growth in retail sales. Over the 30-year period from FY1981- 82 to FY2011-12, statewide retail sales grew by 1.8 percent in real terms (when the effects of inflation are eliminated). The financial plan assumes retail sales growth ranging from 1.8 percent to 3.9 percent in real terms. INTRODUCTION The financially constrained 2016 RTP/SCS includes both a “traditional” core revenue forecast comprised of existing local, state and federal sources and more innovative but reasonably available sources of revenue to implement a program of infrastructure improvements that keeps freight and people moving. As in the past, the financial plan describes steps we can take to obtain needed revenues to implement the region’s transportation vision. The financial plan highlights the importance of finding new and innovative ways to pay for transportation, including our ever-expanding backlog of projects to preserve our existing transportation system. Nationally, we continue to face an insolvency crisis with the Federal Highway Trust Fund, as fuel tax receipts have declined precipitously. Similarly, the viability of California’s State Highway Account remains in question, as only a fraction of our needs are funded through state sources. Our region continues to rely heavily on local sources of tax revenue. Seven sales tax measures in the region generate 71 percent of core revenues for transportation improvements. It is vital that we find new ways to make transportation funding more sustainable in the long term, and efforts are underway to explore how we can transition from our current system based on fuel taxes to a more direct system based on user fees. Recent action by the state Legislature to launch the California Road Charge Pilot Program is a critical step in this transition. In our region, numerous policy and technical studies have been conducted on the subject and more work is planned to examine and demonstrate the viability of user fee systems, including toll networks. Our region has successfully implemented toll systems in the past, with the Transportation Corridor Agencies’ network of privately financed toll roads, the State Route 91 Express Lanes in Orange County and more recently with the express lanes along Interstate 10 and Interstate 110 in Los Angeles County. The SCAG region has secured the necessary resources to support transportation investments detailed in past RTPs, and our current financial plan will continue to meet necessary milestones to implement the 2016 RTP/SCS. The following sections describe the financial assumptions and methodologies used for forecasting revenues and expenditures for transportation investments. Other SCS implementation costs are not included in this analysis. 12906 PAYING FOR THE PLAN FIGURE 6.1 HISTORICAL INFLATION TRENDS (ANNUAL INFLATION) Source: Office of Management and Budget, Budget of the United States Government, FY 2016 Budget (2%) 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 1940 1952 1964 1976 1988 2000 2012 Year-Over-Year Inflation Annualized Inflation FIGURE 6.2 GROWTH IN HIGHWAY CAPITAL COSTS (INDEX VALUE) Source: California Department of Transportation 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 1972 1982 1992 2002 2012 +3.2% INCREASE in construction costs FIGURE 6.3 STATUS OF THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY TRUST FUND ($ BILLIONS) Source: Congressional Budget Office and Federal Highway Administration (60) (40) (20) 0 20 60 40 (80) 80 100 1983 1989 1995 2001 2007 2013 2019 2025 Actual Projected Revenues, Interest and General Fund Transfers End of Year Balance or Shortfall Outlays FIGURE 6.4 STATUS OF THE STATE HIGHWAY OPERATION AND PROTECTION PROGRAM (SHOPP) ($ BILLIONS) Source: California Department of Transportation, 2015 Ten-Year SHOPP Plan 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 Programming Cycle Annual Value of Programmed Projects (Capital Outlay plus Capital Outlay Support) Annual Value of Ten-Year Need (Capital Outlay plus Capital Outlay Support) Growth in construction costs (3.2%) outpaces general inflation (2.4%) The viability of the state and federal revenue sources is of concern 130 2016 RTP/SCS FUEL CONSUMPTION Excise taxes on gasoline and diesel fuels are the basis of most federal and state transportation funding sources. Since these taxes are based on cents- per-gallon purchased, they depend solely on fuel consumption and are not indexed to inflation or construction costs. While changes in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) will continue to play a role during the Plan period, increases in conventional fuel efficiency and the adoption of alternative fuel vehicles will reduce overall fuel consumption. The financial plan assumes that increases in vehicle fuel efficiency will reduce fuel consumption by 0.9 percent per year during the Plan period. STATUS OF THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY TRUST FUND The Federal Highway Trust Fund provides federal highway and transit funding from a nationally-imposed 18.3 cent-per-gallon gasoline excise tax. Since 2008, the Trust Fund has failed to meet its obligations and has required the United States Congress to authorize $141.1 billion in transfers from the General Fund to keep it solvent. The negative balances shown on FIGURE 6.3 illustrate the projected inability of the Trust Fund to pay its obligations into the highway account. At the time of the 2016 RTP/SCS, nearly a decade has passed without substantive Congressional agreement on a long-term solution to provide adequate funding for the Trust Fund. The recently passed transportation reauthorization known as the FAST Act relies on $70 billion of one-time, non- user fees to keep the Trust Fund solvent through 2020. It does not address the present, long-term structural deficiency that exists in funding the Trust Fund. Although the financial plan assumes that Congress will reach agreement on reauthorizing federal spending for transportation programs over the Plan horizon, the core revenues available from the Trust Fund are expected to decline due to increasing fuel efficiency and other factors. STATUS OF THE STATE HIGHWAY ACCOUNT Despite the “Gas Tax Swap,” the effective state gas excise tax rate of 18 cents-per-gallon has remained unadjusted for more than 20 years. Gas tax revenues remain the only source of funding for the State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP), which funds projects to maintain the State Highway System. As shown in FIGURE 6.4, previous levels of funding have been considerably less than actual needs. Statewide, the 2015 Ten- Year SHOPP Plan identifies $8.0 billion in statewide annual needs, while expenditures programmed for the next four years are only $2.3 billion annually. Continued underinvestment in the maintenance needs of the State Highway System will only increase the cost of bringing our highway assets back to a state of good repair. LOCAL SALES TAX MEASURES The SCAG region continues to rely heavily on local sales tax measures for the timely delivery of transportation projects. While most counties impose a 0.5 percent sales tax to fund transportation projects, Los Angeles County levies a 1.5 percent tax—a combination of two permanent half-cent sales taxes and Measure R at 0.5 percent. Measure R is not permanent and expires in 2039. Riverside County’s Measure A also expires in 2039. Measure I in San Bernardino County expires in 2040, followed by Orange County’s Measure M in 2041. Measure D in Imperial County expires in 2050. Ventura County is the only county in the region without an existing dedicated sales tax for transportation. However, Ventura County is in the process of seeking voter approval on a half- cent sales tax, which is reflected as part of the reasonably available revenues. TRANSIT OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE (O&M) COSTS Future transit O&M costs depend on a variety of factors, such as future revenue- miles of service, labor contracts and the age of rolling stock. For the 2016 RTP/ SCS, transit O&M costs are estimated based upon historical increases. The regional average increase of 2.7 percent is used for most operators. For Los Angeles County, the financial plan relies on detailed forecasts from the county transportation commission, which is also consistent with historical data. MULTIMODAL SYSTEM PRESERVATION AND MAINTENANCE The 2016 RTP/SCS identifies $275.5 billion in total system preservation and maintenance needed to bring transit, passenger rail, regionally significant local streets and roads, and the State Highway System to a state of good repair. While the Plan includes core revenue sources for system preservation, these sources are limited due to restrictions on the use of funds and voter-approved commitments to major capital initiatives. 13106 PAYING FOR THE PLAN REVENUE & EXPENDITURE CATEGORIES CORE AND REASONABLY AVAILABLE REVENUES The 2016 RTP/SCS financial plan includes two types of revenue forecasts. Both are included in the financially constrained plan: z Core revenues z Reasonably available revenues The core revenues identified are existing transportation funding sources projected to FY2039-40. The core revenue forecast does not include future increases in state or federal gas excise tax rates (other than the adjustments reflecting the state gasoline sales tax swap) or adoptions of regional gasoline taxes, mileage-based user fees and new tax measures. These revenues provide a benchmark from which additional funding can be identified. The region’s reasonably available revenues include new sources of transportation funding likely to materialize within the 2016 RTP/SCS time frame. These sources include adjustments to existing state and federal gas tax rates, value capture strategies, potential national freight program funds, tolls for specific facilities and private equity participation. Federal guidelines on fiscal constraint permits the inclusion of revenues that are reasonably available. In accordance with federal guidelines, the Plan includes strategies for ensuring the availability of these sources. EXPENDITURE CATEGORIES Transportation expenditures in the SCAG region are summarized into three main categories: z Capital costs for transit, state highways and regionally significant arterials (local streets and roads) z Operating and maintenance costs for transit, state highways and regionally significant arterials (local streets and roads) z Debt service payments (for current and anticipated bond issuances) CORE REVENUES SCAG’s regional core revenue model forecasts transportation revenues over the entire 2016 RTP/SCS time horizon. The revenue model is comprehensive and supports analysis by county or funding source. The revenue forecast was developed using the following framework: z Incorporate financial planning documents developed by local county transportation commissions and transit operators in the region, where available z Ensure consistency with both local and state planning documents z Utilize published data sources to evaluate historical trends z Conduct sensitivity testing of assumptions to augment local forecasts, as needed The region’s revenue forecast horizon for the financial plan is FY2015-16 through FY2039-40. Consistent with federal guidelines, the plan takes into account inflation and reports statistics in nominal (year-of-expenditure) dollars. TABLE 6.1 shows these core revenues in five-year increments by county. 1601 INTRODUCTION 6.MULTIMODAL SYSTEM PRESERVATION & MAINTENANCE NEEDS $156.7 BILLION TRANSIT $15.7 BILLION PASSENGER RAIL $65.8 BILLION STATE HIGHWAYS $37.3 BILLION REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT LOCAL STREETS & ROADS $275.5 BILLION TOTAL (in nominal dollars) Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding. 132 2016 RTP/SCS FIGURE 6.5 CORE REVENUES (IN NOMINAL DOLLARS) COUNTY FY 2016–2020 FY 2021–2025 FY 2026–2030 FY 2031–2035 FY 2036–2040 TOTAL Imperial $0.5 $0.5 $0.6 $0.7 $0.8 $3.2 Los Angeles $34.3 $38.0 $45.4 $53.1 $55.0 $225.8 Orange $8.5 $8.5 $10.1 $12.1 $14.2 $53.4 Riverside $5.4 $6.3 $7.6 $9.3 $10.0 $38.6 San Bernardino $4.2 $4.8 $5.6 $6.5 $7.5 $28.6 Ventura $1.0 $1.1 $1.3 $1.5 $1.7 $6.5 TOTAL $53.9 $59.2 $70.6 $83.1 $89.3 $356.1 TABLE 6.1 CORE REVENUE FORECAST FY 2016–2040 (in Nominal Dollars, Billions) Source: SCAG Revenue Model 2015 Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding. The majority of revenues in the SCAG region come from local sources. The share of state sources (18 percent) has increased since the last RTP as a result of Cap-and-Trade Auction Proceeds. Federal sources are expected to comprise a small portion of overall transportation funds ($37.7 billion). Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funds account for 57 percent of federal funding in the SCAG region. The financial plan also assumes that CMAQ funding will decline in 2022, 2031 and 2036 due to the region achieving attainment for a number of criteria pollutants and reducing the severity level of others. FTA Formula FTA Discretionary Other Federal CMAQ RSTP 45% 12% 11% 13% 19% $37.7 BILLION FEDERAL SHOPP State Gasoline Sales Tax Swap State Transit Assistance Cap-and-Trade Other State STIP 42% 25% 9% 6% 3% 15% $63.8 BILLION The State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), the State Highway Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP) and the State Gasoline Sales Tax Swap account for the bulk of the state funding available. STATE Local Sales Tax TDA Gas Tax Subvention Farebox Revenue Highway Tolls Mitigation Fees Other Local 52% 14% 2% 12% 7% 4% 9% $254.7 BILLION Local sales taxes provide the largest single source of local funding. When local sales taxes in all five counties with such measures are included, these taxes account for more than half (52 percent) of local sources. LOCAL LOCAL + STATE + FEDERAL= $356.1 BILLION 13306 PAYING FOR THE PLAN REASONABLY AVAILABLE REVENUES There are several new funding sources that are reasonably expected to be available for the 2016 RTP/SCS. The following guiding principles were used for identifying reasonably available revenues: z Establish a user fee-based system that better reflects the true cost of transportation, provides firewall protection for new and existing transportation funds, and ensures an equitable distribution of costs and benefits. z Promote national and state programs that include return-to-source guarantees, while maintaining flexibility to reward regions that continue to commit substantial local resources. z Leverage locally available funding with innovative financing tools (e.g., tax credits and expansion of the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act [TIFIA]) to attract private capital and accelerate project delivery. z Promote funding strategies that strengthen the federal commitment to the nation’s goods movement system, recognizing the pivotal role that our region plays in domestic and international trade. TABLE 6.2 identifies eight categories of funding sources that are considered to be reasonably available and are included in the financially constrained plan. These sources were identified on the basis of their potential for revenue generation, historical precedence and the likelihood of their implementation within the time frame of the 2016 RTP/SCS. For each funding source, SCAG has examined the policy and legal context of implementation and has prepared an estimate of the potential revenues generated. Additional documentation of funding sources included in the financial plan are provided in the Transportation Finance Appendix. SUMMARY OF REVENUE SOURCES AND EXPENDITURES The SCAG region’s financially constrained 2016 RTP/SCS includes revenues from both core and reasonably available revenue sources, which together total $556.5 billion from FY2015-16 through FY2039-40 (see TABLE 6.3). The Plan is funded 57 percent by local sources, 23 percent by state sources and 19 percent by federal sources, as illustrated in FIGURE 6.6. Capital projects total $246.6 billion in nominal dollars. Operating and maintenance (O&M) costs total $275.5 billion, while debt service obligations total $34.5 billion. Transit-related costs comprise the largest share of O&M costs for the region, totaling $156.7 billion. TABLE 6.4 presents the SCAG region’s revenue forecast by source in five- year increments, from FY2015-16 through FY2039-40. This is followed by TABLE 6.5, which provides details of the region’s expenditures by category in five-year increments. Source: SCAG Revenue Model 2015 Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding. 7%Core Federal 13%Additional Federal (e.g., Federal Portion of Mileage-Based User Fee, National Freight Program) 11%Core State 12%Additional State (e.g., State Portion of Mileage-Based User Fee) 46%Core Local 12%Additional Local (e.g., Highway Tolls, Ventura County Sales Tax Measure)TOTALREVENUE$556.5 BILLION 44%Capital Projects 6%Debt Service 12%Operation & Maintenance State Highways 28%Operation & Maintenance Transit 3%Operation & Maintenance Passenger Rail 7%Operation & Maintenance Regionally Significant Local Streets and Roads TOTALEXPENDITURES$556.5 BILLION FIGURE 6.6 FY 2016–2040 SUMMARY OF REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES (IN NOMINAL DOLLARS) 134 2016 RTP/SCS REVENUE SOURCE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ACTIONS TO ENSURE AVAILABILITY RESPONSIBLE PARTY(IES) State and Federal Gas Excise Tax Adjustment to Maintain Historical Purchasing Power Additional $0.10 per gallon gasoline tax imposed at the state and the federal levels starting in 2020 to 2024 to maintain purchasing power. $6.0 Requires action of state Legislature and Congress. Strategy is consistent with recommendations from two national commissions to move immediately with augmenting fuel tax resources through conventional Highway Trust Fund mechanisms. Rate is also consistent with proposals introduced in state Legislature during 2015−2016 session. State Legislature, Congress Mileage-Based User Fee (or equivalent fuel tax adjustment) Mileage-based user fees would be implemented to replace gas taxes—estimated at about $0.04 (in 2015 dollars) per mile starting in 2025 and indexed to maintain purchasing power. $124.8 (est. increment only) Requires action of state Legislature and Congress. Strategy is consistent with recommendations from two national commissions to move toward a mileage- based user fee system. In 2014, state Legislature passed Senate Bill (SB) 1077 (DeSaulnier) directing California to conduct a pilot program to study the feasibility of a road charge as a replacement to the gas tax beginning no later than January 1, 2017. The FAST Act establishes the Surface Transportation System Funding Alternatives program, which provides grants to states to demonstrate alternative user-based revenue mechanisms that could maintain the long-term solvency of the Trust Fund. State Legislature, Congress Highway Tolls (includes toll revenue bond proceeds) Toll revenues generated from East-West Freight Corridor and regional express lane network.$23.5 Assembly Bill (AB) 1467 (Nunez) Chapter 32, Statutes of 2006 authorized Caltrans and regional transportation agencies to enter into comprehensive development lease agreements with public and private entities or consortia of those entities for certain types of transportation projects. Further, AB 521 (Runner) Chapter 542, Statutes of 2006 modified provisions in AB 1467. Senate Bill Second Extraordinary Session 4 (SBX2 4) Chapter 2, Statutes of 2009 (Cogdill) established the legislative authority until January 1, 2017, allowing for regional transportation agencies and Caltrans to enter into an unlimited number of public-private partnerships (PPP) and deleted the restrictions on the number and type of projects that may be undertaken. Chapter 474, Statutes of 2009 (AB 798) established the California Transportation Financing Authority (CTFA). Highway projects that meet planning and environmental review requirements are eligible for tolling subject to meeting requirements of the CTFA. AB 798 also lifted the requirement for express lane projects authorized under AB 1467 to have separate legislative approval. SB 1316 (Correa) enabled RCTC to impose tolls along SR-91 Express Lanes. The I-15 Express Lanes in Riverside County were authorized by AB 1954 (Jeffries). SB 1298 (Hernandez) authorized continued tolling along the I-10 and I-110 Express Lanes in Los Angeles County. AB 914 (Brown) allowed express lanes along I-10 and the I-15 in San Bernardino County. AB 194 (Frazier) allowed the California Transportation Commission to authorize additional express lane projects. MPO, CTCs, Caltrans, CTFA, and FHWA as may be applicable TABLE 6.2 NEW REVENUE SOURCES AND INNOVATIVE FINANCING STRATEGIES (in Nominal Dollars, Billions) 13506 PAYING FOR THE PLAN REVENUE SOURCE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ACTIONS TO ENSURE AVAILABILITY RESPONSIBLE PARTY(IES) Private Equity Participation Private equity share as may be applicable for key initiatives: e.g., toll facilities; also, freight rail package assumes railroads’ share of costs for main line capacity and intermodal facilities. $3.4 Region has authority as noted above. Current funding plans for specific intermodal facilities assume private sources. MPO, CTCs, private consortium, state Legislature, and Union Pacific/ BNSF as appropriate for specific facilities Freight Fee/National Freight Program The recent reauthorization of the federal surface transportation act (the FAST Act) provides dedicated federal funding for infrastructure improvements supporting the national freight network through the newly created National Highway Freight Program and the Nationally Significant Freight and Highway Projects program. These programs are funded at approximately $2.1 billion per year nationally. Regional estimate assumes a conservative percentage of national totals. $5.4 Current efforts at the local/regional level continue to endorse a federal program for freight. Other mechanisms to ensure the establishment of a funding program for freight may entail working with local/regional, state, and federal stakeholders to assess a national freight fee. Freight fees could be assessed in proportion to relative impacts on the transportation system. Congress and potentially state Legislature as well as local/regional stakeholders State Bond Proceeds, Federal Grants & Other for California High-Speed Rail Program State general obligation bonds authorized under the Bond Act approved by California voters as Proposition 1A in 2008; federal grants authorized under American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program; Cap-and-Trade Auction Proceeds; potential use of qualified tax credit bonds; and private sources. $34.0 Estimate for Southern California segments based on statewide system total per 2014 California High-Speed Rail Business Plan. Further coordination anticipated with the California High-Speed Rail Authority in finalizing business plan; additionally, the High-Speed Rail Authority will pursue private-sector participation as a source of system financing. MPO, California High-Speed Rail Authority, local/regional stakeholders, private-sector partners Value Capture Strategies Assumes formation of special districts (Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts) including use of tax increment financing for specific initiatives. $1.2 Pursue necessary approvals for special districts by 2020. Benefit assessment districts require majority approval by property owners; community facility districts require two-thirds approval; work with private entities for joint development opportunities as may be applicable. MPO, CTCs, local jurisdictions, property owners along project corridors, developers Local Option Sales Tax Half-cent sales tax measure for Ventura County $2.1 Local sales tax measure to be placed on ballot by 2020 Ventura County TABLE 6.2 CONTINUED 136 2016 RTP/SCS TABLE 6.3 SUMMARY OF REVENUE SOURCES REVENUE SOURCE REVENUE PROJECTION ASSUMPTIONS REVENUE ESTIMATE Local Option Sales Tax Measures Description: Locally imposed ½ percent sales tax in four counties (Imperial, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino). Permanent 1 percent (combination of two ½ cent sales taxes) plus Measure R through 2039 in Los Angeles County. Measure D in Imperial County expires in 2050; Measure M in Orange County expires in 2041; Measure A in Riverside County expires in 2039; and Measure D in San Bernardino County expires in 2040. Assumptions: Sales taxes grow consistent with county transportation commission forecasts and historical trends. $132.7 Transportation Development Act (TDA)—Local Transportation Fund Description: The Local Transportation Fund (LTF) is derived from a ¼ cent sales tax on retail sales statewide. Funds are returned to the county of generation and used mostly for transit operations and transit capital expenses. Assumptions: Same sales tax growth rate as used for local option sales tax measures. $35.6 Gas Excise Tax Subventions (to Cities and Counties) Description: Subventions to counties and local jurisdictions in region from the California state gas tax. Revenues for the forecast are proportionate to the percentage of streets and roads that are regionally significant. Assumptions: Gasoline fuel consumption declines in real terms by 1.6 percent due to increasing fuel efficiency in conventional vehicles and adoption of electric and hybrid vehicles. Regionally significant streets and roads (28 to 48 percent of total roads) are classified as either arterials or collectors. $5.6 Transit Farebox Revenue Description: Transit fares collected by transit operators in the SCAG region. Assumptions: Farebox revenues increase consistent with historic trends, planned system expansions, and operator forecasts.$29.7 Highway Tolls (in core revenue forecast) Description: Revenues generated from toll roads operated by the Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA), from the SR-91 Express Lanes operated by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), and from the express lanes along I-10 and I-110 in Los Angeles County. Assumptions: Toll revenues grow consistent with county transportation commission forecasts and historical trends. $17.2 Mitigation Fees Description: Revenues generated from development impact fees. The revenue forecast includes fees from the Transportation Corridor Agency (TCA) development impact fee program, San Bernardino County’s development impact fee program and Riverside County’s Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) for both the Coachella Valley and Western Riverside County. Assumptions: The financial forecast is consistent with revenue forecasts from TCA, Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC), and the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG). $10.1 Other Local Sources Description: Includes committed local revenue sources such as transit advertising and auxiliary revenues, lease revenues, and interest and investment earnings from reserve funds. Assumptions: Revenues are based on financial data from transit operators and local county transportation commissions. $23.8 LOCAL SUBTOTAL $254.7 Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding. TABLE 6.3.1 CORE AND REASONABLY AVAILABLE REVENUE PROJECTIONS—LOCAL REVENUE SOURCES (in Nominal Dollars, Billions) 13706 PAYING FOR THE PLAN REVENUE SOURCE REVENUE PROJECTION ASSUMPTIONS REVENUE ESTIMATE State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Description: The STIP is a five-year capital improvement program that provides funding from the State Highway Account (SHA) for projects that increase the capacity of the transportation system. The SHA is funded through a combination of state gas excise tax, the Federal Highway Trust Fund, and truck weight fees. The STIP may include projects on state highways, local roads, intercity rail, or public transit systems. The Regional Transportation Planning Agencies (RTPAs) propose 75 percent of STIP funding for regional transportation projects in Regional Transportation Improvement Programs (RTIPs). Caltrans proposes 25 percent of STIP funding for interregional transportation projects in the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP). Assumptions: Funds are based upon the 2014 Report of STIP Balances County and Interregional Shares, August 1, 2014. Fuel consumption declines in real terms by 0.9 percent due to increasing fuel efficiency in conventional vehicles and adoption of electric and hybrid vehicles. $9.6 State Highway Operation and Protection Plan (SHOPP) Description: Funds state highway maintenance and operations projects. Assumptions: Short-term revenues are based on overlapping 2012 and 2014 SHOPP programs. Long-term forecasts are consistent with STIP forecasts and assume decline in fuel consumption. $26.7 State Gasoline Sales Tax Swap Description: Prior to 2010, state sales tax on gasoline funded discretionary projects through the Transportation Investment Fund, which distributed revenues to the STIP, local streets and roads, and transit. In 2010, the sales tax revenues were “swapped” for an increased excise tax (initially 17.3 cents) recalculated each year to ensure revenue neutrality. Assumptions: The forecast is based on current funding levels as reported by the State Controller. Future revenues grow by 1.8 percent (in real terms) to be revenue neutral consistent with the gasoline sales tax swap. $15.7 State Transit Assistance Fund (STA) Description: STA is funded from the diesel sales tax and is distributed by population share and revenue share of the transit operators. Assumptions: The forecast is based on current funding levels reported by the State Controller. Future funding declines with fuel consumption using assumptions consistent with other sources. $5.8 Cap-and-Trade Auction Proceeds Description: The Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) established the goal of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions statewide to 1990 levels by 2020. In order to help achieve this goal, the California Air Resources Board (ARB) adopted a regulation to establish a Cap-and-Trade program that places a “cap” on the aggregate GHG emissions from entities responsible for roughly 85 percent of the state’s GHG emissions. As part of the Cap-and-Trade program, ARB conducts quarterly auctions where it sells emission allowances. Revenues from the sale of these allowances fund projects that support the goals of AB 32, including transit and rail investments. Funds associated with non-transportation investments and High-Speed Rail are not included in this amount. Funds associated with High-Speed Rail are address under Innovative Financing and New Revenue Sources. Assumptions: The forecast is based on current revenue estimates from the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO). The LAO projects statewide revenues to reach a cumulative program total of $15 billion by 2020. Given the uncertainty about future allowance prices, annual growth is assumed to be flat beyond 2020. SCAG’s revenue projection for Cap-and-Trade Auction Proceeds is conservative and represents a bottom floor estimate for the region. Proceeds for transportation could be significantly greater. $3.7 Other State Sources Description: Other state sources include remaining Highway Safety, Traffic, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006 (Proposition 1B), Active Transportation Program, and other miscellaneous state grant apportionments for the SCAG region. Assumptions: Short-term revenues are based on actual apportionments. Future Active Transportation Program funding declines with fuel consumption using assumptions consistent with other sources. $2.2 STATE SUBTOTAL $63.8 Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding. TABLE 6.3.2 CORE AND REASONABLY AVAILABLE REVENUE PROJECTIONS—STATE REVENUE SOURCES (in Nominal Dollars, Billions) 138 2016 RTP/SCS REVENUE SOURCE REVENUE PROJECTION ASSUMPTIONS REVENUE ESTIMATE FHWA Non-Discretionary Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Program Description: Program to reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality in non-attainment areas. Assumptions: Short-term revenues are based upon the Caltrans apportionment estimates. Long-term revenues assume that fuel consumption declines by 0.9 percent (in real terms) annually. CMAQ funding is assumed to be reduced by 25 percent in 2022, an additional 25 percent in 2031, and an additional 25 percent in 2036 due to improved air quality. $4.9 FHWA Non-Discretionary Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) Description: Projects eligible for RSTP funds include rehabilitation and new construction on any highways included in the National Highway System (NHS) and Interstate Highways (including bridges). Also, transit capital projects, as well as intracity and intercity bus terminals and facilities, are eligible. Assumptions: Short-term revenues are based upon the Caltrans apportionment estimates. Long-term revenues assume that fuel consumption declines by 0.9 percent (in real terms) annually. $7.3 FTA Formula Programs 5307 Urbanized Area Formula, 5310 Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities Formula, 5311 Rural Formula, 5337 State of Good Repair Formula, and 5339 Bus and Bus Facilities Formula Description: This includes a number of FTA programs distributed by formula. 5307 is distributed to state urbanized areas with a formula based upon population, population density, number of low-income individuals, and transit revenue and passenger miles of service. Program funds capital projects, planning, job access and reverse commute projects, and operations costs under certain circumstances. 5310 funds are allocated by formula to states for projects providing enhanced mobility to seniors and persons with disabilities. 5311 provides capital, planning, and operating assistance to states to support public transportation in rural areas with populations less than 50,000. 5337 is distributed based on revenue and route miles and provides funds for repairing and upgrading rail transit systems, high-intensity bus systems that use High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes, including bus rapid transit (BRT). 5339 provides capital funding to replace, rehabilitate, and purchase buses and related equipment and to construct bus-related facilities. Assumptions: Formula funds are assumed to decline in proportion with the Federal Highway Trust Fund. As with the FHWA sources, fuel consumption declines by 0.9 percent (in real terms) annually. $16.8 FTA Non-Formula Program 5309 Fixed Guideway Capital Investment Grants ("New Starts") Description: Provides grants for new fixed guideways or extensions to fixed guideways (projects that operate on a separate right-of-way exclusively for public transportation, or that include a rail or a catenary system), bus rapid transit projects operating in mixed traffic that represent a substantial investment in the corridor, and projects that improve capacity on an existing fixed guideway system. Assumptions: Operators are assumed to receive FTA discretionary funds in rough proportion to what they have received historically. As with the FHWA sources, fuel consumption declines by 0.9 percent (in real terms) annually. $4.7 Other Federal Sources Description: Includes other federal programs, such as Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) competitive grant program, Highway Safety Improvement Program, Federal Safe Routes to School, Highway Bridge Program, and earmarks. Assumptions: Short-term revenues are based on actual apportionments. Long-term revenues assumes a 0.9 percent (in real terms) annual decline in fuel consumption as used for other federal funding sources. $4.0 FEDERAL SUBTOTAL $37.7 Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding. TABLE 6.3.3 CORE AND REASONABLY AVAILABLE REVENUE PROJECTIONS—FEDERAL REVENUE SOURCES (in Nominal Dollars, Billions) 13906 PAYING FOR THE PLAN TABLE 6.3.4 CORE AND REASONABLY AVAILABLE REVENUE PROJECTIONS—INNOVATIVE FINANCING AND NEW REVENUE SOURCES (in Nominal Dollars, Billions) REVENUE SOURCE REVENUE PROJECTION ASSUMPTIONS REVENUE ESTIMATE State and Federal Gas Excise Tax Adjustment to Maintain Historical Purchasing Power Description: Additional 10-cents-per-gallon gasoline tax imposed by the state and federal government starting in 2020 through 2024. Assumptions: Forecast consistent with historical tax rate adjustments for both state and federal gas taxes.$6.0 Mileage-Based User Fee (or equivalent fuel tax adjustment) Description: Mileage-based user fees would be implemented to replace existing gas taxes (state and federal) by 2025. Assumptions: Consistent with recommendations from two national commissions established under SAFETEA-LU, it is assumed that a national mileage-based user fee system would be established during the latter years of the RTP/SCS. An estimated $0.04 per mile (in 2015 dollars) is assumed starting in 2025 to replace existing gas tax revenues. $124.8 (est. increment only) Highway Tolls (includes toll revenue bond proceeds) Description: Toll revenues generated from regional toll facilities (e.g., East-West Freight Corridor and regional express lane network). Assumptions: Toll revenues based on recent feasibility studies for applicable corridors. Also includes toll revenue bond proceeds.$23.5 Private Equity Participation Description: Private equity share as may be applicable for key initiatives. Assumptions: Private capital is assumed for a number of projects, including toll facilities; also, freight rail package assumes railroads’ share of costs for main line capacity and intermodal facilities. $3.4 Freight Fees/National Freight Program Description: Establishment of a national freight program consistent with federal surface transportation reauthorization (FAST ACT) and/or establishment of freight fees imposed nationally. Assumptions: The recently passed federal transportation reauthorization bill provides dedicated freight funding of approximately $2.1 billion per year nationally. Regional estimate assumes a conservative percentage of proposed national program. $5.4 State Bond Proceeds, Federal Grants & Other for California High-Speed Rail Program Description: Estimated total per 2014 California High-Speed Rail Business Plan. Assumptions: State general obligation bonds authorized under the Bond Act approved by California voters as Proposition 1A in 2008; federal grants authorized under ARRA and the High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program (HSIPR); Cap-and-Trade Auction Proceeds; potential use of qualified tax credit bonds; and private sources. $34.0 Value Capture Strategies Description: Formation of special districts—Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts. Assumptions: This strategy refers to capturing the incremental value generated by transportation investments. Specifically, SCAG assumes the formation of special districts, including Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFDs) for specific projects (e.g., East-West Freight Corridor). $1.2 Local Option Sales Tax Description: Locally imposed ½ percent sales tax measure for Ventura County. Assumptions: Sales tax grows consistent with historical trends in county retail sales.$2.1 NEW REVENUE SOURCE SUBTOTAL $200.4 GRAND TOTAL $556.5 Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding. 140 2016 RTP/SCS TABLE 6.4 FY 2016–2040 RTP/SCS REVENUES (in Nominal Dollars, Billions) REVENUE SOURCES FY 2016–2020 FY 2021–2025 FY 2026–2030 FY 2031–2035 FY 2036–2040 TOTAL LO C A L Sales Tax $21.1 $26.6 $32.8 $40.9 $46.8 $168.3 • Local Option Sales Tax Measures $16.8 $21.2 $26.1 $32.4 $36.3 $132.7 • Transportation Development Act (TDA)—Local Transportation Fund $4.3 $5.4 $6.8 $8.5 $10.6 $35.6 Gas Excise Tax Subventions (to Cities and Counties)$1.0 $1.1 $1.1 $1.2 $1.2 $5.6 Transit Farebox Revenue $3.9 $4.9 $5.9 $6.9 $8.2 $29.7 Highway Tolls (in core revenue forecast)$2.0 $2.6 $3.3 $4.2 $5.2 $17.2 Mitigation Fees $1.7 $1.9 $2.1 $2.3 $2.1 $10.1 Other Local Sources $7.0 $3.6 $5.3 $5.6 $2.4 $23.8 Local Total $36.7 $40.5 $50.5 $61.0 $65.9 $254.7 S T A T E State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)$1.4 $1.8 $2.0 $2.1 $2.3 $9.6 • Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP)$1.1 $1.4 $1.5 $1.6 $1.7 $7.2 • Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP)$0.4 $0.5 $0.5 $0.5 $0.6 $2.5 State Highway Operation and Protection Plan (SHOPP)$4.3 $5.0 $5.4 $5.8 $6.2 $26.7 State Gasoline Sales Tax Swap $2.0 $2.4 $3.0 $3.7 $4.6 $15.7 State Transit Assistance Fund (STA)$0.9 $1.0 $1.2 $1.3 $1.4 $5.8 Cap-and-Trade Auction Proceeds $0.7 $0.8 $0.8 $0.8 $0.8 $3.7 Other State Sources $0.7 $0.3 $0.4 $0.4 $0.4 $2.2 State Total $10.0 $11.4 $12.6 $14.1 $15.7 $63.8 FE D E R A L Federal Transit $4.0 $4.1 $4.2 $4.7 $4.3 $21.5 • Federal Transit Formula $2.9 $3.1 $3.3 $3.6 $3.9 $16.8 • Federal Transit Non-Formula $1.2 $1.0 $0.9 $1.1 $0.5 $4.7 Federal Highway & Other $3.1 $3.1 $3.3 $3.3 $3.3 $16.2 • Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)$1.2 $1.1 $1.1 $0.9 $0.7 $4.9 • Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP)$1.2 $1.3 $1.4 $1.6 $1.7 $7.3 • Other Federal Sources $0.7 $0.7 $0.8 $0.9 $0.9 $4.0 Federal Total $7.2 $7.3 $7.5 $8.0 $7.7 $37.7 IN N O V A T I V E F I N A N C I N G & NE W R E V E N U E S O U R C E S State and Federal Gas Excise Tax Adjustment $1.3 $4.8 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $6.0 Mileage-Based User Fee $0.0 $5.5 $31.9 $39.6 $47.9 $124.8 Highway Tolls (includes toll revenue bond proceeds)$0.2 $9.0 $4.2 $4.6 $5.5 $23.5 Private Equity Participation $1.1 $0.1 $2.1 $0.1 $0.0 $3.4 Freight Fee/National Freight Program $0.7 $0.9 $1.0 $1.2 $1.5 $5.4 State Bond Proceeds, Cap-and-Trade Auction Proceeds, & Other for California High-Speed Rail Program $6.0 $10.0 $8.0 $5.0 $5.0 $34.0 Value Capture Strategies $0.0 $1.2 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $1.2 Local Option Sales Tax (Ventura County)$0.1 $0.4 $0.5 $0.6 $0.7 $2.1 Innovative Financing & New Revenue Sources Total $9.4 $31.8 $47.6 $51.1 $60.5 $200.4 REVENUE TOTAL $63.3 $91.1 $118.2 $134.2 $149.8 $556.5 Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding. 14106 PAYING FOR THE PLAN TABLE 6.5 FY 2016–2040 RTP/SCS EXPENDITURES (in Nominal Dollars, Billions) RTP COSTS FY 2016–2020 FY 2021–2025 FY 2026–2030 FY 2031–2035 FY 2036–2040 TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS:$27.6 $46.7 $56.0 $57.0 $59.2 $246.6 Arterials $3.3 $2.2 $2.4 $5.0 $5.4 $18.4 Goods Movement (includes Grade Separations)$8.0 $18.9 $19.5 $12.2 $12.1 $70.7 High-Occupancy Vehicle/Express Lanes $2.7 $2.2 $2.5 $3.7 $4.1 $15.2 Mixed-Flow and Interchange Improvements $2.2 $1.4 $2.6 $2.9 $3.0 $12.2 Toll Facilities $1.8 $3.2 $2.3 $0.6 $0.5 $8.4 Transportation Systems Management (including ITS)$0.9 $1.1 $1.4 $2.9 $2.9 $9.2 Transit $6.4 $8.6 $11.0 $14.4 $15.7 $56.1 Passenger Rail $0.8 $6.3 $10.3 $10.4 $10.8 $38.6 Active Transportation $0.8 $1.7 $1.7 $2.0 $2.0 $8.1 Transportation Demand Management $0.2 $0.2 $1.6 $2.3 $2.6 $6.9 Other (includes Environmental Mitigation, Landscaping, and Project Development Costs)$0.5 $0.6 $0.7 $0.7 $0.2 $2.7 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE:$30.8 $38.0 $54.9 $69.3 $82.5 $275.5 State Highways $9.0 $10.5 $12.4 $15.7 $18.2 $65.8 Transit $18.5 $23.3 $29.4 $38.6 $46.9 $156.7 Passenger Rail $1.6 $2.3 $3.0 $3.8 $5.0 $15.7 Regionally Significant Local Streets and Roads*$1.7 $1.9 $10.1 $11.1 $12.5 $37.3 DEBT SERVICE $4.9 $6.4 $7.3 $7.9 $8.0 $34.5 COST TOTAL $63.3 $91.1 $118.2 $134.2 $149.8 $556.5 Note: Numbers may not sum to total due to rounding. * Includes $4.8 billion for active transportation in addition to capital project investment level of $8.1 billion for a total of $12.9 billion for active transportation improvements CHAPTER 7 HIGHLIGHTS 07 THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF INVESTING IN TRANSPORTATION 144 WHY TRANSPORTATION ACCESS IS IMPORTANT FOR THE REGIONAL ECONOMY 145 QUANTIFYING THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE PLAN 146 THE RESULTS OF OUR ANALYSIS 147 FULL RESULTS 148 Image courtesy of Alameda Corridor-East Construction Authority Southern California is a huge geographic region. Often, employers in one area cannot easily access workers living in another. A more efficient transportation system, with increased public transit, will create a more efficient and competitive labor market and add economic activity and jobs into the economy. A PLAN THAT CREATES ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY: THE BIG PICTURE 144 2016 RTP/SCS The 2016 RTP/SCS outlines strategies for investing in transportation infrastructure that will benefit Southern California, the state and the nation in terms of economic development, job creation, economic growth and poverty reduction—as well as overall business and economic competitive advantages in the global economy. Over the 2016–2040 period, the 2016 RTP/SCS calls for spending more than $556.5 billion on transportation improvement projects. The economic analysis prepared for the 2016 RTP/SCS, shown in more detail in the Economic & Job Creation Analysis Appendix, shows that significant employment will be generated throughout our region over the 25-year period of the Plan. The 2016 RTP/SCS boosts employment in two ways—providing jobs for people in highway and rail construction, operation and maintenance; and boosting the economic competitiveness of the region by making it a more attractive place to do business. Even though we have gained back many of the jobs lost in the Great Recession, the region is contending with a larger population base and stagnant wages, which has resulted in even more of Southern California’s population slipping into poverty. More concerning is the fact that a staggering one in four children live below the poverty line in the region. The 2016 RTP/SCS is a major job creation engine, and the types of jobs created by the Plan, coupled with improved access to those jobs, have the potential to provide greater economic opportunity throughout the region. With jobs that can help sustain people in need, we can rebuild our infrastructure, rebuild our middle class and move citizens throughout Southern California from poverty to prosperity. The economic analysis shows that construction, maintenance and operations expenditures specified in the 2016 RTP/SCS, as well as the indirect and induced jobs that flow from those expenditures, will generate an average of more than 188,000 new jobs annually on average. When investments are made in the transportation system, the economic benefits go far beyond the jobs created building, operating and maintaining it. Unlike spending to satisfy current needs, infrastructure delivers benefits for decades. The infrastructure, once built, can enhance the economic competitiveness of a region. Projects that reduce congestion may help firms produce at lower cost, or allow those firms to reach larger markets or hire more capable employees. An economy with a well-functioning transportation system is a more attractive place for firms to do business, enhancing the economic competitiveness of our region. An additional 351,000 annual jobs will be created by the SCAG region’s increased competitiveness and improved economic performance that will result from congestion reduction and improvements in regional amenities due to implementation of the 2016 RTP/SCS. THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF INVESTING IN TRANSPORTATION As we mentioned briefly above, the 2016 RTP/SCS will lead to more jobs in at least two ways: 1. Providing direct jobs in highway and rail construction, transportation, and transit operations and maintenance 2. Enhancing economic competitiveness in the region by making it a more attractive place to do business and to live These two impacts are summarized below. z Providing direct jobs in highway and rail construction, transportation, and transit operations and maintenance: The 2016 RTP/SCS will employ people to build, operate and maintain transportation projects as a result of the Plan’s regional infrastructure investments. Economists refer to these jobs as the “direct effect” of the investments. Direct effects ripple through the economy, creating additional jobs in two ways: „Indirect Effects: Indirect effects are the jobs in companies that support the direct jobs created by the RTP/SCS spending. The firms and agencies that build and maintain the transportation system with RTP/SCS funding buy materials, office supplies and business services. All of those supply purchases that are necessitated by the RTP/SCS spending are indirect effects. „Induced Effects: Additionally, employees of the firms and agencies that build, operate and maintain the Southern California regional transportation system use their wages to buy all kinds of goods—housing, food, clothing, entertainment and more—and that supports additional jobs. This ripple effect creates what economists call “induced effects.” Employees who build, operate and maintain the RTP/SCS will earn wages to buy goods and services associated with daily living. z Enhancing economic competitiveness in the region by making it a more attractive place to do business: Academic scholars have long understood that public infrastructure investments create direct jobs and additional multiplier effects from those jobs. But recently, economic research has illuminated how transportation spending also improves the viability and productivity of firms in regions, by increasing economic competitiveness through the increased 14507 A PLAN THAT CREATES ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY: THE BIG PICTURE efficiency of a transportation system. A well-planned, well-functioning transportation system and integrated land use pattern can allow firms to communicate and conduct business with one another more quickly, draw workers from larger labor market pools, and ship and receive goods and services at lower costs. All of this can contribute to enhanced regional economic competitiveness, raising the productivity of firms in the region and leading to more jobs than those generated to build, operate and maintain the RTP/SCS. WHY TRANSPORTATION ACCESS IS IMPORTANT FOR THE REGIONAL ECONOMY Two economic transformations have occurred over the past two to three decades that have made transportation access an increasingly important element of regional economies. First, metropolitan economies increasingly rely on the value of proximity—what urban economists call “agglomeration economies,” or the propensity of successful local economies to cluster. Second, congestion has risen to levels that limit economic growth, research shows. z Agglomeration Economies and the Need for Access: Firms benefit from being near other firms. Santa Monica’s “Silicon Beach” is a location where technology firms have easy access to other nearby peer firms, creating an environment of shared ideas, talent and interaction. Yet, that access is not always as readily available as it might seem. A video gaming company in Santa Monica might benefit from access to talent at Caltech or movie studios in Burbank, but both are easily an hour away during much of the day because of traffic congestion. So, the benefit of agglomeration—nearby access to business partners, customers and ideas—is diminished by a congested transportation system. The benefits of local concentrations of firms are increasingly based on face-to-face communication. Research has shown that firms have higher productivity when locating near other firms, and those productivity benefits are often short-distance phenomena. Good transportation access “shrinks distance” by allowing businesses to more quickly access knowledge, suppliers and customers. Well-performing transportation systems, by contributing to dense, lively, walkable neighborhoods, can also create communities that are conducive to serendipitous meetings and face-to-face communication. This is particularly important in knowledge-intensive or creative industries. z Congestion and Employment: Traffic congestion has been increasing in nearly all U.S. metropolitan areas. Research shows that traffic delays inhibit job growth. In the Los Angeles metropolitan area, actual employment growth from 1990 to 2003 was 567,983 new jobs, but researchers have estimated that with a 50 percent reduction in congestion in the region’s metropolitan areas, employment growth from 1990 to 2003 would have been 700,235 new jobs. Research suggests that the employment enhancing effect of reducing congestion by implementing the 2016 RTP/SCS investments is larger in more congested urban areas. This is intuitive; the “distance shrinking” effect of managing congestion is more important in more congested urban areas. This is also a non-linear effect; congestion relief grows more important for the economy as congestion levels rise. This sets the background and context for the economic impact study of the 2016 RTP/SCS. Metropolitan economies are increasingly relying on agglomeration benefits, as knowledge-based firms desire to locate near other similar firms. This phenomenon has long been familiar in Silicon Valley, and evidence suggests that the need to locate near similar firms is becoming pervasive in many segments of modern economies. At the same time, congestion has increased the “effective distance” within metropolitan areas and the evidence suggests that the negative economic effects of congestion are largest (and growing) in our most congested cities. Creating better access and mobility, a key goal of 2016 RTP/SCS, can be a clear pathway toward stimulating economic growth. There are five possible paths through which transportation improvements can increase regional economic competitiveness. Each of these is described in the following sections. 1. Improved labor market matching: Reducing travel time allows firms to hire from a larger geographic area. This effectively increases the firm’s labor market—particularly in a large urban area like the SCAG region where reductions in commuting time can yield access to many more potential employees. Increasing the size of the labor pool allows firms to find a better employee match for its needs. By hiring employees who better suit their needs, the firm can produce more (i.e., employees are more productive) for the same cost. This allows the firm to be more competitive and capture a larger market share. And that, in turn, can lead to increased hiring if the increase in market share overcomes 146 2016 RTP/SCS the tendency of firms to produce more with fewer employees due to improved employer-employee job matches. 2. Firms move into the region in response to enhanced economic competitiveness: This effect flows in part from the first effect. If the region’s transportation system supports more efficient commutes, then employers will be encouraged to draw from larger labor market pools. And if that larger employee pool allows firms to hire better employees, eventually those firms will move into the region in response to those improved hiring prospects. This is especially true for firms that rely on a skilled workforce. The increases in firm productivity that initially come from improved labor market matching will result in firms moving into the SCAG region from other locations over longer periods of time. 3. Reduced congestion increases labor supply: Metropolitan regions compete for mobile labor. That means that those regions with lower traffic congestion will (when all else is equal) lure more migrants— simply due to the value of offering commuters lower traffic congestion. This increases the supply of available labor. In metropolitan areas with high traffic congestion and longer commutes, the labor pool will have to be compensated either in the form of higher wages, lower house prices or both. These two related effects are, in fact, one and the same—the higher wages in high congestion metropolitan areas reflect the need to lure in a labor pool that otherwise might choose to locate in lower congestion locales. Reduced congestion can attract more workers to a region, allowing a firm to hire quality workers at reasonable wages. 4. Increased market for firms’ products: Reductions in travel time also can allow firms to supply a larger market area, leading to increased economic competitiveness and regional job growth. One example is the goods movement/freight traffic that moves through the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Larger ports can build infrastructure that speeds up the processing of shipments, therefore lowering costs. Supply chain managers favor Southern California because of the speed and reliability that goods can be moved around the region and to the rest of the nation. As the economy expands, congestion robs the area of this competitive advantage. Reducing shipping times for landside freight, from the ports to points within and beyond the region, can help increase shipping volumes and lead to lower costs. This ultimately can add up to higher productivity, making the region’s ports more cost effective than other competitive points of entry. 5. Learning: In a growing knowledge-based economy, cities are increasingly engines of economic innovation. Nearly all economic advances—in consumer products, technology, medicine, consumer services, retailing and logistics, and entertainment and fine arts— are created in metropolitan areas. A large and growing body of literature argues that much of the economic advantage of cities is the learning that is possible when individuals and firms are in close proximity. Engineers in Silicon Valley interact regularly, within and across different firms, creating a world-class hub of knowledge and innovation that is unrivaled in the computing, advanced electronics and software industries. The movie industry in Los Angeles provides the same center for knowledge and learning in the entertainment industry. Such learning effects are central to many industries, including manufacturing processes and services that increasingly rely on innovations to remain competitive. Transportation investments that reduce traffic congestion can allow people to interact more readily with a larger pool of like-minded experts, increasing the learning and innovation in a regional economy. That can allow local firms to innovate in ways that lowers costs, improves products and leads to larger market share. Over time, that improved innovation environment will attract mobile labor and capital (workers and firms) from other regions, further boosting economic activity. QUANTIFYING THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE PLAN To quantify the economic impact of the Plan’s implementation, the SCAG economic team used data and software from Regional Economic Models, Inc. (REMI). The REMI TranSight model is an advanced economic analysis model that combines input-output approaches, coupled with a model of resident and firm migration into and out of our region to model the direct, indirect and induced effects of the 2016 RTP/SCS spending. REMI also includes a general equilibrium model combined with New Economic Geography approaches to model changes in economic competitiveness. REMI TranSight is the most advanced tool commercially available for analysis that forecasts the total economic effects of changes to transportation systems. All of the economic analysis of the Plan was conducted using REMI models. More details on the REMI models and the methodologies that SCAG used can be found in the Economic & Job Creation Analysis Appendix. 14707 A PLAN THAT CREATES ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY: THE BIG PICTURE THE RESULTS OF OUR ANALYSIS Results are reported in two parts: 1. Jobs that result from the 2016 RTP/SCS investment spending (direct, indirect and induced effects) 2. Additional jobs that flow from the improvements to the transportation network, resulting in network efficiencies and related increases in regional economic and business competitiveness JOBS THAT RESULT FROM THE RTP/SCS INVESTMENT SPENDING (DIRECT, INDIRECT AND INDUCED EFFECTS) TABLE 7.1 shows the annual average new jobs from the 2016 RTP/SCS financial plan spending. The job impact is reported as annual average jobs in five-year periods (starting with 2016–2020), for each county and for the entire region. The last column in TABLE 7.1 shows jobs, averaged over all Plan years, from 2016 RTP/SCS construction, operations and maintenance spending. REMI TranSight model outputs predicted that jobs from transit operations and maintenance (O&M) expenditures in the region grow from an annual average of 119,000 in 2016–2020 to 173,000 in the last five years of the Plan (2036– 2040). As a fraction of the total jobs from the Plan’s spending (construction and O&M), transit O&M jobs grow from half of the jobs in 2016–2020 to nearly two-thirds of all jobs in 2036–2040. Transit O&M spending, as a fraction of the total Plan spending, was virtually constant across those two time periods— increasing from 37 percent of total Plan spending in 2016–2020 to 39 percent of Plan spending in 2036–2040. The large increase in the share of the Plan’s jobs from transit O&M while the share of the Plan’s spending from transit O&M stays constant is not consistent. Upon examination, the research team concluded that the size of the SCAG region’s transit spending is outside of what REMI can accurately model in the later years of the Plan. In the years 2036–2040, the region will spend $7.5 billion per year on transit O&M, while REMI’s baseline forecast of the size of the transit industry in the region during that same time period is about $2 billion per year. The large difference is not due to any fault of the REMI model, but rather is due to the fact that the SCAG region is building the largest transit public works project in the history of the U.S.—an investment at a scale well beyond what has been experienced in other similar metropolitan areas during recent decades and even of a magnitude unprecedented compared to prior SCAG RTPs. The scale of the transit investment and the resulting magnitude of the increase in transit O&M are beyond what the research team believes the REMI TranSight model can reliably forecast at this point in time, therefore, the growth in jobs from transit O&M spending was adjusted downward. TABLE 7.1 2016 RTP/SCS EMPLOYMENT IMPACT FROM CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE SPENDING REGION 2016–2020 2021–2025 2026–2030 2031–2035 2036–2040 AVG PER YEAR Imperial 1.68 2.14 4.54 4.55 4.55 3.49 Los Angeles 110.74 112.71 99.16 86.01 93.78 100.48 Orange 52.99 21.17 16.75 17.41 20.05 25.67 Riverside 31.99 19.33 25.09 28.84 24.90 26.03 San Bernardino 32.53 26.41 26.98 27.11 25.13 27.63 Ventura 7.13 6.00 6.02 3.71 4.04 5.38 SCAG REGION 237.06 187.76 178.53 167.63 172.45 188.69 Annual Average Jobs Relative to Baseline (Thousands) Source: SCAG calculations from 2016 RTP/SCS financial plan input into REMI model. Note that the REMI model reports full and part-time jobs and the job numbers include both full-time and part-time jobs. Figures may not add up due to rounding. 148 2016 RTP/SCS FULL RESULTS The full economic results of the 2016 RTP/SCS investment are summarized in the table, with millions of new jobs (annual average) resulting from the Plan in five-year time periods and an annual average shown for 2016-2040. The total combined jobs from the two effects—Plan investment (construction, operations and maintenance spending) and network efficiency/economic competitiveness—are shown summed together in the table to highlight the total economic impact of the 2016 RTP/SCS. ADDITIONAL JOBS THAT FLOW FROM THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK, RESULTING IN NETWORK EFFICIENCIES AND RELATED INCREASES IN REGIONAL ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS COMPETITIVENESS Network efficiency in the form of improved transportation access is a second source of job growth. TABLE 7.2 shows the jobs from improved economic competitiveness that result from decreases in travel times and less costly trip- making relative to the baseline. Note that the economic competitiveness jobs grow over time, as the effect of the 2016 RTP/SCS relative to baseline results in increasingly larger transportation improvements and resulting cumulative network efficiencies over the course of the Plan. TABLE 7.2 2016 RTP/SCS JOBS FROM ENHANCED ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS, REMI ESTIMATES OF JOBS FROM NETWORK EFFICIENCY PLUS AMENITIES AND OPERATIONS Annual Average Jobs Relative to Baseline (Thousands) REGION 2016–2020 2021–2025 2026–2030 2031–2035 2036–2040 AVG PER YEAR Imperial 0.1 0.4 0.73 1.19 1.73 0.83 Los Angeles 40.62 137.22 225.15 292.13 320.1 203.04 Orange 7.43 25.6 42.42 65.98 99 48.09 Riverside 9.11 31.37 48.78 66.25 83.43 47.78 San Bernardino 6.36 25.56 47.08 65.72 79.91 44.93 Ventura 0.81 3.6 7.33 10.1 10.7 6.51 SCAG REGION 64.4 223.74 371.49 501.38 594.87 351.19 Source: SCAG calculations from 2016 RTP/SCS travel model results input into REMI TranSight model. Figures may not add up due to rounding. IMPERIALCOUNTY 4,300 RIVERSIDE COUNTY 73,800 SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY 72,600 LOS ANGELES COUNTY 303,500 VENTURA COUNTY 11,900 ORANGE COUNTY 73,800 CREATING JOBS IN THE SCAG REGION Total jobs, all sources, construction, operations and maintenance, network benefits, from 2016 RTP/SCS. In comparison, the 2012 RTP/SCS would create 528,500 average total jobs during the life of the plan. 539,900 AVG Total JOBS per year in the SCAG region AVG Total Jobs PER YEAR by County 08 CHAPTER 8 HIGHLIGHTS EVALUATING THE PLAN’S PERFORMANCE: A SUMMARY 153 PERFORMANCE OUTCOMES AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES 154 LAND USE RELATED BENEFITS 165 SENATE BILL 375 AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS 166 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE 166 TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY 172 CONCLUSION 173 Image courtesy of Samer Momani The 2016 RTP/SCS uses a number of performance measures to help gauge progress toward meeting the goals and objectives of our region, as well as how the Plan meets federal requirements, including the intent of the current federal transportation authorization. The measures also address state requirements for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and planning for a more sustainable future. The 2016 RTP/SCS is expected to result in significant benefits to our region with respect to mobility and accessibility, air quality, economic growth and job creation, sustainability, and environmental justice. An extended discussion on how the Plan performs, along with the outcomes it achieves, is the topic of this chapter. MEASURING OUR PROGRESS FOR THE FUTURE PLAN PERFORMANCE RESULTSFOCUS This graphic highlights the key benefits of implementing the 2016 RTP/SCS in terms of mobility, economy, efficiency and air quality. average daily vehicle miles driven per person 20.5 miles daily delay per capita (extra time spent in traffic) 9.2 mins Spending Less Time on the Road 39% 7.4% REDUCTION IN BUILDING ENERGY COSTS (transportation/energy/water use)$14,000/yr HOUSEHOLD COSTS PASSENGER VEHICLE FUEL USE Efficiency Cost Savings 4% 10% 12% Improved Air Quality GHG 8% 18% 21% 2020 2035 2040 REDUCTIONS NOx 9% 96.4 TONS 88.2 TONS PM2.5 5% 13.3 TONS 12.6 TONS ROG 8% 49.1 TONS 45.0 TONS CO 9% 338.6 TONS 307.7 TONS additional jobs supported by improving competitiveness 351,000 More Economic Opportunities INVESTMENT $1.00 BENEFIT $2.00= 15308 MEASURING OUR PROGRESS FOR THE FUTURE EVALUATING THE PLAN’S PERFORMANCE: A SUMMARY COMPARING THE PLAN VS. NO PLAN Implementation of the 2016 RTP/SCS will secure a safe, efficient, sustainable and prosperous future for our region. To demonstrate how effective the Plan would be toward achieving our regional goals, SCAG conducted a “Plan vs. No Build” (or Baseline) analysis—essentially comparing how the region would perform with and without implementation of the Plan. This analysis is summarized in this chapter. More details on this analysis and its results can be found in the Performance Measures Appendix. First and foremost, the 2016 RTP/SCS meets all of the federal and state requirements. It meets all provisions for transportation conformity under the federal Clean Air Act. Cleaner fuels and new vehicle technologies will help significantly reduce many of the pollutants that contribute to smog and other airborne contaminants that may impact public health in the region. The Plan also performs well when it comes to meeting state-mandated targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks. The state- determined targets for the SCAG region are an eight percent per capita reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks by 2020, and a 13 percent reduction by 2035 (compared with 2005 levels). The Plan would result in an eight percent reduction in emissions by 2020, an 18 percent reduction by 2035, and a 21 percent reduction by 2040 as compared to 2005 levels. Overall, the analysis clearly demonstrates that implementing the 2016 RTP/ SCS would result in a regional transportation network that improves travel conditions and air quality, while also promoting an equitable distribution of benefits—that is, social equity. Trips to work, schools and other key destinations would be quicker and more efficient under the Plan. The 2016 RTP/SCS integrates multiple transportation modes, leading to increases in carpooling, demand for transit and use of active transportation modes for trips during peak travel hours and at other times. More specifically, our analysis found that, in comparison to the Baseline, the Plan will: z Increase the combined percentage of work trips made by active transportation and public transit by about four percent, with a commensurate reduction in the share of commuters traveling by single occupant vehicle. z Reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per capita by 7.4 percent and Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT) per capita by about 17 percent (for automobiles and light/medium duty trucks) as a result of more location efficient land use patterns and improved transit service. z Increase daily transit travel by nearly one-third, as a result of improved transit service and more transit-oriented development patterns. z Reduce delay per capita by 39 percent. z Reduce total heavy duty truck delay by 40 percent. z Create an estimated 351,000 (or more) additional new jobs annually, due the region’s increased competitiveness and improved economic performance that will result from congestion reduction and improvements in regional amenities with implementation of the Plan. z Reduce the amount of previously undeveloped (greenfield) lands converted to more urbanized use by 23 percent. Conservation of open space and other rural lands is achieved by focusing new residential and commercial development in higher density areas. Through this strategy of conservation, the Plan provides a solid foundation for more sustainable development in the SCAG region. The 2016 RTP/SCS also focuses on improving public health outcomes in the SCAG region. Some key performance results include a reduction in our regional obesity rate and reductions in the share of our population that suffers with hypertension and type 2 diabetes. The total annual health costs for respiratory disease will be reduced under the Plan more than 13 percent compared with the Baseline. These public health improvements are the result of investments in active transportation, more walkable communities and improved regional air quality as promoted in the 2016 RTP/SCS. 154 2016 RTP/SCS PERFORMANCE OUTCOMES AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES This section summarizes how well the 2016 RTP/SCS is expected to perform when fully implemented. TABLE 8.1 lists the 2016 RTP/SCS performance outcomes and the associated measures used to evaluate performance, using the SCAG Regional Travel Demand Model (RTDM) and other tools. The table also includes specific performance results for both the Baseline and the Plan for each of the measures. Additional performance measures that will be used for ongoing regional monitoring are discussed in the Performance Measures Appendix. In the discussion of performance outcomes, three scenarios are referenced: Base Year, Baseline and Plan. z Base Year represents existing conditions as of 2012—that is, our region as it was in 2012: our transportation system, land use patterns and socio-economic characteristics (e.g., households and employment). The year 2012 was selected as the Base Year for this analysis because it is the year of the previous RTP/SCS. z Baseline assumes a continuation of the development trends of recent decades, with local General Plans not including the intensified policies regarding growth distribution as promoted in the Plan. This scenario represents a future in 2040 in which only the following have been implemented: transportation projects currently under construction or undergoing right-of-way acquisition; those transportation programs and projects programmed and committed to in the 2015 Federal Transportation Improvement Program (FTIP); and/or transportation projects that have already received environmental clearance. z Plan represents future conditions in 2040, in which the transportation investments and strategies detailed in the 2016 RTP/ SCS are fully realized. The Base Year, Baseline and Plan scenarios discussed in this chapter were developed to help evaluate the performance of the strategies, programs and projects presented in Chapter 5—the core of the 2016 RTP/SCS—and to meet various state and federal requirements. On the following pages, a summary is provided of the Plan’s performance outcomes, along with their associated performance measures. Some of the significant co-benefits provided by the Plan are summarized in TABLE 8.2. LOCATION EFFICIENCY The Location Efficiency outcome reflects the degree to which improved coordination of land use and transportation planning impacts the movement of people and goods in the SCAG region. This outcome has several associated performance measures that will be used for monitoring the degree to which the region is advancing toward our Location Efficiency goals: 1. Share of Growth in High Quality Transit Areas (HQTAs) 2. Land Consumption 3. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) 4. Transit Mode Share 5. Average Distance for Work and Non-Work Trips 6. Percent of Trips Less than Three Miles 7. Work Trip Length Distribution In addition to these seven metrics, measures of mobility and accessibility also serve to further reinforce the importance of the location efficiency outcome. Measures supporting the Mobility and Accessibility outcome are discussed in the next section of this chapter. The following is a summary of the Location Efficiency performance measures: SHARE OF GROWTH IN HIGH QUALITY TRANSIT AREAS (HQTAS) Between 2012 and 2040, growth in the regional share of both households and employment in the HQTAs is projected to increase from the Baseline scenario to the Plan scenario. LAND CONSUMPTION The land consumption metric measures the amount of agricultural land that has changed from rural to more intensive development patterns to accommodate new growth. Greenfield land consumption refers to development that occurs on land that has not previously been developed for, or otherwise impacted by, urban uses, including agricultural lands, forests, deserts and other undeveloped sites. As shown in TABLE 8.2, new land consumption under the Plan would be substantially less than what would occur under the Baseline. PLAN PERFORMANCE RESULTS IN THE SCAG REGION Daily Minutes of Delay per capita LOS ANGELES COUNTY DAILY VMT per capita 21.5 MILES 20.2 MILES 18.4 MILES 14.7 MINUTES 16.4 MINUTES 11.5 MINUTES DAILY DELAY per capita ORANGE COUNTY DAILY VMT per capita 23.8 MILES 22.8 MILES 21.4 MILES 11.9 MINUTES 13.2 MINUTES 7.9 MINUTES DAILY DELAY per capita RIVERSIDE COUNTY DAILY VMT per capita 23.3 MILES 23.7 MILES 21.7 MILES 5.9 MINUTES 12.3 MINUTES 5.6 MINUTES DAILY DELAY per capita VENTURA COUNTY DAILY VMT per capita 22.4 MILES 21.9 MILES 20.2 MILES 7.0 MINUTES 11.5 MINUTES 5.7 MINUTES DAILY DELAY per capita DAILY VMT per capita 24.8 MILES 26.3 MILES 25.1 MILES 0.7 MINUTES 2.7 MINUTES 2.0 MINUTES DAILY DELAY per capita IMPERIAL COUNTY DAILY VMT per capita 26.6 MILES 27.1 MILES 25.9 MILES 7.6 MINUTES 17.1 MINUTES 7.4 MINUTES DAILY DELAY per capita SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY Daily Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)per capita 2012 BASE YEAR22.8 MILES 2040 BASELINE22.1 MILES 2040 PLAN20.5 MILES 2012 BASE YEAR11.8 MINUTES 2040 BASELINE15.0 MINUTES 2040 PLAN9.2 MINUTES 2012 BASE YEAR 2040 BASELINE 2040 PLAN Baseline to Plan Comparison-7.4% Base Year to Plan Comparison-10.2% Baseline to Plan Comparison-39% Base Year to Plan Comparison-22% 156 2016 RTP/SCS TABLE 8.1 2016 RTP/SCS PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND RESULTS (IN THOUSANDS OF HOURS) PERFORMANCE MEASURE DEFINITION OBJECTIVE CATEGORY 2040 BASELINE 2040 PLAN INDICATOR OUTCOME: LOCATION EFFICIENCY Share of growth in High Quality Transit Areas (HQTAs) Share of the region’s growth in households and employment in HQTAs Improvement (increase) over No Project Baseline Percent of households in HQTAs 36%46% Percent of jobs in HQTAs 44%55% Land consumption Greenfield land consumed and refill land consumed Improvement (decrease) over No Project Baseline Greenfield land consumed 154 sq miles 118 sq miles  Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per capita Average daily vehicle miles driven per person Improvement (decrease) over No Project Baseline Automobiles and light-duty trucks 22.1 miles 20.5 miles  Transit mode share The share of total trips that use transit for work and non-work trips Improvement (increase) over No Project Baseline All Trips 2.2%3.1% Work Trips 5.6%8.2% Average distance traveled for work and non-work trips The average distance traveled for work or non-work trips Improvement (decrease) over No Project Baseline Work Trips 15.1 miles 15.5 miles  Non-Work Trips 7.8 miles 7.9 miles Percent of trips less than 3 miles The share of work and non-work trips which are fewer than 3 miles Improvement (increase) over No Project Baseline Work Trips 20.4%20.3% Non-Work Trips 41.7%41.9% Work trip length distribution The statistical distribution of work trip length in the region Improvement (increase) over No Project Baseline Trip Length: 10 miles or Less 51.6%50.9% Trip Length: 25 miles or Less 81.8%81.0% OUTCOME: MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY Person delay per capita* Delay per capita can be used as a supplemental measure to account for population growth impacts on delay Improvement (decrease) over No Project Baseline Daily minutes of delay per capita 15.0 mins 9.2 mins  Person delay by facility type* Delay: Excess travel time resulting from the difference between a reference speed and actual speed Improvement (decrease) over No Project Baseline Highway 3,035,105 hrs 2,023,417 hrs  HOV 251,547 hrs 42,590 hrs  Arterial 2,254,896 hrs 1,327,235 hrs  Truck delay by facility type* Delay: Excess travel time resulting from the difference between a reference speed and actual speed Improvement (decrease) over No Project Baseline Highway 274,456 hrs 171,828 hrs  Arterial 47,561 hrs 20,998 hrs  Travel time distribution for transit, SOV and HOV modes for work and non-work trips* Travel time distribution for transit, SOV and HOV for work and non-work trips Improvement (increase) over No Project Baseline % of PM peak transit trips <45 minutes 22%26% % of PM peak HOV trips <45 minutes 72%79% % of PM peak SOV trips <45 minutes 82%89% 15708 MEASURING OUR PROGRESS FOR THE FUTURE TABLE 8.1 CONTINUED PERFORMANCE MEASURE DEFINITION OBJECTIVE CATEGORY 2040 BASELINE 2040 PLAN INDICATOR OUTCOME: SAFETY AND HEALTH Collision rates by severity by mode (per 100 million vehicle miles)* Collision rate per 100 million vehicle miles by mode and number of fatalities and serious injuries by mode (all, bicycle/pedestrian) Improvement (decrease) over No Project Baseline Serious injuries N/A 1.60 Fatalities N/A 0.31 Criteria pollutants emissions (tons per day)CO, NOx, PM 2.5, PM 10 and VOC Meet Federal air quality conformity requirements (FR) Reactive organic gases (ROG)49.1 tons 45.0 tons  Carbon monoxide (CO)338.6 tons 307.7 tons  Oxides of nitrogen (NOx)96.4 tons 88.2 tons  Particulate matter (PM 10)32.6 tons 30.8 tons  Particulate matter (PM 2.5)13.3 tons 12.6 tons  Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)94.6 tons 86.8 tons  Air pollution-related health measures Pollution-related respiratory disease incidence and cost Improvement (decrease) over No Project Baseline Pollution-related health incidences (annual)270,328 234,363  Pollution-related health costs (annual)$4.48 billion $3.88 billion  Physical activity-related health measures Physical activity/weight related health issues and costs Improvement over No Project Baseline Daily per capita walking 12.1 mins 16.0 mins  Daily per capita biking 1.6 mins 2.0 mins  Daily per capita driving 64.8 mins 61.9 mins  Obese population (%)**26.3%25.6% High blood pressure (%)**21.5%20.8% Heart disease (%)**4.4%4.2% Diabetes Type 2 (%)**6.1%6.0% Mode share of walking and bicycling Mode share of walking and biking for work trips, non-work trips and all trips Improvement (increase) over No Project Baseline Walk share (Work)4.4%5.6% Bike share (Work)0.5%0.7% Walk share (Non-Work)12.0%15.0% Bike share (Non-Work)1.8%2.5% Walk share (All Trips)10.7%13.5% Bike share (All Trips)1.6%2.2% 158 2016 RTP/SCS TABLE 8.1 CONTINUED PERFORMANCE MEASURE DEFINITION OBJECTIVE CATEGORY 2040 BASELINE 2040 PLAN INDICATOR OUTCOME: ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Greenhouse gas emissions CO, NOx, PM 2.5, PM 10 and VOC emissions; and per capita greenhouse gas emissions (CO2) Meet state greenhouse gas reduction targets (SR) Reduction in per capita greenhouse gas emissions from 2005 levels N/A 8% in 2020 18% in 2035 21% in 2040 OUTCOME: ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY Additional jobs supported by improving competitiveness Number of jobs added to the economy as a result of improved transportation conditions which make the region more economically competitive Improvement (increase) over No Project Baseline Annual number of new jobs generated N/A 351,000+ Additional jobs supported by transportation investments Total number of jobs supported in the economy as a result of transportation expenditures Improvement (increase) over No Project Baseline Annual number of new jobs generated N/A 188,000+ OUTCOME: INVESTMENT EFFECTIVENESS Benefit/Cost Ratio Ratio of monetized user and societal benefits to the agency transportation costs Greater than 1.0 Benefit ratio per $1 investment N/A 2.0 OUTCOME: TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY Cost to preserve multimodal system to current and state of good repair Annual cost per capita required to preserve the regional multimodal transportation system to current conditions Improvement (decrease) over Base Year Cost per capita (per year)N/A $368 OUTCOME: ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE See Table 8.4: Performance Measures: Environmental Justice Meet Federal requirements. No unaddressed disproportionately high and adverse effects for low income or minority communities (FR) Notes: Acronyms (FR) Federal requirement HOV: High-Occupancy Vehicle (SR) State requirement SOV: Single-Occupancy Vehicle * MAP-21 calls for performance measures and targets associated with congestion, safety, reliability, freight movement, infrastructure condition, environment and project delivery. However, federal rule-making in support of MAP-21 performance measures in still in progress. ** Results are for areas experiencing land use and population changes not the entire SCAG region. 15908 MEASURING OUR PROGRESS FOR THE FUTURE TABLE 8.2 2016 RTP/SCS KEY BENEFITS BENEFIT CATEGORIES BASELINE RTP/SCS SAVINGS % SAVINGS Local Infrastructure and Services Costs: Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs to Support New Growth, 2012–20401 $40.6 billion $37.3 billion $3.3 billion 8.1% Household Costs: Transportation and Home Energy/Water Use, All Households, Annual (2040)$16,000 $14,000 $2,000 12.3% Land Consumption: New (greenfield) Land Consumed to Accommodate New Growth 2012–2040 154 sq miles 118 sq miles 36 sq miles 23.4% Building Energy Use: Residential and Commercial Buildings, Cumulative, 2012–2040 (measured in British Thermal Units (BTUs)) 20,311 trillion 19,563 trillion 748 trillion 3.7% Building Energy Costs: Residential and Commercial Buildings, Cumulative, 2012–2040 $762 billion $735 billion $27 billion 3.5% Building Water Use: Residential and Commercial Buildings, Cumulative, 2012–2040 (measured in Acre Feet (AF))134 million 133.2 million 0.8 million 0.6% Building Water Costs: Residential and Commercial Buildings, Cumulative, 2012–2040 $186 billion $185 billion $1 billion 0.5% Household Driving: Annual Passenger VMT, 2040 177.7 billion 150 billion 27.7 billion 15.6% Note: 1 Operations and maintenance costs referenced here include costs beyond those for transportation (e.g., sewer and water operations and maintenance costs). 160 2016 RTP/SCS VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT) PER CAPITA This measure is new to the 2016 RTP/SCS. VMT (for automobiles and light trucks) per capita has become an increasingly significant metric since the passage of Senate Bill 375, which led to state-determined reduction targets for regional greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles and light trucks. Automobiles and light duty trucks are a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, producing more than 60 percent of transportation sector emissions. Therefore, VMT reduction is a critical component of a comprehensive regional strategy for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. By monitoring progress in reducing per capita VMT through implementation of the various transportation investments and land use strategies outlined in this Plan, we will be better able to accurately gauge our momentum toward achieving our goals for reducing regional greenhouse gas emissions. Daily per capita VMT in the SCAG region is projected to decrease significantly in 2040 under the Plan. TRANSIT MODE SHARE Transit mode share is another new metric for the 2016 RTP/SCS. It measures the share of transit trips made throughout the region for work and non-work purposes. This new measure will help us to identify how well the transit strategies and improvements proposed in the 2016 RTP/SCS are working toward providing better and more diverse commuting options for the traveling public. Ideally, with better transit service, more commuters will choose that option over driving alone, further reducing VMT and regional greenhouse gas emissions. TABLE 8.3 shows transit mode share by county for work trips and for all trips in 2040 as projected under the Plan. AVERAGE DISTANCE FOR WORK AND NON-WORK TRIPS The average distance for work trips in 2040 is projected to increase slightly under the Plan. The average distance traveled for non-work trips in 2040 is projected to remain relatively constant between the Baseline and the Plan. PERCENT OF TRIPS LESS THAN THREE MILES The vast majority of trips in Southern California today are made by people driving alone. As the length of trips becomes shorter, particularly to within a few miles, people are more likely to use transit, bike, walk or choose other alternatives to driving alone. By 2040, the share of work trips and non-work trips less than three miles is projected to remain relatively unchanged. WORK TRIP LENGTH DISTRIBUTION The share of trips less than ten miles in 2040 is projected to be just over 50 percent under both the Baseline and the Plan. Likewise, the share of trips under 25 miles would be about 81 percent for both the Baseline and the Plan. MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY The Mobility and Accessibility outcome is defined as the ability to reach desired destinations with relative ease and within a reasonable time, using reasonably available transportation choices. This section discusses the mobility and accessibility performance measures for the 2016 RTP/SCS. MOBILITY The Mobility performance measure relies on the commonly used measure of delay. Delay is defined as the difference between actual travel time and the travel time at a pre-defined reference or optimal speed for each modal alternative. It is measured in vehicle-hours of delay (VHD), which can then be used to derive person-hours of delay. The mobility measures used to evaluate alternatives for this outcome include: z Person Delay by Facility Type (Highway, High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes, Arterials) z Person Delay per Capita z Truck Delay by Facility Type (Highway, Arterial) TABLE 8.3 TRANSIT MODE SHARE BY COUNTY COUNTY WORK TRIPS ALL TRIPS Imperial 0.6%0.3% Los Angeles 12.0%4.7% Orange 3.8%1.7% Riverside 1.1%0.5% San Bernardino 2.1%0.7% Ventura 1.6%0.7% SCAG Region 8.2%3.1% (Plan 2040) 16108 MEASURING OUR PROGRESS FOR THE FUTURE Highway Non-Recurrent Delay As indicated previously, this measure will be used only for ongoing regional monitoring, not for evaluation of alternatives for the 2016 RTP/SCS. Non- recurrent delay refers to the share of congestion that is considered to be atypical. FIGURE 8.2 shows the relative proportion of highway congestion that is estimated to be caused by non-recurrent events by county. Highway Speed Maps Maps illustrating highway speed conditions during the afternoon peak period (3 PM to 7 PM) based upon the SCAG RTDM results for the Base Year, Baseline and Plan are provided in the Performance Measures Appendix. Additional speed maps are provided in the Highways & Arterials Appendix. ACCESSIBILITY The Accessibility outcome is used to evaluate how well the transportation system performs in providing people access to opportunities. Opportunities may include jobs, education, medical care, recreation, shopping or any other activities that may help enhance a person’s quality of life. For the 2016 RTP/SCS, accessibility is simply defined as the distribution of trips by mode by travel time. As with the 2012 RTP/SCS, accessibility is measured by taking afternoon or PM peak period travel demand model results for the base and forecast years and identifying the percentage of commute or home-based work trips that are completed within 45 minutes. Peak periods are those times during the weekday when commuting travel on regional roadways reaches its highest levels. Typically, peak periods occur twice daily, first during the morning commute when people are traveling to their workplaces and again in the late afternoon when people are returning home from work. FIGURE 8.3 shows these results. In all cases, the 2040 Plan would improve accessibility for home-based work trips over the Baseline. The 2016 RTP/SCS provides a comprehensive measure of accessibility, including the transit, SOV, and HOV modes, for both work and non-work trips. The results of these mode-specific accessibility analyses can be found in the Performance Measures Appendix. One additional measure for delay that is readily available for ongoing monitoring, but which cannot be readily forecast, is non-recurrent delay. Recurrent delay is the day-to-day delay that occurs because too many vehicles are on the road at the same time. Non-recurrent delay is the delay that is caused by collisions, weather, special events or other atypical incidents. Non- recurrent delay can be mitigated or reduced by improving incident management strategies. Other uses of intelligent transportation technologies, such as traffic signal coordination and the provision of real-time information about unexpected delays, allow travelers to make better informed decisions regarding the availability of transportation alternatives, including transit. Non-recurrent delay as an on-going regional monitoring measure is discussed in greater detail in the Performance Measures Appendix. Person Delay by Facility Type (Highway, High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes, Arterials) Since the 2012 RTP/SCS, the person delay measure has been expanded to differentiate between single-occupancy vehicle (SOV) and HOV delay. Person delay on our highways under the Plan would improve on Baseline conditions, while delay on HOV facilities will be reduced more dramatically. Delay on our regional arterial roadways would also improve between the Baseline and the Plan. FIGURE 8.1 shows total person hours of delay by facility type. Person Delay Per Capita Normalizing delay by the number of people living in an area provides insight as to how well the region is mitigating traffic congestion in light of increasing population growth. Delay per capita is expected to grow considerably, particularly in the Inland Empire counties of Riverside and San Bernardino, under Baseline conditions. However, implementation of the Plan would reduce per capita delay substantially to below 2012 levels. Truck Delay by Facility Type (Highway, Arterial) This measure estimates the average daily truck delay by facility type for highways and arterials. The 2016 RTP/SCS includes significant investments in a regional freight corridor and other improvements to facilitate goods movement. It is estimated that the Plan would reduce heavy-duty truck delay on the highway and arterial systems. However, truck delay under the Plan would still be above Base Year levels, partly due to the projected growth in trade and associated truck traffic. 162 2016 RTP/SCS FIGURE 8.1 DAILY PERSON-HOURS OF DELAY BY FACILITY TYPE (IN THOUSANDS) 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 Highway/ Expressway HOV Arterial Total Delay 2012 Base Year 2040 Baseline 2040 Plan 56%44% Los Angeles 52%48%Orange 41%59%Riverside 22%78%San Bernardino 22%78%Ventura 52%48%SCAG Region RE C URR EN T D E LAY NON-RE C URR EN T D E LAY Imperial N/A FIGURE 8.2 RECURRENT AND NON-RECURRENT CONGESTION (2011) FIGURE 8.3 WORK TRIPS COMPLETED WITHIN 45 MINUTES 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Transit High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Single-Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) 2012 Base Year 2040 Baseline 2040 Plan 16308 MEASURING OUR PROGRESS FOR THE FUTURE matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5), carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). These pollutants require careful monitoring because of their known adverse effects on human health. While children, older residents and persons with existing respiratory illnesses are most vulnerable to the effects of air pollutants, the health effects of long-term exposure are a concern for everyone in the region. Some of the major health concerns of exposure to high levels of these criteria pollutants include respiratory irritation, reduced lung capacity, chest pain, and aggravation of asthma and other respiratory illnesses.3 Airborne particulate matter comes in all sizes. However, particles smaller than ten micrometers in diameter are considered the most dangerous to human health because they are small enough to be absorbed into the lungs. The finer the particle size, the more dangerous they are. Particulate matter smaller than 2.5 micrometers is a particularly serious concern for people with existing heart or lung disease, as even short-term exposure to high levels of PM 2.5 may aggravate symptoms. High levels of carbon monoxide (CO) is also considered a health hazard, especially for people with compromised respiratory or coronary function, as CO is known to reduce the flow of oxygen through the human body. Long-term exposure to high levels of nitrogen dioxide, which is produced primarily through the burning of fossil fuels, may cause a narrowing of the bronchial airways, resulting in chronic bronchitis or aggravation of asthma symptoms.4 The criteria pollutant performance measure supports both the Safety and Health outcome and the Environmental Quality outcome. The 2016 RTP/SCS would improve physical activity outcomes through improved location efficiency, which increases the share of short trips and through the provision of additional investments in active transportation networks including first/last mile improvements, Safe Routes to School projects and regional bikeway infrastructure. It would also increase access to natural lands and parks, which would further increase opportunities for physical activity. New to the 2016 RTP/SCS is the development of a new Public Health module for the Urban Footprint/Scenario Planning Model to measure the Plan’s impact on physical activity. The model was evaluated by a statewide review panel consisting of representatives of state, regional and local agencies. The Plan is expected to result in 4.3 additional minutes of physical activity per capita over the Baseline in areas experiencing changes in land use, which would improve 3 For more information on the health impacts of criteria air pollutants, see U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Six Common Air Pollutants: http://www3.epa.gov/ airquality/urbanair/. 4 For more information on the health impacts of particulate matter, see U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Particle Matter (PM) Health, Last Accessed October 7, 2015: http:// www3.epa.gov/pm/health.html. SAFETY AND HEALTH The Safety and Health outcomes have been carried over from the 2012 RTP/ SCS. In addition, the 2016 RTP/SCS includes new measures to evaluate the health outcomes of the Plan, including three new measures discussed below. The safety and health impacts of regional transportation improvements cannot be easily forecast, but total collisions can show a reduction in future years, particularly if people shift from travel modes with higher collision risk to modes with lower collision risk. The total number of collisions is generally used as the performance measure for safety and it can be partially projected by using mode and facility specific collision rates (highways, arterials and transit). This approach is used for the 2016 RTP/SCS, but it is important to note that this methodology does not take into account safety improvements specific to each mode. It only reflects changes based on modal or facility shifts. For monitoring, this measure can be reported historically by time period (month) and by mode (including for active transportation). Safety and Health outcome trends are discussed in greater detail in the Performance Measures Appendix. Recognizing that the RTP/SCS integrates transportation and land use and has impacts beyond those exclusively transportation-related, the 2016 RTP/ SCS includes three new health-related measures: mode share for walking and biking, rates of physical activity and weight-related disease, and incidence of respiratory/pollution-related disease.1 The health benefits of an active lifestyle have become increasingly apparent in recent years, and there is growing support for improving the walkability and bikability of the communities where we live and work. The linkage between obesity and disease has been well documented, and providing the appropriate community design and infrastructure to support a more active lifestyle is an important first step toward promoting healthy communities. Walking and biking mode shares can be used to evaluate the 2016 RTP/SCS alternatives, while the disease-focused measures may also be useful for on-going regional monitoring. A health measure carried over from the 2012 RTP/SCS is tons of criteria air pollutants, which is highly correlated to public health concerns such as asthma. There are six common air pollutants that are monitored in accordance with federal air quality regulations.2 These criteria pollutants include particulate 1 Ogden, Ph.D., C., & Carroll, M.S.P.H, M. (2010). Prevalence of Overweight, Obesity, and Extreme Obesity Among Adults: United States, Trends 1960–1962 Through 2007–2008. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Accessed at http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ hestat/obesity_adult_07_08/obesity_adult_07_08.htm. 2 For more information on Federal air quality standards, see U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS): http://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/ criteria.html. 164 2016 RTP/SCS health outcomes related to obesity by 2.7 percent and high blood pressure by 3.3 percent for residents in those areas. For a broader discussion of the Scenario Planning Model, please see the SCS Background Documentation Appendix. For more detailed information on the connection between physical activity and health outcomes, please see the Public Health Appendix. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY This outcome is measured in terms of criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions. Emissions are estimated using the SCAG RTDM results, which are used as input to the California Air Resources Board’s (ARB) Emission Factors (EMFAC) model. Pollutant emissions are reported in detail as part of the Transportation Conformity Analysis Appendix. The impact of air quality on public health is discussed in the Safety and Health outcome section of this chapter. Monitoring of regional greenhouse gas emissions is discussed in the Performance Measures Appendix. ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY The economic opportunity outcome is measured in terms of additional jobs created through improved regional economic competitiveness as a result of the transportation investments provided through the 2016 RTP/SCS. An annual average of more than 188,000 new jobs would be generated by the construction and operations expenditures in the 2016 RTP/SCS, in addition to more than 351,000 annual jobs that would be created in a broad cross-section of industries by the region’s increased competitiveness and improved economic performance—as a result of the improved transportation system. Additional economic benefits of the 2016 RTP/SCS are discussed in Chapter 7. INVESTMENT EFFECTIVENESS The investment effectiveness outcome indicates the degree to which the Plan’s expenditures generate benefits that transportation users can experience directly. This outcome is important because it describes how the Plan’s transportation investments make productive use of increasingly scarce funds. The benefit/cost ratio is the measure used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness outcome, as it compares the incremental benefits with the incremental costs of multimodal transportation investments. The benefits are divided into several categories, including: z Savings resulting from reduced travel delay z Air quality improvements z Safety improvements z Reductions in vehicle operating costs For these categories, travel demand and air quality models are used to estimate the benefits of the Plan compared with the Baseline. Most of these benefits are a function of changes in VMT and VHT. Not all impacts are linear, so reductions in congestion can increase or decrease vehicle operating costs and emissions. Delay savings are reflected directly in the VHT statistics. To estimate the benefit/cost ratio, the benefits in each category are converted into dollars and added together. These are divided by the total incremental costs of the Plan’s transportation improvements to produce a ratio. The investments in the 2016 RTP/SCS would provide a return of $2.00 for every dollar invested, for a benefit/cost ratio of 2.0. For this analysis, all benefits and costs are expressed in 2012 dollars. Benefits are estimated over the RTP/SCS planning period through 2040. The user benefits are estimated using California’s Cal-B/C framework and incorporate SCAG’s RTDM outputs. The costs include the incremental public expenditures over the entire 2016 RTP/SCS planning period.5 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY A transportation system is sustainable if it maintains its overall performance over time in an equitable manner with minimum damage to the environment, and at the same time does not compromise the ability of future generations to address their transportation needs. Sustainability, therefore, pertains to how our decisions today impact future generations. One of the measures used to evaluate system sustainability is the total inflation-adjusted cost per capita to maintain our overall multimodal transportation system performance at current conditions. The 2016 RTP/SCS includes two additional new measures to support this outcome: State Highway System pavement condition and local roads pavement condition. These additional performance measures will strengthen the transportation system sustainability outcome and further support implementation of MAP-21. 5 California Department of Transportation. (2009). California Life-Cycle Benefit/Cost Analysis Model (Cal-B/C) User’s Guide (Version 4.0). Accessed at http://www.dot.ca.gov/ hq/tpp/offices/eab/benefit_files/CalBC_User_Guide_v8.pdf. 16508 MEASURING OUR PROGRESS FOR THE FUTURE The 2016 RTP/SCS is committed to maintaining a sustainable regional transportation system by allocating $275.5 billion toward maintaining and operating the system in a state of good repair over the period of the Plan. This amounts to an average annual per capita investment of about $368 (in 2015 dollars) for each year of the Plan period. More details on performance measures for the Transportation System Sustainability outcome are presented in the Performance Measures Appendix. LAND USE RELATED BENEFITS Unlike the Plan, the Baseline scenario relies more heavily on growth in undeveloped lands at the edges of cities and beyond and focuses more new housing toward single-family developments in suburban settings. Using a different modeling process from that used for the mobility-based performance measures, additional land use related performance results were derived using the single framework model as described in the SCS Background Documentation Appendix. The land use strategy of the 2016 RTP/SCS promotes location efficiency by orienting new housing and job growth in areas served by high quality transit and in other targeted opportunity areas including existing main streets, downtowns and corridors where infrastructure already exists. This more compact land use pattern, combined with the transportation network improvements and strategies identified in the 2016 RTP/SCS, would result in improved pedestrian and bicycle access to community amenities, shorter average trip lengths and reduced vehicle miles traveled. This strategy also supports the development of more livable communities that provide more housing choices, conserve natural resources, offer more and better transportation options, and promote an overall better quality of life. The more focused land use pattern promoted in the Plan also reduces the need for significant capital investments. Because new development is focused in areas where infrastructure already exists, there is not as much need to extend or build new local roads, water and sewer systems, and parks. However, in other instances, modernization of utilities needs to be considered and completed to accommodate the additional use.There are also operations and maintenance (O&M) cost savings. O&M costs include the ongoing local expenditures required to operate and maintain the infrastructure serving new residential growth. It is important to note the O&M costs referred to in this section are not the same O&M costs discussed in other sections of the 2016 RTP/SCS. The 2016 RTP/SCS land use strategy also reduces the average household costs associated with driving and residential energy and water use. A land use pattern that contains more mixed-use/walkable and urban infill development accommodates a higher proportion of growth in more energy-efficient housing types like townhomes, apartments and smaller single-family homes, as well as more compact commercial building types. It should be noted that location is also an important factor in determining energy costs: buildings located in the warmer areas of the region use more energy each year, in part because they require more energy for cooling during the summer months. As California is facing major constraints on water supplies due to ongoing drought conditions throughout the state, there is a strong emphasis on reducing residential water use. Residential water use is a function of both indoor and outdoor water needs, with outdoor use (landscape irrigation) accounting for the majority of the difference among housing types. Because homes with 1901 INTRODUCTION 8.RTP/SCS GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTIONS 2020 2035 2040 8% 13% N/A 8% 18% 21% 0% 5% N/A ARB TARGET 2016 RTP/SCS % DIFFERENCE Percent Reduction from 2005 Levels Per Capita * ARB has set GHG emissions reduction targets for 2020 and 2035, but not for 2040 166 2016 RTP/SCS larger yards require more water for landscape irrigation, lot size is generally highly correlated with a household’s overall water consumption. Therefore, a land use pattern with a greater proportion of large lot single-family homes will require more water than a land use pattern that features a larger share of compact and urban infill development, which includes more attached and multifamily homes. And, as is the case for energy use, the location and type of new development has a significant bearing on water use: homes in the warmer and more arid locations of the region will consume more water to maintain lawns and other landscaping. SENATE BILL 375 AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS As discussed previously in this Plan, Senate Bill 375 requires that SCAG and other Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) throughout the state develop a Sustainable Communities Strategy to reduce per capita greenhouse gas emissions through integrated transportation, land use, housing and environmental planning. Pursuant to Senate Bill 375, ARB set per capita greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets from passenger vehicles for each of the state’s 18 MPOs. For the SCAG region, the targets are set at eight percent below 2005 per capita emissions levels by 2020 and 13 percent below 2005 per capita emissions levels by 2035. Although ARB has not adjusted SCAG’s regional targets since the 2012 RTP/SCS, SCAG anticipates that the region’s targets could change— considering the Governor’s recent Executive Order.6 Because the transportation sector is the largest contributor to California’s greenhouse gas emissions (more than 36 percent), SCAG anticipates updated and more stringent regional greenhouse gas reduction targets may be forthcoming.7 In the meantime, the 2016 RTP/SCS achieves per capita greenhouse gas emissions reductions relative to 2005 of eight percent in 2020, 18 percent in 2035, and 21 percent in 2040—exceeding the reductions that ARB currently requires. For more detailed information and analysis regarding monitoring of air quality and greenhouse gas emissions in the SCAG region, please see the Transportation Conformity Analysis Appendix. 6 California Air Resources Board. (2015). Frequently Asked Questions About Executive Order B-30-15 2030 Carbon Target and Adaptation. [Fact Sheet]. Retrieved from http://www.arb. ca.gov/newsrel/2030_carbon_target_adaptation_faq.pdf 7 California Air Resources Board. California Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory. (2015) [Website]. Retrieved from http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/data.htm. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE The concept of environmental justice is about equal and fair access to a healthy environment, with the goal of protecting minority and low-income communities from incurring disproportionate negative environmental impacts. SCAG’s environmental justice program includes two main elements: technical analysis and public outreach. In the regional transportation-planning context, SCAG’s role is to 1) ensure that when transportation decisions are made, low-income and minority communities have ample opportunity to participate in the decision- making process, and 2) identify whether such communities receive an equitable distribution of benefits and not a disproportionate share of burdens. As such, SCAG adheres to all federal and state directives on environmental justice. All public agencies that use federal funding must make environmental justice part of their mission and adhere to three fundamental environmental justice principles: 1. To avoid, minimize or mitigate disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects, including social and economic effects, on minority populations and low-income populations. 2. To ensure the full and fair participation by all potentially affected communities in the transportation decision-making process. 3. To prevent the denial of, reduction in, or significant delay in the receipt of benefits by minority and low-income populations. The 2016 RTP/SCS program of environmental justice public outreach and analysis, described in detail in the Environmental Justice Appendix, reviews federal legislation pertaining to environmental justice; major equity issues specific to our region; SCAG policies and programs related to this important topic; outreach efforts in communities across the region; and SCAG’s efforts to identify demographic groups to ensure environmental justice in all of our communities. 16708 MEASURING OUR PROGRESS FOR THE FUTURE TABLE 8.4 2016 RTP/SCS PERFORMANCE MEASURES: ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE PERFORMANCE MEASURE DEFINITION PERFORMANCE TARGET SUMMARY OF IMPACTS 2016 RTP/SCS revenue sources in terms of tax burdens1 Proportion of 2016 RTP/SCS revenue sources (taxable sales, income, and gasoline taxes) for low income and minority populations No unaddressed disproportionately high and adverse effects for low income or minority communities No unaddressed disproportionate impacts—households in poverty will not contribute disproportionately to the overall funding of the Plan. Minority households will not pay a higher proportion of taxes to fund the 2016 RTP/SCS than their relative representation in the region as a whole Share of transportation system usage1 Comparison of transportation system usage by mode for low income and minority households vs each group's population share in the greater region No unaddressed disproportionately high and adverse effects for low income or minority communities No unaddressed disproportionate impacts—low income and minority groups show a higher usage of transit and active transportation modes and positions these communities to benefit from the investments in the 2016 RTP/SCS 2016 RTP/SCS investments1 Allocation of Plan investments by mode (bus, HOV lanes, commuter/high speed rail, highways/arterials, and light/ heavy rail transit) No unaddressed disproportionately high and adverse effects for low income or minority communities No unaddressed disproportionate impacts—the share of transportation investments for low income and minority communities outpaces these groups' financial burdens for the 2016 RTP/SCS Distribution of travel time savings and travel distance reductions1 Details what groups are overall benefiting as a result of the Plan in terms of travel time and distance savings No unaddressed disproportionately high and adverse effects for low income or minority communities No unaddressed disproportionate impacts—the Plan's travel time and person-mile savings for low income households and minority communities is in line with each group's usage of the transportation system Geographic distribution of transportation investments Examination of transit, roadway and active transportation infrastructure investments in various communities throughout the region No unaddressed disproportionately high and adverse effects for low income or minority communities No unaddressed disproportionate impacts—the Plan's transportation infrastructure investments are distributed throughout the region in proportion to population density Jobs-housing imbalance1 Comparison of median earnings for intra-county vs inter- county commuters for each county in the SCAG region; analysis of relative housing affordability and jobs throughout the region Establish existing conditions (not a performance measure for the Plan) Existing conditions show that higher wage workers tend to commute longer distances than lower wage workers. Inland counties show a lower job-to-worker ratio than coastal counties, indicating that there are more long distance commuters in inland counties. Please refer to the Environmental Justice Appendix for potential strategies to improve conditions at the local level Accessibility to employment and services1 Percentage of employment and shopping destinations within a one- and two-mile travel buffer from each neighborhood; also, share of employment and shopping destinations that can be reached within 30 minutes by auto or 45 minutes by bus or all transit modes during the evening peak period No unaddressed disproportionately high and adverse effects for low income or minority communities No unaddressed disproportionate impacts—the Plan will improve the number of accessible destinations within 45 minutes of travel and within short distances for low income and minority communities both by auto and transit Accessibility to parks and schools Share of population within a one- and two-mile travel buffer from a regional park or school; also, share of park acreage that can be reached within 30 minutes by auto or 45 minutes by bus or all transit modes during the evening peak period No unaddressed disproportionately high and adverse effects for low income or minority communities No unaddressed disproportionate impacts—the Plan will improve the number of destinations accessible within 45 minutes of travel and short distances for low income and minority communities both by auto and transit Gentrification and displacement1 Examination of historical demographic and economic trends for areas surrounding rail transit stations Establish existing conditions (not a performance measure for the Plan) Historic trends from 2000 to 2012 show that population living in areas within a half mile of rail transit stations are not strongly influenced by the larger region’s demographic and economic trends. For example, the growth of Hispanics and seniors (age 65 and above) in these areas has not kept pace with regional trends. Patterns in residents’ income and housing prices suggest that gentrification may be happening and low income and minority households are at risk for displacement. Refer to the Environmental Justice Appendix for potential strategies to reduce impacts at the local level Emissions Impact Analysis1 Comparison of Plan and Baseline scenarios; identification of areas that are lower performing as a result of the Plan, along with a breakdown of demographics for those areas No unaddressed disproportionately high and adverse effects for low income or minority communities No unaddressed disproportionate impacts—the Plan will result in reductions in carbon monoxide and particulate matter emissions for on-road vehicles and benefits will be experienced both by minority and low income households and in communities with a high concentration of minority and low income groups 168 2016 RTP/SCS TABLE 8.4 CONTINUED PERFORMANCE MEASURE DEFINITION PERFORMANCE TARGET SUMMARY OF IMPACTS Air quality health impacts along highways and highly traveled corridors1 Comparison of Plan and Baseline scenarios and demographic analysis of communities in close proximity to highways and highly traveled corridors No unaddressed disproportionately high and adverse effects for low income or minority communities No unaddressed disproportionate impacts—the Plan will result in an overall reduction in emissions in areas that are near roadways, which have been seen to have a higher concentration of minority and low income groups than the region as a whole Aviation noise impacts1 Comparison of Plan and Baseline scenarios; breakdown of population by race and ethnicity for low performing airport noise impacted areas No unaddressed disproportionately high and adverse effects for low income or minority communities No unaddressed disproportionate impacts—the Plan will result in aviation noise areas that are geographically smaller than the Baseline scenario, and will benefit minority and low income households as a result Roadway noise impacts1 Comparison of Plan and Baseline scenarios, identification of areas that are low performing as a result of the Plan; breakdown of population for these impacted areas by race/ ethnicity and income No unaddressed disproportionately high and adverse effects for low income or minority communities No unaddressed disproportionate impacts—the Plan results in a reduction of roadway noise when compared to the Baseline scenario, which has a benefit to minority and low income households who represent a higher share of population who live in close proximity to major roadways Active transportation hazard Breakdown of population by demographic group for areas that experience the highest rates of bicycle and pedestrian collisions Establish existing conditions (not a performance measure for the Plan) Collision data from 2012 shows that low income and minority communities incur a higher rate of bicycle and pedestrian risk. Improvements in active transportation infrastructure and Complete Streets measures, such as those proposed in the Plan, have been shown to reduce hazard to bicyclists and pedestrians. Refer to the Environmental Justice Appendix for potential strategies to reduce risk at the local level Rail-related impacts1 Breakdown of population by demographic group for areas in close proximity to rail corridors and planned grade separations No unaddressed disproportionately high and adverse effects for low income or minority communities No unaddressed disproportionate impacts—there is no significant difference between the Plan and the Baseline in the concentration of minority and low income communities in areas directly adjacent to commercial and passenger railways Public health analysis Historical emissions and health data summarized for areas that have high concentrations of minority and low income population Establish existing conditions (not a performance measure for the Plan) Recent trends indicate that air quality is improving throughout the region. For select areas that show increase, there is sometimes a higher proportion of minority and low income population. When examining public health indicators from the CalEnviroScreen tool, it appears that areas with the highest concentrations of minority and low income population incur some of the highest risks in the region. Refer to the Environmental Justice Appendix for potential strategies to improve conditions at the local level Climate vulnerability Breakdown of population by demographic group for areas potentially impacted by substandard housing, sea level rise and wildfire risk Establish existing conditions (not a performance measure for the Plan) Existing conditions indicate that minority and low income populations are at a greater risk for experiencing negative impacts of climate change. Refer to the Environmental Justice Appendix for potential strategies to reduce impacts at the local level. Proposed mileage-based user fee impacts Examination of potential impacts from implementation of a mileage-based user fee on low income households in the region No unaddressed disproportionately high and adverse effects for low income or minority communities No unaddressed disproportionate impacts—results show that the mileage-based user fee is less regressive to low income residents than the current gasoline tax. Note: 1 Performance measures used in the Environmental Justice Analysis for the 2012 RTP/SCS 16908 MEASURING OUR PROGRESS FOR THE FUTURE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE PERFORMANCE MEASURES In the development of the analysis, SCAG identified 18 performance measures to analyze existing environmental justice parameters in the region and to address any potential impacts of the 2016 RTP/SCS on the various environmental justice population groups. SCAG also examined potential impacts at various geographies and specifically employed a community- based approach for the 2016 RTP/SCS based on guidance from stakeholders. A brief description of the environmental justice performance measures is provided in this section. A more detailed presentation of the results of the 2016 RTP/SCS environmental justice analysis can be found in the Environmental Justice Appendix. TABLE 8.4 describes the 2016 RTP/SCS environmental justice performance measures and provides a summary of impacts for each of the measures. PERFORMANCE MEASURE 1: 2016 RTP/SCS REVENUE SOURCES IN TERMS OF TAX BURDENS Different funding sources (i.e., income, property, sales and fuel taxes) can impose disproportionate burdens on lower-income and minority groups. Sales and gasoline taxes, which are the primary sources of funding for the region’s transportation system, were evaluated for the purposes of this analysis. The amount of taxes paid was broken down to demonstrate how tax burdens fall on various demographic groups. As in previous RTP environmental justice reports, the 2016 RTP/SCS environmental justice analysis examined in detail the incidence, distribution and burden of taxation. PERFORMANCE MEASURE 2: SHARE OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM USAGE SCAG analyzed the use of various transportation modes by race/ethnicity and by income quintile (an income quintile is a category into which 20 percent of households ranked by income fall). PERFORMANCE MEASURE 3: 2016 RTP/SCS INVESTMENTS The strategy that public agencies pursue to invest in transportation has a huge impact on environmental justice. In short, it can determine what transportation choices will be available to low-income and minority communities. A disproportionate allocation of resources for various transit investments, for example, can indicate a pattern of discrimination. PERFORMANCE MEASURE 4: DISTRIBUTION OF TRAVEL TIME SAVINGS AND TRAVEL DISTANCE REDUCTIONS SCAG assessed both the distribution of travel time and distance savings that are expected to result from implementing the 2016 RTP/SCS, by analyzing demographic data and the associated mode usage statistics for each Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) in the region. With this input, an estimate for the time savings for each income group and ethnic group can be identified for trips involving transit (bus and rail) and automobiles. PERFORMANCE MEASURE 5: GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OF TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENTS This section is a new addition to the environmental justice analysis for the 2016 RTP/SCS and examines where transportation investments are planned throughout the region. Building on the new community-based approach for the overall effort, a summary of investments for areas with a high concentration of minority population and/or low income population is included for roadway, transit and active transportation investments. PERFORMANCE MEASURE 6: JOBS-HOUSING IMBALANCE An imbalance or mismatch between employment and housing in a community is considered to be a key contributor to local traffic congestion. Some argue that these imbalances and mismatches are also impediments to environmental justice. Driving is expensive and people who can’t afford to own a car generally need to live near to their jobs so they can get to work using transit, or by walking or biking. PERFORMANCE MEASURE 7: ACCESSIBILITY TO EMPLOYMENT AND SERVICES Accessibility is vital for social and economic interactions. As a measure, accessibility is determined by the spatial distribution of potential destinations; the ease of reaching each destination by various transportation modes; and the magnitude, quality and character of the activities at the destination sites. Travel costs are central: the lower the costs of travel, in terms of time and money, the more places people can reach within a certain budget—that is, the greater the accessibility. The number of destination choices that people have is equally crucial: the more destinations and the more varied the destinations, the higher the level of accessibility. 170 2016 RTP/SCS PERFORMANCE MEASURE 10: EMISSIONS IMPACT ANALYSIS Air pollution comes from many different sources and can be classified into two types: ozone and particulate matter. Ozone pollution takes a gaseous form and is generated as vapor emitted from fuels commonly used in motor vehicles and industrial processes. Ozone is formed by the reaction between volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) in the presence of sunlight. Ozone negatively impacts the respiratory system. Particulate matter (PM 10 and PM 2.5) are very fine particles made up of materials such as soot, ash, chemicals, metals and fuel exhaust that are released into the atmosphere. Particulate pollution has been linked to significant health problems, including aggravated asthma, respiratory disease, chronic bronchitis, decreased lung function and premature death. Transportation projects can have both positive and negative impacts on the environment. Conversely, appropriate transportation investments can motivate travelers to shift to less polluting modes (e.g., bus, train, carpooling or commuter rail). On the other hand, investments that increase traffic on a particular facility typically degrade air quality in the immediate vicinity of that facility. Low-income and minority groups may be at particular risk for health hazards resulting from air pollution, and the objective for this analysis is to assess impacts for these groups as a result of the Plan versus Baseline (no-build) scenario. PERFORMANCE MEASURE 11: AIR QUALITY HEALTH IMPACTS ALONG HIGHWAYS AND HIGHLY TRAVELED CORRIDORS Exposure to air pollutants is considered an environmental justice issue due to the disproportionate share of minority and low-income populations living in close proximity to heavily traveled corridors, particularly near port and logistics activities. This exposure to unhealthy air results in nearly 5,000 premature deaths annually in the SCAG region, as well as 140,000 children with asthma and other respiratory symptoms. More than half of Americans exposed to PM 2.5 pollution that exceeds the national standard live in the SCAG region.9 This measure examines the potential emissions impacts of the RTP/SCS for PM and ozone emissions that result from on-road vehicles both at the TAZ level and for areas in close proximity to highways and highly traveled corridors. 9 California Air Resources Board, South Coast Air Quality Management District, and SCAG. (2011). Powering the Future: A Vision for Clean Energy, Clear Skies, and a Growing Economy. [Fact Sheet]. http://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/2011/powering_the_future.pdf. PERFORMANCE MEASURE 8: ACCESSIBILITY TO PARKS AND NATURAL LANDS Similar to the method used for measuring accessibility to jobs, accessibility to parks is defined as the percentage of park acreage reachable within a 30-minute travel time by auto and 45-minute travel time by local bus and all transit options. For this round of SCAG’s environmental justice effort, analysis was included that measured accessibility to the recently designated San Gabriel Mountains National Monument. Also included in our accessibility analysis (for employment and services) is a measurement of the share of population within a one- and two-mile travel distance of all regional parks and open space under the Plan and Baseline scenario, based on the principle that shorter trips should be encouraged through implementation of the 2016 RTP/SCS. PERFORMANCE MEASURE 9: GENTRIFICATION AND DISPLACEMENT The integration of transportation and land use planning has been recognized for its ability to reduce VMT, air pollution and greenhouse gases, while also increasing opportunities for physical activity. However, there has been some criticism of smart growth strategies in relation to housing affordability, specifically in regard to Transit-Oriented Development (TOD). In response to these concerns, SCAG developed a methodology to monitor demographic trends in and around transit-oriented communities. For the 2016 RTP/SCS, recent indicators show that emerging trends for areas in close proximity to rail transit stations (one half mile surrounding a rail transit stop) are not consistent with those for the greater region. From 2000 to 2012, the region experienced huge growth for certain cohorts, specifically the Hispanic population and seniors aged 65 and over. This same trend was also seen in areas near rail transit stations, but to a much lesser degree. At the same time, median household income has decreased less, and median gross rent has increased more, in these transit oriented communities than has been the trend for the greater region. These divergent growth patterns represent evidence indicating likely gentrification, which may lead to displacement for low income households.8 SCAG will continue to monitor growth in TOD areas and is committed to promoting affordable housing throughout the region. Additional tools that local jurisdictions may use to combat displacement of low income and minority residents are provided in the Environmental Justice Toolbox, located in the Plan’s Environmental Justice Appendix. 8 Environmental Justice Emerging Trends and Best Practices Guidebook, Document Number: FHWAHEP-11-024 (2011). U.S. Department of Transprtation, Federal Highway Administration. 17108 MEASURING OUR PROGRESS FOR THE FUTURE transportation options is key to attracting more people to choose these alternatives. Bicycling or walking along roadways in close proximity with motor vehicles is often perceived as dangerous, and reducing hazards in the pedestrian and cycling environment is a primary strategy toward achieving our goal of promoting healthier, more active communities. As a new environmental justice indicator for the 2016 RTP/SCS, Active Transportation Hazards seeks to evaluate incidences of motor vehicle collisions involving bicyclists and pedestrians in our communities, with the goal of promoting an improved environment for active transportation users and encouraging more residents to make the choice to walk or bicycle in their communities. As with other environmental justice performance measures, this indicator will be used to identify patterns of active transportation hazards and potential disparities among our various communities. PERFORMANCE MEASURE 15: RAIL-RELATED IMPACTS Freight rail emissions account for five percent of all NOx emissions and four percent of all PM emissions generated by regional goods movement activities, as described in the Goods Movement Appendix. When compared with all regional PM and NOx sources, the contributions by freight rail emissions is even lower. However, environmental pollution from locomotives, rail yards and other rail facilities must be considered, as concentrations of rail activities can cause localized rail-related pollution. In response to input from our federal partners, SCAG developed a summary analysis to address potential environmental justice impacts in areas adjacent to railroads and rail facilities, although further discussion and analysis is recommended. This outcome analyzes environmental justice communities adjacent to railroads and rail facilities, rail impacts to sensitive receptors, and examines environmental justice concerns that may potentially be alleviated by grade separation projects. PERFORMANCE MEASURE 16: PUBLIC HEALTH IMPACT A new environmental justice indicator for the 2016 RTP/SCS, the Public Health measure seeks to evaluate the potential disparity among communities in the SCAG region in terms of public health issues that may be associated with historical toxic exposure and local transportation infrastructure. Like the Active Transportation Hazards measure discussed previously, inclusion of this new analysis is intended to further the goal of fostering healthier lifestyle choices in all of our communities. It is a key goal of this Plan to provide more and better opportunities for physical activity and other healthy lifestyle choices throughout the SCAG region. PERFORMANCE MEASURE 12: AVIATION NOISE IMPACTS The SCAG region supports the nation’s largest regional airport system, in terms of the number of airports and overall aircraft operations operating in a very complex airspace environment. This system has six established air carrier airports, including Los Angeles International (LAX), Burbank Bob Hope, John Wayne, Long Beach, Ontario and Palm Springs. There are also four emerging air carrier airports within the Inland Empire and in North Los Angeles County. These include San Bernardino International Airport, March Inland Port (joint use with March Air Reserve Base), Southern California Logistics Airport and Palmdale Airport (joint use with Air Force Plant 42). The regional aviation system also includes more than 40 general aviation airports and two commuter airports—for a total of more than 55 public use airports. Although the projected demand for airport capacity has decreased in comparison with what was projected in the 2012 RTP/SCS, there is still moderate growth expected in the future. The challenge is striking a balance between the aviation capacity needs of Southern California and the quality of life for people living near airports. This measure evaluates the impact of aviation noise on neighborhoods close to airports and examines the potential impacts on environmental justice populations specifically. PERFORMANCE MEASURE 13: ROADWAY NOISE IMPACTS The SCAG region has an extensive roadway system consisting of more than 70,000 lane miles. It includes one of the country’s most extensive HOV lane systems and a growing network of toll lanes, as well as express lanes. The region also has a vast network of arterials and other minor roadways and noise may cause significant environmental concerns. Noise associated with highway traffic depends on a number of factors that include traffic volumes, vehicle speed, vehicle fleet mix (cars, trucks) and the location of the highway with respect to schools, daycare facilities, parks and other “sensitive receptors.” According to FHWA guidance, noise impacts occur when noise levels increase substantially in comparison with existing levels. Impacts are assessed in this section by examining how the RTP/SCS affects roadway noise and by determining the population groups that could potentially be most impacted by roadway noise. PERFORMANCE MEASURE 14: ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION HAZARDS Encouraging a healthier, more active lifestyle in all of our communities is one of the featured goals of this Plan. Making walking and bicycling safer 172 2016 RTP/SCS PERFORMANCE MEASURE 17: CLIMATE VULNERABILITY This is another new environmental justice performance indicator that seeks to identify regional disparities in regard to vulnerability to the consequences of climate change among the various communities in the SCAG region. Of particular interest in this analysis will be relative risk for sea level rise, wildfires, and flooding. It is understood that climate change is expected to impact different regions in different ways. In Southern California, we may expect development of a general trend of warmer temperatures, less precipitation and higher sea levels along our coasts. This combination of climatic changes will likely result in increased wildfire danger, particularly in the foothill areas where our cities adjoin our local mountains. Due to melting ice caps in the polar regions, a steady rise in global sea level is expected. This may impact the coastal regions of Southern California. This new measure will allow SCAG to obtain a better understanding of how these anticipated changes in our local climate may impact our more vulnerable communities.10 PERFORMANCE MEASURE 18: PROPOSED MILEAGE-BASED USER FEE IMPACTS This analysis is based on a proposed transportation improvement funding strategy that recommends implementation of a user fee based on VMT. If implemented, the mileage-based user fee would replace the current gasoline tax and is estimated to cost about four cents (2015 value) per mile and would be indexed to maintain its purchasing power beginning in 2025. Implementation of this financing strategy would require action by the California State Legislature and/or the U.S. Congress. This measure examines the impact of the gasoline tax on low income households and assesses the mileage-based user fee as a replacement option. 10 For more information on potential climate change impact in Southern California, see Southern California Association of Governments and Dan Cayan, Climate Change: What Should Southern California Prepare for?: http://www.scag.ca.gov/documents/climat- echange_dancayan.pdf. TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY REQUIREMENTS The Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) establishes the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and planning requirements for certain air pollutants. To comply with the CAA in achieving the national air quality standards, the ARB develops a State Implementation Plan (SIP) for each federal designated non- attainment and maintenance area within California. SIP development is a joint effort of the local air agencies and ARB working with federal, state and local agencies, including regional MPOs. Transportation conformity is required under the CAA section 176(c) to ensure that federally supported highway and transit project activities “conform” to, or are consistent with, the purpose of the applicable SIP. Conformity for the purpose of the SIP means that transportation activities including regional transportation plans, transportation improvement programs and transportation projects will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing air quality violations, or delay timely attainment of the relevant NAAQS. Conformity applies to areas that are designated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as being in non-attainment or maintenance for the following transportation related criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), ozone, and particulate matter (PM 2.5 and PM 10). Under the U.S. Department of Transportation Metropolitan Planning regulations and the EPA’s Transportation Conformity regulations, the 2016 RTP/SCS is required to pass the following four conformity tests in order to demonstrate transportation conformity: z Regional Emissions z Timely Implementation of Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) z Financial Constraint z Interagency Consultation and Public Involvement The Regional Council adopts the initial transportation conformity determination, while FHWA/Federal Transit Administration (FTA) approves the final transportation conformity determination for the 2016 RTP/SCS. 17308 MEASURING OUR PROGRESS FOR THE FUTURE CONFORMITY ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS As documented in the Transportation Conformity Analysis Appendix, the 2016 RTP/SCS meets all federal transportation conformity requirements and demonstrates transportation conformity. The findings associated with the conformity tests are described in detail in the Transportation Conformity Analysis Appendix. TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION REDUCTION TARGETS Although transportation conformity is a federal requirement and reducing greenhouse gas emissions is a state mandate, both requirements are highly interrelated. First of all, each of the 2016 RTP/SCS policies, strategies, programs and projects that contribute to transportation conformity are the same policies, strategies, programs and projects that help to meet state targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions—and vice versa. Secondly, although transportation conformity addresses emissions of criteria pollutants and their precursors, such emissions originate from the same source as greenhouse gas emissions: the combustion of fossil fuels in motor vehicles. Any strategies that result in reduction or elimination of use of fossil fuels in motor vehicles may help the 2016 RTP/SCS meet both federal transportation conformity requirements and state greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets. In addition, the regional emissions analysis used for transportation conformity and the emissions analysis conducted for meeting greenhouse gas reduction targets use the same regional transportation model and ARB’s Emission Factors (EMFAC) model. Finally, there is greater awareness of the need for more concerted efforts at the federal, state and local levels to integrate the SIP development process with planning and actions to address climate change. As a result, transportation conformity and greenhouse gas emissions reductions will become even more interconnected and more mutually supportive. CONCLUSION As we look toward mid-century, it is important to consider what the region can do beyond the transportation projects for which we expect to have funding. In our final chapter, ‘Looking Ahead,’ additional strategies and investments will be presented that would bring the SCAG region closer to achieving our goals for improved mobility and accessibility, a strong economic future, sustainable growth, and ultimately an enhanced quality of life for everyone in our region. CHAPTER 9 HIGHLIGHTS 09 INTRODUCTION 176 THE 2016 STRATEGIC PLAN 176 OUR REGION BEYOND 2040 181 CONCLUSION 183 Image courtesy of Allan Crawford This Plan has discussed many long-term needs for our region’s transportation system. Despite $556.5 billion in investments reviewed in the 2016 RTP/ SCS, this still will not be enough to address all of our needs as we head toward mid-century. In addition, as noted earlier, state policies will continue to push the region to achieve sustainability goals beyond the horizon of the plan. LOOKING AHEAD 176 2016 RTP/SCS INTRODUCTION The implication of the Governor’s Executive Order B-30-15, referenced earlier, is that state-mandated targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will likely become more ambitious and will be extended to target years beyond 2040. The first part of this chapter describes the 2016 Regional Strategic Plan, a list of projects without identified funding that would benefit mobility in the region. The second part of this chapter, which concludes this presentation of the 2016 RTP/SCS, provides insight into developments that will impact the region beyond 2040. THE 2016 STRATEGIC PLAN This chapter serves as a Strategic Plan for discussing what strategies, programs and projects the region should pursue in coming decades if and when additional funding becomes available. This Strategic Plan is intended to help inform future updates to SCAG’s RTP/SCS, beyond the 2016 RTP/SCS. Back in 2008, SCAG first developed a Strategic Plan to guide long-term decisions for transportation investments and strategies. The Strategic Plan in the agency’s 2008 RTP helped inform what kinds of investments to include in the 2012 RTP/SCS—as part of that Plan’s financially constrained transportation network. Not surprisingly, the Strategic Plan included in the 2012 RTP/SCS played a large role in informing the investments and strategies detailed in the Financially Constrained Plan of the 2016 RTP/SCS (also referred to as the “Constrained Plan”). Among these are: z Promoting Active Transportation: The 2012 Strategic Plan called for further enhancements to the active transportation system, including an increased focus on first/last mile connections to and from public transit, increasing the density of bikeways, incorporating Complete Streets practices that make streets friendlier to pedestrians and bicyclists, and increasing connectivity for pedestrians and bicyclists between jurisdictions. As part of the 2012 RTP/SCS, $6.7 billion was allocated for active transportation. Since the 2012 RTP/ SCS was adopted, active transportation has been recognized as a regional priority, not just a local priority. Orange County began work on a strategic bikeway network and completed the first portion in 2012, and it is fully incorporated into the 2016 RTP/ SCS. Meanwhile, Los Angeles County is developing its own Active Transportation Strategic Plan. z Expanding the High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes System: The 2012 Strategic Plan recommended expanding our regionwide HOV lane network, although these improvements were unfunded. The 2016 RTP/SCS now fully funds an HOV expansion project within Orange County as part of its Constrained Plan. z Improving Local Highway Grade Separations: The 2012 Strategic Plan recommended constructing grade separations on our local highways, although these improvements were unfunded as well. The 2016 RTP/SCS fully funds several grade separation projects throughout the region as part of its Constrained Plan. It is clear that the 2012 Strategic Plan played a large role in influencing the 2016 Constrained Plan, as intended. Moving forward, we expect the Strategic Plan discussed in this chapter will help inform future RTP/SCS updates. Should additional funding become available to pursue projects beyond our Constrained Plan, more consensus would be needed and in some cases further studies would be warranted before specific projects could move forward. LONG-TERM EMISSIONS-REDUCTION STRATEGIES FOR RAIL As part of our current Strategic Plan, we will continue ongoing work with railroads, air quality management agencies and other stakeholders to reach our goal of a zero-emissions rail system. FREIGHT RAIL Achieving a rail system with zero emissions will be challenging because freight rail operates as a national system and locomotives cannot remain captive to our region. Any new technology will require an operational strategy to change out locomotive types, or it will require compatible infrastructure nationwide to provide new types of cleaner power and/or fuel to locomotives. These challenges are formidable, but several near zero- and zero-emissions rail technologies are actually under development. A zero-emissions rail system would require full electrification and such a system could be powered by electric catenary or linear synchronous motors. There are also options for a hybrid- electric engine or a battery tender car, which provide additional power, allowing locomotives to operate in zero-emissions mode while battery power is available. 17709 LOOKING AHEAD Opportunities for near zero-emissions include incorporating liquid natural gas tender cars and after treatment systems. Tier 4 engines and earlier engine types can be retrofitted to operate with natural gas, though safety and operational issues remain challenging. Additional after-treatment options are in the conceptual stage, which could go beyond Tier 4 standards. Please see the Goods Movement Appendix for more detail on these technologies, as well as a plan to deploy these technologies as they become commercially viable. CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN The California High-Speed Train will be electrified and will therefore produce no emissions along its operating corridors. Furthermore, the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) has committed to using 100 percent renewable energy to power its trains. Because of the expected reduction in air and auto travel, the CHSRA estimates its service will save 2.0 million to 3.2 million barrels of oil annually, beginning in 2030.1 With plans for a zero-emissions high-speed rail system in Southern California, and as the freight rail sector makes advances in near zero- and zero-emissions technologies, the region’s passenger and commuter rail systems should pursue a similar strategic vision. LONG-TERM EMISSIONS-REDUCTION STRATEGIES FOR TRUCKS The reduction or elimination of emissions from heavy-duty trucking is equally important to our long-term vision of a zero-emissions goods movement system. In the near term, our 2016 RTP/SCS proposes an aggressive program to bring into service more clean fuel trucks and hybrid trucks that are now available. For the longer term, we provide a detailed plan to advance zero-emissions truck technologies, as described in the Goods Movement Appendix. The trucking market offers unique challenges because of heavy vehicle and load weights, operational performance requirements, and high incremental costs. However, several reduced-emissions trucks are commercially available now and many zero- and near zero-emissions trucks are under development. Reduced-emissions natural gas trucks already have been deployed at our region’s ports and several hundred hybrid electric trucks are on the road due to the Hybrid Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Project (HVIP) at the California Air Resources Board. 1 California High Speed Rail Authority. Environmental Fact Sheet, August 2014. Other promising technologies include plug-in hybrid-electric trucks, which have batteries that are charged through an external power source; battery-electric trucks, which can generate their own power or receive power from an outside source; and hydrogen fuel cell electric trucks. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is leading several ongoing demonstration programs, with funding from regional partners and state and federal agencies that are developing prototype zero-emissions trucks. These programs are also accessing the compatibility of these trucks with wayside power charging infrastructure. These demonstration programs rely on partnerships with original equipment manufacturers that can develop truck prototypes and with private sector partners that can test and evaluate prototypes in real world operating conditions. For more information on the steps toward development and deployment of these technologies and more detail about potential technologies, please see the Goods Movement Appendix. UNFUNDED OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS Well-targeted investments to improve our roadways can yield numerous benefits. Adding auxiliary lanes and managed lanes; improving interchanges; deploying on-ramp metering devices and adaptive signals; and other ITS enhancements can make the entire roadway system more efficient, increase capacity and help reduce congestion. Caltrans Corridor System Management Plans (CSMPs) have identified a number of improvements throughout the State Highway System (SHS) to improve productivity. The future development of corridor mobility and sustainability improvement plans (i.e., Corridor Sustainability Studies) for various corridors throughout the SCAG region may also identify future operational improvements not only within the SHS, but for all modes of travel throughout the region. UNFUNDED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS Regionally significant major corridor improvements and strategies described in the Strategic Plan are identified in TABLE 9.1. A complete list is contained in the 2016 RTP/SCS Project List contained as part of Project List Appendix. 178 2016 RTP/SCS EXPANDING OUR REGION’S HIGH-SPEED TRAIN SYSTEM CALIFORNIA HIGH-SPEED TRAIN The California High-Speed Train will provide people with an additional option for traveling within the state, offering an alternative to flying and driving. This will be especially important as highways and airports continue to become more congested and constrained as California’s population continues to grow. Phase One of the system, approved by voters, extends from the Kern County line in our region through Palmdale and Burbank to Los Angeles Union Station and Anaheim. Phase Two, extending from downtown Los Angeles to San Diego, will link many urban areas and other destinations within our Southern California region via the San Gabriel Valley and the Inland Empire. This corridor is about 160 miles long and it traverses Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego counties. With more than 21 million residents, these four counties make up about 56 percent of the state’s current population. And they’re projected to grow significantly by 2050. Upon completion, Phase Two will provide important access to planned and existing regional centers, including Ontario International Airport, the March Inland Port, and potentially San Bernardino International and Corona airports— helping to meet SCAG’s long-term goal of regionalizing air travel in Southern California. Eventually, Phase Two is expected to be the basis for further high- speed rail extensions into Nevada and Arizona. Phase One and Two of the California High-Speed Train will provide excellent regional connectivity to our region by connecting with a robust network of intercity and commuter rail, subway, light rail, modern streetcars and fixed- route transit systems. Integrated planning will allow these regional and local transportation networks to complement the High-Speed Train. Commuter, intercity and interregional rail services and transit serve distinct travel markets, but coordinating their schedules will further increase the region’s rail and transit ridership by attracting new and crossover passengers to these different market segments. XPRESSWEST In addition to the California High-Speed Train, our region has other important high-speed rail projects in development. XpressWest is a high-speed rail service that will connect Victorville and Las Vegas along the Interstate 15 corridor and connect via the High Desert Corridor to Palmdale and California High-Speed Train Phase One. It will use “steel wheel on steel rail” electric multiple unit train technology, at speeds of up to 150 miles per hour (mph). TABLE 9.1 MAJOR STRATEGIC PLAN PROJECTS IMPERIAL COUNTY SR-111 Corridor Improvements LOS ANGELES COUNTY Metro Blue Line Extension to California State University Long Beach Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension Beyond Phase II Terminus Metro Green Line Extension to San Pedro, Long Beach and LA/Orange County Line Metro Orange Line Extension to Burbank Bob Hope Airport Orangeline High-Speed Transit (Union Station to Santa Clarita) I-605 HOV lanes from I-10 to I-210 ORANGE COUNTY Additional Transit Station Improvements to Fullerton Transportation Center and Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center Fullerton College Connector SR-133 Multimodal Corridor Improvements RIVERSIDE COUNTY Coachella Valley Daily Rail Service between Downtown Los Angeles and Indio CETAP - Riverside County to Orange County Perris Valley Line Extension to Temecula SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY San Bernardino Mountain-Valley Railway System between San Bernardino/Highland and Big Bear Lake VENTURA COUNTY Santa Paula Branch Line VARIOUS COUNTIES Cordon Pricing Demonstration Projects (locations to be determined) California High-Speed Train System Phase 2 California/Nevada Super-Speed Train Anaheim to Las Vegas Expanded Express Lane Network (beyond Constrained Plan) Long-Term Goods Movement Emission-Reduction Strategies for Rail and Trucks Mileage-Based User Fee Demonstration Projects and Implementation Strategy Additional Metrolink and LOSSAN Improvements (beyond financially constrained plan) XpressWest High-Speed Rail Between Palmdale-Victorville-Las Vegas 17909 LOOKING AHEAD That would result in a trip between Victorville and Las Vegas lasting only 80 minutes. XpressWest has secured federal environmental Records of Decision and authorization to construct and operate. In November 2015, XpressWest was awarded the franchise to construct and operate high-speed rail service within Nevada between Southern California and Las Vegas by the Nevada High Speed Rail Authority. SOUTHWEST HIGH-SPEED RAIL In September 2014, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) released the Southwest Multi-State Rail Planning Study. This study analyzed candidate high-speed rail corridors in several southwest states. California, Nevada and Arizona are included as the “primary” area and New Mexico, Utah and Colorado are included as the “extended” area. The study includes: 1. “Core Express” with top speeds greater than 125 mph 2. “Regional” with top speeds of 90 mph to 125 mph 3. “Emerging/Feeder” with top speeds up to 90 mph The California High-Speed Train and XpressWest corridors were identified as Core Express corridors in the study. The study also recommended a particular emphasis on the Phoenix to Southern California corridor as a future high-speed rail market to be studied. EXPANDING OUR REGION’S COMMUTER RAIL SYSTEM METROLINK AND PACIFIC SURFLINER Both the Amtrak Pacific Surfliner and Metrolink are forecast to significantly increase their ridership and number of daily trains through 2040. The Constrained Plan of this 2016 RTP/SCS includes funding the first $1 billion of the Southern California High-Speed Rail Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). However, this $1 billion investment only funds the top 12 projects on the project list, which contains 74 projects totaling $4 billion. Metrolink recently completed its long-range Strategic Assessment in 2016 and it forecasts growth in the number of daily trains from 165 current weekday trains today to 240 weekday trains by 2025. In addition, the 2012 Los Angeles–San Diego–San Luis Obispo Rail Corridor (LOSSAN) Strategic Implementation Plan (SIP) forecasts up to 310 weekday Metrolink trains by 2040. For the Amtrak Pacific Surfliner, the SIP forecasts up to 18 daily round trips between downtown Los Angeles and San Diego, and additional round trips between downtown Los Angeles and Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo. Additionally, the SIP includes: z New East Ventura to Santa Barbara commuter service with four round trips per day z New Los Angeles to San Diego commuter service with five round trips per day (operations split between Metrolink and Coaster) z New express service with four round trips per day (operations split between Metrolink and the Pacific Surfliner) z New Metrolink service to San Jacinto with eight round trips per day Today, the average speed for Metrolink is about 37 mph, and the average speed for the Pacific Surfliner is 46 mph. Average speeds vary by line, and while top speeds are 79 mph (and a segment of 90 mph through Camp Pendleton), predominant one-track operations in our region greatly reduce the average system speed. Even if all 74 of the MOU projects are built, our region will still have large portions of its rail network constrained by one-track operations. This reinforces the need to fund capital projects in order to speed up service and make passenger rail more attractive to the commuter who drives alone. SCAG’s Strategic Plan vision for speed and service improvements to Metrolink and Pacific Surfliner calls for an intensive investment in capital projects to further increase speed and service levels over and above the Constrained Plan. The Strategic Plan results in even more segments of the network operating at speeds of 110 mph or more. These projects include additional double tracking, sidings, station improvements, grade separations and grade crossings. Not only will this benefit commuter rail trips in our region, it will benefit Amtrak intercity and California High-Speed Train interregional trips also, as the three systems feed and complement one another. While these rail networks serve three distinct travel markets, improving all three will encourage people to consider and use all three in their travel decisions, rather than be limited to any single mode of transportation. In addition to capital improvements, our strategic vision calls for considerably more express trips, regular special event services, and implementation of new Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) services that directly connect with Metrolink and the Pacific Surfliner. 180 2016 RTP/SCS EXPANDED BIKE SHARE Bike Share, an innovative program in which people can share bicycles, can be expanded beyond the 880 stations regionwide that are envisioned in the Constrained Plan. Because it is such a new service, more local jurisdictions may wish to deploy bike share facilities where they can. This Strategic Plan anticipates an additional 1,084 stations regionwide, should funding become available. FIRST/LAST MILE The first/last mile challenge, which deters many people from using transit, can be alleviated as more than 200 high quality transit stations identified in the Strategic Plan Project List increases to nearly 700 stations as urban areas become more developed and more bus routes offer people higher quality transit choices. LIVABLE CORRIDORS Pedestrian travel will also increase substantially as a consequence of higher density development. New treatments installed as part of routine roadway maintenance, such as bulb-outs, sanctuary islands and innovative midblock crossing signals such as the high-intensity activated crosswalk beacon (commonly referred to as “HAWK”) will increase pedestrian safety. These treatments will expand livable corridors by 93 percent beyond the 16 areas in the Constrained Plan into new areas focusing on transit growth and new “village” development along new corridors. Funding for some of these treatments will come during the development process, through focused developer fees, or by pursuing other innovative funding strategies. Meanwhile, bicycle treatments such as bike racks and long-term secure bike parking will increase the convenience of biking. NEIGHBORHOOD MOBILITY AREAS Utilizing Complete Streets principles and applying them aggressively in the planning and implementation of neighborhood roadway improvements will increase mobility further. Traffic calming, combined with land use changes, will provide more opportunities for bicycling and walking in less urban settings such as local “village areas” with sidewalk café seating and local farmers markets. Connections to these villages will be promoted by strategies that tackle the first/ last mile challenge that transit faces. Bicycle boulevards and other lower-speed streets that give bicycles priority have been shown to be effective at calming traffic, while increasing safety and bicyclist connectivity. This Strategic Plan sees local governments increasing the use of Complete Streets principles in their roadway improvements, expanding these areas beyond what is in the EXPANDING ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION There is great potential for walking, biking and other forms of active transportation to expand beyond what is proposed in this 2016 RTP/SCS. Policies designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will continue to highlight active transportation as a key step toward a more sustainable region. As transit service expands and a wider range of shared-mobility options become available, active transportation will serve regional mobility, ensuring that people can quickly, easily and safely transfer from one mode of transportation to the next. Active transportation also plays a critical role in helping the region to realize its vision for how it uses land, which includes accommodating more people in vibrant, mixed-use communities and urban centers. Sidewalks and active transportation networks contribute to the attractiveness and economic vitality of mixed-use communities. They also play an important role in reducing congestion and increasing mobility. EXPANDED REGIONAL GREENWAY NETWORK New active transportation plans by local jurisdictions will aspire beyond what is considered in the 2016 RTP/SCS Constrained Plan, and as a result new innovative strategies will be tested and proven effective throughout our region. One expected innovation is to create greater physical separations between bicyclists and motor vehicles, particularly on higher-speed streets. Separated bikeways and Class 1 bikeways are considerably more expensive options than installing bike lanes or sharrows, but these more expensive options have been shown to increase ridership.2 The SCAG region currently has four miles of separated bikeways and these now operate on an “experimental” basis in local jurisdictions such as Long Beach and Redondo Beach. Caltrans is developing guidelines to incorporate separated bikeways into the California Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Once incorporated, local governments will be able to freely incorporate separated bikeways without incurring liability. In this Strategic Plan, SCAG assumes that our region will have about 230 miles of new separated bikeways converted from bike lanes on arterial streets. As part of the effort to develop separated bikeways, this Strategic Plan envisions greater integration of watershed planning, river rehabilitation, and access for bicyclists and pedestrians. It further envisions the use of open area drainage channels that were once creeks, and the maintenance roads next to them for walking and biking. It envisions greater coordination of rights of way under utility lines. 2 Chapter 3: Why Choose Separated Bike Lanes? (2015). In Separated Bike Lane Planning and Design Guide. Federal Highway Administration. 18109 LOOKING AHEAD increase system efficiency, improve safety, and reduce auto-related collisions and fatalities. However, realizing the potential benefits (and potential negative impacts) depends on the rate of development and the adoption of a wide range of public and private sector innovations. Although SCAG and its partners should be prepared for the widest possible range of technological advancements related to the transportation system, quantifying the benefits of certain new mobility innovations may be premature due to uncertain fluctuations in future market demand. Many of these new applications and transportation services are being discussed in the media, and there are some reservations about how long they will last. Although they may have limited applicability in many parts of our region today, there is little doubt that certain technological innovations in transportation will grow significantly during the time frame of the 2016 RTP/SCS and beyond. The population in 2040 will have an entirely different expectation of the role of technology in their everyday lives than generations past. Changing demographics and broad economic trends have led to a demand for more flexible transportation options, the expansion of the sharing economy and calls for communities where people can live, work and play within a small area. This Plan reflects the ever-expanding portfolio of new mobility innovations that advanced technologies can enable and considers their long- term, regional impacts. Currently, the clean technology industry and application developers outpace government in delivering technological innovation to the transportation sector. In light of this, SCAG continues to research the impacts of transportation innovation in terms of scale and longevity, looking at things such whether a technology or innovation will be amenable to only a small segment of the population and/or last for 10, 15 or 30 years? Or, are we at the outset of a major paradigm shift? Are tipping points just around the corner? Will the longstanding trend of the majority of trips taken by automobile persist? The 2012 RTP/SCS identified policies to support a number of best practices and technological innovations that were not fully modeled at the time, such as alternative fuel vehicles and neighborhood electric vehicles. This 2016 RTP/SCS addresses new transportation innovations that have been planned and deployed since 2012, such as neighborhood electric vehicles (NEV), car sharing, bike sharing and ridesourcing (identified by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) as Transportation Network Companies). SCAG has developed modeling assumptions and methodologies to analyze these mobility innovations and local land use regulations. Constrained Plan, increasing bikeway density and improving the quality of life for even more residents. STRATEGIC FINANCE VALUE PRICING STRATEGY Following the adoption of the 2008 RTP, SCAG initiated a comprehensive study of value pricing strategies, which has come to be known as the Express Travel Choices Study. The emerging regional value pricing strategy is structured to help the region meet its transportation demand management and air quality goals, while also providing a reliable and dedicated source of revenue. The value pricing strategy could allow users of the transportation system to know the true cost of their travel, resulting in informed decision-making and a more efficient use of the transportation system. Value pricing strategies evaluated through the Express Travel Choices Study include a regional express lane network, cordon pricing and a mileage-based user fee. Although some of these pricing concepts have been incorporated into the Constrained Plan as elements are pursued as pilot initiatives or are under construction for implementation (e.g., segments of the regional express lane network), these strategies still face a number of significant hurdles before their full benefits can be realized. A second phase of the Express Travel Choices Study, initiated after the adoption of the 2012 RTP/ SCS and ongoing, continues to establish an implementation plan for the regional value pricing strategy. As we discussed in Chapter 6, SCAG will also continue to participate in state and national efforts to address the long-term transition of excise fuel taxes to mileage-based user fees. OUR REGION BEYOND 2040 TECHNOLOGY AND NEW MOBILITY INNOVATIONS BEYOND 2040 Technological innovations have the potential to make existing transportation choices more widely available and easier to use throughout the region. By providing more options for local and regional trips, technological innovations have the potential to shift travel to less environmentally damaging modes, lessen the negative environmental impacts associated with current vehicle use, 182 2016 RTP/SCS In addition to the new mobility innovations mentioned above, the region can expect to see significant growth in the deployment and use of automated vehicles. By some estimates, automation features being introduced within the next five years could be available in up to 70 percent of the vehicles on the road in 2040. The following are some examples of automated driving features that need to be considered and supported. There are a wide range of demonstration projects that could be pursued by SCAG and its partners, in collaboration with private sector organizations with increased federal, state and local funding: z Jam-Assist and Advanced Collision Avoidance: Combining advanced collision detection and avoidance technology currently in development, vehicles will operate “hands-off” and “feet-off” on highways. These features could also improve operation in low-speed environments. Equipping transit vehicles with jam assist could dramatically improve vehicle throughput in congested transit-only corridors, or in Bus Rapid Transit systems. z Semi-Automated Mode Vehicles: Vehicles will operate without driver input under certain limited conditions, while requiring driver input for most portions of the trip. This is the current state of technology with the Google car. However, safety and traffic benefits will begin to spread throughout the roadway network as this technology advances. Vehicles will be able to operate without driver input, although the driver will need to monitor the vehicle’s operation. These features could be available in both consumer and commercial vehicles as early as 2018–2020 and could represent a sizable minority of the fleet mix as early as 2030–2035. z Fully Automated Mode Vehicles: Vehicles will operate without driver input in certain conditions, requiring driver input for other portions of the trip. Most researchers agree that this will be the mid-term state of vehicle automation. In highway driving conditions, drivers will turn over full control of the vehicle and vehicle systems will communicate with one another. Vehicles will be able to form “platoons” in order to operate at closer distances (less than 1.8 seconds apart in one Japanese study) in order to improve fuel consumption and traffic flows. Freight industry representatives are interested in whether the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) will waive driver work hour limits for following vehicles under platooning conditions. In low-speed conditions, “platooning” could improve transit bus operations and automation could improve bus/curb alignment. To some researchers, this could facilitate a new business model of mobility—as a service similar to the way cellphone plans are priced, especially in dense urban areas. z Fully Automated Vehicles: Vehicles will operate without driver input, but will still require a driver to monitor the vehicle. The vehicle will navigate trips from beginning to end and possibly self-park within low-speed environments. This technology could potentially be available as early as 2025–2030, but it will not be used in a significant share of vehicles until 2035–2040. z Fully Autonomous Vehicles: Passenger vehicles will operate with or without drivers, resulting in radical changes to urban form. Cars will park themselves, attend to maintenance and refueling, or alter ownership patterns so that they stay in constant circulation. Driverless taxi, freight and transit vehicles could have a dramatic impact on various professional driving careers. ADDRESSING SUSTAINABILITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS BEYOND 2040 In addition to Governor Brown’s Executive Order discussed earlier, a number of policy trends are converging that will continue to push the state and region toward increasing de-carbonization of the transportation and energy sectors. Over the past 20 years, the international community has outlined a goal of limiting global warming to two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. In the context of California, these trends include advancing beyond the Governor’s Executive Order goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 100 percent later in the century. This could be accomplished in stages through various market and regulatory tools such as the Cap-and-Trade program and updates to the Assembly Bill 32 Scoping Plan. Electrification of the transportation sector over the next few decades is likely to be one outcome of these trends. The California Energy Commission (CEC) is also developing net zero energy building policies. Caltrans has prepared a new state transportation plan to significantly reduce vehicle miles traveled. Through the Senate Bill 375 target setting process, ARB will likely propose higher greenhouse gas reduction targets for metropolitan planning organizations through the continued integration of transportation and land use planning. Finally, Cap- and-Trade Triennial Investment Plans will continue to be updated to fund the implementation of greenhouse reduction goals. However, the international science community is increasingly concerned that the two degrees Celsius goal is not stringent enough to avoid significant and perhaps irreversible climate damage to the planet, and serious discussions are occurring to reduce the international goal to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Whether 18309 LOOKING AHEAD or not a consensus develops to intensify the climate change goals, California policymakers recognize the incredibly significant role of local jurisdictions and regions in taking climate action. Local jurisdictions and regions should expect to face new regulations and targets to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions for many decades ahead. PREPARING THE REGION FOR RESILIENCY AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE In addition to creating a low-carbon sustainable future, the state and region will also be facing the human and infrastructure costs of adapting to climate change impacts that already are occurring. These include growing wildfire threats, sea- level rise and coastal flooding, increased mudslides and flooding, extreme heat waves and large reductions in water supplies. Our region must prepare to confront these changes, and an important objective of this Strategic Plan is to build a region that is more resilient to these and other consequences of climate change. The twin policy goals of mitigation and adaptation will dominate state, regional and local planning for energy, water and transportation for the rest of this century. New collaborative programs and partnerships between businesses, academia, community groups, residents and all levels of government will be required. Here is a simple but compelling example of how our region can become more resilient to the consequences of climate change: first/last mile strategies call for steps to make it easier for people to get to and from transit stops, such as building sidewalks and bike paths and installing places where people can lock up their bicycles near transit stations. These investments make transit more accessible while helping the region meet its goal of reducing the number of miles that people travel alone in their cars. But to make first/last mile strategies effective as our region faces more frequent days of extreme heat and intense rainstorms, they have to be refined. A more climate resilient strategy would be to design sidewalks and bike paths with native drought tolerant shade trees, as well as adding shade features at transit stations. Also, as pedestrian infrastructure is built, it should include adequate drainage and other storm water management features, to ensure access and safety during heavy rainstorms. Looking to the state for recommendations on how to mitigate and adapt to climate change is challenging because its policies are evolving. Still, they come with a sense of urgency.3 The State of California recognizes the increasingly significant role that regional planning and local actions can play in meeting the state-level goals related to climate change. SCAG will continue to help the region further develop into a hub for local and regional government innovation, leadership and collaboration. For example, SCAG funded the Green Region Initiative category of projects, as part of the Sustainability Planning Grant Program. These grants provide local governments with technical expertise so they can develop local climate action plans, energy plans, water plans, open space strategies and public health plans. Working to make our region more resilient to the inevitable consequences of continued climate change is a major priority of this Plan, and it will continue to resonate in future updates as we head toward 2040 and well beyond. CONCLUSION As our region continues to grow in the coming years, we must ensure that effective strategies are in place toward fulfilling the needs of our growing population. With the understanding that our Constrained Plan can only get us so far, additional strategies must be considered to truly address the diverse needs of everyone who uses the regional transportation network. The challenges ahead as we strive toward increased mobility, more livable and healthy communities and a more sustainable region are significant. But this Plan, the 2016 RTP/SCS, charts a course toward progress. It serves as a roadmap toward 2040 and a vision for a better future. It is a living document and it will change as circumstances change as we progress toward mid-century. Above all, our RTP/SCS is a collective and inclusive effort—one that aims for a bright future for all of us. 3 See California State Executive Order B-30-15. 2016 RTP/SCS184 GLOSSARY AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials – A nonprofit, non- partisan association representing highway and transportation departments in the 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. AB 32 Assembly Bill 32 – Signed into law on September 26, 2006, it requires that the state’s global warming emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. This reduction will be accomplished through an enforceable statewide cap on global warming emissions that will be phased in starting in 2012 in addition to other measures. In order to effectively implement the cap, AB 32 directs the California Air Resources Board (ARB) to develop appropriate regulations and establish a mandatory reporting system to track and monitor global warming emissions levels. AB 169 Assembly Bill 169 – Provides for the sixteen federally recognized tribes in the SCAG region to join the SCAG Joint Powers Authority (JPA) to participate in the Southern California Association of Governments by voting at the SCAG General Assembly. ACE Alameda Corridor East – A 35-mile corridor extending through the San Gabriel Valley between East Los Angeles and Pomona and connecting the Alameda Corridor to the transcontinental railroad network. Active Transportation A mode of transportation that includes walking, running, biking, skateboarding and other human powered forms of transportation. It can also include low-speed electrical devices such as motorized wheel chairs, Segways, electric-assist bicycles and neighborhood electric vehicles, such as golf carts. ADA Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 – Guarantees equal opportunity for individuals with disabilities in public accommodations, employment, transportation, state and local government services and telecommunications. It prescribes federal transportation requirements for transportation providers. Agricultural Lands Land designated for farming; specifically the production of crops and rearing of animals to provide food and other products. AHSC Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities – A state grant program from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund that addresses land-use, housing, transportation and land preservation projects to support infill and compact development to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. AJR 40 Assembly Joint Resolution No. 40 – Introduced on August 23, 2007, the resolution calls upon the governor to declare a state of emergency in respect to the air quality health crisis in the South Coast Air Quality Basin related to emissions of PM 2.5 and to direct steps necessary to address the emergency. ANCA Federal Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 – Establishes a national aviation noise policy that reviews airport noise and access restrictions on operations for Stage 2 and Stage 3 aircraft. Antelope Valley AQMD Antelope Valley Air Quality Management District – The air pollution control agency for the portion of Los Angeles County north of the San Gabriel Mountains. AQMP Air Quality Management Plan – Regional plan for air quality improvement in compliance with federal and state requirements. ARB Air Resources Board – State agency responsible for attaining and maintaining healthy air quality through setting and enforcing emissions standards, conducting research, monitoring air quality, providing education and outreach and overseeing/assisting local air quality districts. ARB is also responsible for implementing AB 32 and establishing regional greenhouse gas emission reduction targets for automobile and light trucks under SB 375. ATIS Advanced Traveler Information Systems – Technology used to provide travelers with information, both pre-trip and in-vehicle, so they can better utilize the transportation system. ATMS Advanced Transportation Management Systems – Technology used to improve the operations of the transportation network. ATP Active Transportation Program – Provides state funds for city and county projects that improve safety and convenience for bicycle commuters, recreational riders and safe routes to school programs. Replaces the Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA). Automated Vehicle U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has defined five increasing levels of vehicle automation at five levels: 0. No-Automation: The driver is in complete and sole control of the primary vehicle controls . 1. Function-Specific Automation: Automation at this level involves one or more specific control functions. 2. Combined Function Automation: This level involves automation of at least two primary control functions designed to work in unison to relieve the driver of control of those functions. 3. Limited Self-Driving Automation: Vehicles at this level of automation enable the driver to cede full control of all safety-critical functions under certain traffic or environmental conditions. 4. Full Self-Driving Automation: The vehicle is designed to perform all safety-critical driving functions and monitor roadway conditions for an entire trip. Autonomous Vehicle Vehicles in which operation of the vehicle occurs without direct driver input to control the steering, acceleration and braking and are designed so that the driver is not expected to constantly monitor the roadway while operating in self-driving mode. 185GLOSSARY standards is a “non-attainment” area. States must develop SIPs to explain how they will comply with the CAA. The act was amended in 1977 and again in 1990. CAFR Comprehensive Annual Financial Report – Official annual financial report that encompasses all funds and financial components associated with any given organization. Cal B/C Model California Life-Cycle Benefit/Cost Analysis Model – Developed for the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) as a tool for benefit-cost analysis of highway and transit projects. It is an Excel (spreadsheet) application structured to analyze several types of transportation improvement projects in a corridor where there already exists a highway facility or a transit service (the base case). Caltrans California Department of Transportation – State agency responsible for the design, construction, maintenance and operation of the California State Highway System, as well as that portion of the Interstate Highway System within the state’s boundaries. Cap-and-Trade A market based regulation that is designed to reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs) from multiple sources. Cap-and-Trade sets a firm limit or cap on GHGs and minimize the compliance costs of achieving California’s AB 32 goals. The cap will decline approximately 3 percent each year beginning in 2013. Trading creates incentives to reduce GHGs below allowable levels through investments in clean technologies. With a carbon market, a price on carbon is established for GHGs. Market forces spur technological innovation and investments in clean energy. Cap-and-Trade is an environmentally effective and economically efficient response to climate change. Car Share An integrated network of passenger vehicles available for short-term rental in heavily urbanized areas. Car share can take the form of return systems in which a vehicle must be returned to the parking space from which it was rented. Alternatively, it can take the form of point-to-point systems in which the car can be returned to another space, or left anywhere within a pre-determined geographic zone. Catalytic Demand Additional aviation demand that is created by companies that locate in the proximity of expanding airports with developable land around them to reduce airport ground access time and costs for their employees and clients. Catalytic demand is greatest for large hub airports, particularly international airports. CEHD Community, Economic and Human Development Committee – A SCAG committee that studies the problems, programs and other matters which pertain to the regional issues of community, economic and human development and growth. This committee reviews projects, plans and programs of regional significance for consistency and conformity with applicable regional plans. AVO Average Vehicle Occupancy – Calculated by dividing the total number of travelers by the total number of vehicles. Base Year The year 2012, used in the RTP/SCS performance analysis as a reference point for current conditions. Baseline Future scenario which includes only those projects that are existing, undergoing right- of-way acquisition or construction, come from the first year of the previous RTP or RTIP, or have completed the NEPA process. The Baseline is based upon the adopted 2015 FTIP. The Baseline functions as the “No Project” alternative used in the RTP/SCS Program EIR. BEV Battery Electric Vehicle – An electric drive vehicle powertrain that is powered by an on- board battery. A BEV is a sub-class of Plug-in Electric Vehicle. Bikeway Common term for any designated bicycle facility, such as a bike path, bike lane, bike route, sharrow, bicycle boulevard or cycle-track. Bike Share An integrated network of bicycle rental kiosks in heavily urbanized areas. The bike share network is intended to reduce short-distance driving by providing low-cost bicycle rentals at regular intervals (200 yards apart) throughout the heavily urbanized area. BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics – The principal fact-finding agency for the federal government in the broad field of labor economics and statistics. BNSF Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company. BTA Bicycle Transportation Account – Provides state funds for city and county projects that improve safety and convenience for bicycle commuters. Replaced by the California Active Transportation Program (ATP). Bus A transit mode comprised of rubber-tired passenger vehicles operating on fixed-routes and schedules over roadways. BRT Bus Rapid Transit – Bus transit service that seeks to reduce travel time through measures such as traffic signal priority, automatic vehicle location, dedicated bus lanes, limited-stop service and faster fare collection policies. CAA Clean Air Act – 1970 federal act that authorized EPA to establish air quality standards to limit levels of pollutants in the air. EPA has promulgated such standards (or NAAQS) for six criteria pollutants sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), ozone, lead and particulate matter (PM 10). All areas of the United States must maintain ambient levels of these pollutants below the ceilings established by the NAAQS; any area that does not meet these 186 2016 RTP/SCS CEQA California Environmental Quality Act – State law providing certain environmental protections that apply to all transportation projects funded with state funds. CETAP Community Environmental and Transportation Acceptability Process – Part of the Riverside County Integrated Project that is examining where to locate possible major new multimodal transportation facilities to serve the current and future transportation needs of Western Riverside County, while minimizing impacts on communities and the environment. CHSRA California High-Speed Rail Authority – Agency responsible for planning, designing, constructing and operating a state-of-the-art high-speed rail system in California. CIP Capital Improvement Program – Long-range strategic plan that identifies capital projects; provides a planning schedule and financing options. CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program – Federal program initiated by ISTEA to provide funding for surface transportation and other related projects that contribute to air quality improvements and reduce congestion. CMIA Corridor Mobility Improvement Account – These funds would be allocated by the California Transportation Commission to highly congested travel corridors in the state. Projects in this category must be a high priority; be able to start construction by 2012; improve mobility in a highly congested corridor by improving travel times and reducing vehicle hours of delay; connect the State Highway System; and improve access to jobs, housing, markets and commerce. CMP Congestion Management Program – Established by Proposition 111 in 1990, requires each county to develop and adopt a CMP that includes highway and roadway system monitoring, multimodal system performance analysis, transportation demand management program, land- use analysis program and local conformance. CNSSTC California-Nevada Super-Speed Train Commission – Public-private partnership developed to promote a high-speed link between California and Nevada. CO Carbon Monoxide – A colorless, odorless, poisonous gas formed when carbon in fuels is not burned completely. It is a byproduct of highway vehicle exhaust, which contributes about 60 percent of all CO emissions nationwide. COG Council of Governments – Under state law, a single or multi-county council created by a joint powers agreement. Complete Streets Streets designed and operated to enable safe access for all roadway users of all ages and abilities, including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit riders. Complete Streets Approach An approach to funding for planning, designing and maintaining roadways that incorporates Complete Streets implementation as the variable costs in larger road construction or rehabilitation projects. This approach can dramatically reduce the costs of Complete Streets as compared to implementation of stand-alone projects. Commuter Bus (CB) Fixed-route bus systems that are primarily connecting outlying areas with a central city through bus service that operates with at least five miles of continuous closed- door service. This service typically operates using motorcoaches (aka over-the-road buses) and usually features peak scheduling, multiple-trip tickets and multiple stops in outlying areas with limited stops in the central city. Commuter Rail (CR) A transit mode that is an electric or diesel propelled railway for urban passenger train service consisting of local short distance travel operating between a central city and adjacent suburbs. Service must be operated on a regular basis by or under contract with a transit operator for the purpose of transporting passengers within urbanized areas (UZAs), or between urbanized areas and outlying areas. Such rail service, using either locomotive hauled or self-propelled railroad passenger cars, is generally characterized by multi-trip tickets, specific station to station fares, railroad employment practices and usually only one or two stations in a central business district. Commuter Rail does not include heavy rail rapid transit, or light rail/ streetcar transit service, or intercity rail service. Congestion Management Process Systematic approach required in transportation management areas (TMAs) that provides for effective management and operation, based on a cooperatively developed and implemented metropolitan-wide strategy, of new and existing transportation facilities eligible for funding under Title 23 U.S.C. and Title 49 U.S.C., through the use of operational management strategies. Connected/ Automated Vehicles Refers to the interrelated nature of connectivity and automation in new vehicle technology. Connected vehicles are vehicles that use any of a number of different communication technologies to communicate with the driver, other cars on the road (vehicle- to-vehicle [V2V]), roadside infrastructure (vehicle-to-infrastructure [V2I]) and the “Cloud” to improved safety, user experience and collision avoidance. Constant Dollars Dollars expended/received in a specific year adjusted for inflation/deflation relative to another time period. Corridor In planning, a broad geographical band that follows a general directional flow or connects major sources of trips. It may contain a number of streets and highways, as well as transit lines and routes. CSMP Corridor System Management Plans. 187GLOSSARY EIS Environmental Impact Statement (federal) – National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirement for assessing the environmental impacts of federal actions that may have a significant impact on the human environment. EMFAC Emission Factor – Model that estimates on-road motor vehicle emission rates for current year as well as backcasted and forecasted inventories. Enabling Technology This term refers to a technological innovation which lays the foundation or creates a platform that allows a separate unrelated technology to achieve commercialization. For example, car share and bike share systems have been under development since the early 1970s. However the explosion of smart phone usage and the convergence of mobile banking and GPS location services have made these systems viable for a larger portion of the population. Environmental Justice (EJ) The concept of Environmental Justice is about equal and fair access to a healthy environment, with the goal of protecting minority and low-income communities from incurring disproportionate negative environmental impacts. EPA Environmental Protection Agency – Federal agency established to develop and enforce regulations that implement environmental laws enacted by Congress to protect human health and safeguard the natural environment. Executive Order B-30-15 Executive Order signed by Governor Brown on April 29, 2015, which establishes a California Greenhouse Gas (GHG) reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Express Lane An HOV lane that single-occupant drivers can pay to drive in, also referred to as “High Occupancy Toll Lanes.” EWFC An east-west segment of the Regional Clean Freight Corridor System that connects I-710 to the west and I-15 to the east. EV Electric Vehicle – A vehicle fully or partially powered by an electric engine. Synonymous with Plug-In Electric Vehicle (PEV). EV Charging Station A location where a vehicle can be parked and the electric storage or battery can be recharged. EV Charging Stations can be private or publicly accessible and can be free to the user or used for a fee. EV Charging Stations are configured in three different levels defined by the amount of electricity that can be transmitted to the vehicle. Level 1 provides energy through a 120 Volt AC Plug comparable to a household product. Based on the battery type and vehicle, AC Level 1 charging adds about 2 to 5 miles of range to a PEV per hour of charging time. Level 2 equipment offers charging through 208 or 240 V AC electrical connection comparable to a household appliance such as a washing machine. AC Level 2 adds about 10 to 20 miles of range CTC California Transportation Commission – Eleven voting members and two non-voting ex- officio members. Nine of the members are appointed by the Governor, one is appointed by the Senate Rules Committee and one is appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly, to oversee and administer state and federal transportation funds and provide oversight on project delivery. CTIPS California Transportation Improvement Program System – A project programming database system used to efficiently and effectively develop and manage various transportation programming documents as required under state and federal law. CTP California Transportation Plan – A statewide, long-range transportation policy plan that provides for the movement of people, goods, services and information. The CTP offers a blueprint to guide future transportation decisions and investments that will ensure California’s ability to compete globally, provide safe and effective mobility for all persons, better link transportation and land-use decisions, improve air quality and reduce petroleum energy consumption. CVO Commercial Vehicle Operations – Management of commercial vehicle activities through ITS. Deficiency Plan Set of provisions contained in a Congestion Management Plan to address congestion when unacceptable levels of congestion occur. Projects implemented through the Deficiency Plan must, by statute, have both mobility and air quality benefits. Demand Response A transit mode comprised of automobiles, vans, or small buses operating in response to calls from passengers or their agents to the transit operator, who then dispatches a vehicle to pick up the passengers and transport them to their destinations. A demand response (DR) operation is characterized by vehicles that do not operate over a fixed route or on a fixed schedule except on a temporary basis. Displacement The process that occurs when the increasing property values brought about through gentrification drive out the existing residents and business operators and attract a new and different demographic population to an area. Lower income residents may also become unable to access housing in certain areas due to increasing housing prices. Please also see Gentrification. DTIM Direct Travel Impact Model – A vehicle emissions forecasting model. EDF Environmental Defense Fund – A national non-profit organization that seeks to protect the environmental rights of all people, including future generations. EIR Environmental Impact Report – An informational document, required under CEQA, which will inform public agency decision-makers and the public generally of the significant environmental effects of a project, possible ways to minimize significant effects and reasonable alternatives to the project. 188 2016 RTP/SCS per hour of charging time. Direct-current (DC) fast charging equipment, or Level 3 (typically 208/480 V AC three-phase input), enables rapid charging along heavy traffic corridors and can add 50 to 70 miles of range in about 20 minutes. FAA Federal Aviation Administration – Federal agency responsible for issuing and enforcing safety regulations and minimum standards, managing air space and air traffic and building and maintaining air navigation facilities. FAST Act Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (H.R. 22) – Signed into law by President Obama on December 4, 2016. Funding surface transportation programs at over $305 billion for five years through 2020. FCV Fuel Cell Vehicle – Electric vehicles that are powered by hydrogen fuel cells. FHWA Federal Highway Administration – Federal agency responsible for administering the Federal-Aid Highway Program, which provides federal financial assistance to the states to construct and improve the National Highway System, urban and rural roads and bridges. Financially Constrained Expenditures are said to be financially constrained if they are within limits of anticipated revenues. First Mile/Last Mile Strategies designed to increase transit usage by making it more convenient and safe to walk or bike to transit stations. Includes such strategies as wayfinding, bikeways, sidewalk repair and bike share. FRA Federal Railroad Administration – Federal agency created to promulgate and enforce rail safety regulations, administer railroad assistance programs, conduct research and development in support of improved railroad safety and national rail transportation policy and consolidate government support of rail transportation activities. FTA Federal Transit Administration – The federal agency responsible for administering federal transit funds and assisting in the planning and establishment of areawide urban mass transportation systems. As opposed to FHWA funding, most FTA funds are allocated directly to local agencies, rather than to Caltrans. FTIP Federal Transportation Improvement Program – A six-year comprehensive listing of transportation projects proposed for federal funding, that require a federal action, or are regionally significant and are within the planning area of an MPO. The last two years are for informational purposes only. FTZ Foreign Trade Zones. FY Fiscal Year – The twelve-month period on which the budget is planned. The state fiscal year begins July 1 and ends June 30 of the following year. The federal fiscal year begins October 1 and ends September 30 of the following year. GAO Government Accountability Office – Congressional agency responsible for examining matters related to the receipt and payment of public funds. Gentrification While holding many definitions, is commonly understood as a change process in historically low-wealth communities that results in rising real estate values coupled with shifts in the economic, social and cultural demographics and feel of the communities. Please also see Displacement. GHG Greenhouse Gases – Components of the atmosphere that contribute to the greenhouse effect. The principal greenhouse gases that enter the atmosphere because of human activities are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and fluorinated gases. GGRF Greenhouse Gas Reduction Funds are administered by state and local agencies for a variety of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions programs, including energy efficiency, public transit, low-carbon transportation and affordable housing. GIS Geographic Information System – Powerful mapping software that links information about where things are with information about what things are like. GIS allows users to examine relationships between features distributed unevenly over space, seeking patterns that may not be apparent without using advanced techniques of query, selection, analysis and display. GNP Gross National Product – An estimate of the total value of goods and services produced in any specified country in a given year. GNP can be measured as a total amount or an amount per capita. Grade Crossing A crossing or intersection of highways, railroad tracks, other guideways, or pedestrian walks, or combinations of these at the same level or grade. Greenfield Also known as “raw land,” land that is privately owned, lacks urban services, has not been previously developed and is located at the fringe of existing urban areas. GRP Gross Regional Product. HCP Habitat Conservation Plan – Established under Section 10 of the federal Endangered Species Act to allow development to proceed while protecting endangered species. A federal Habitat Conservation Plan is typically accompanied by a state Natural Communities Conservation Plan or NCCP. 189GLOSSARY HSIPR High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program – A Federal Railroad Administration program created to invest in new high-speed rail corridors and existing rail corridors to improve speed and service. HST High-Speed Train – Intercity passenger rail service that is reasonably expected to reach speeds of at least 110 mile per hour. HUD U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development – Federal agency charged with increasing homeownership, supporting community development and increasing access to affordable housing free from discrimination. ICAPCD Imperial County Air Pollution Control District – Local air pollution control agency mandated by state and federal regulations to implement and enforce air pollution rules and regulations. ICE Internal Combustion Engine – Refers traditional vehicle engines that are powered by the burning of fuel sources, including gasoline, diesel and natural gas. ICTC Imperial County Transportation Commission – Agency responsible for planning and funding countywide transportation improvements and administering the county’s transportation sales tax revenues. ICTF Intermodal Container Transfer Facility – a near-dock intermodal rail facility owned and operated by Union Pacific Rail Road, adjacent to the SPB ports. IGR Intergovernmental Review Process – The review of documents by several governmental agencies to ensure consistency of regionally significant local plans, projects and programs with SCAG’s adopted regional plans. Infrastructure The basic facilities, equipment, services and installations needed for the growth and functioning of a community. IOS Initial Operating Segment. ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act – Signed into federal law on December 18, 1991, it provided authorization for highways, highway safety and mass transportation for FYs 1991−1997 and served as the legislative vehicle for defining federal surface transportation policy. ITIP Interregional Transportation Improvement Program – The portion of the STIP that includes projects selected by Caltrans (25 percent of STIP funds). HDT Heavy-Duty Truck – Truck with a gross vehicle weight of 8,500 pounds or more. Heavy Rail A transit mode that is an electric railway with the capacity for a heavy volume of traffic. It is characterized by high speed and rapid acceleration passenger rail cars operating singly or in multi-car trains on fixed rails, separate rights-of-way (ROW) from which all other vehicular and foot traffic are excluded, sophisticated signaling and raised platform loading. HiAP Health in All Policies – HiAP is a collaborative strategy that aims to improve public health outcomes by including health considerations in the decision-making process across sectors and policy areas. HiAP addresses the social determinants of health by encouraging transportation practitioners to work with nontraditional partners who have expertise related to public health outcomes, such as city and county public health departments. HQTA High-Quality Transit Areas – Generally a walkable transit village or corridor, consistent with the adopted RTP/SCS and is within one half-mile of a well-serviced transit stop or a transit corridor with 15-minute or less service frequency during peak commute hours. The definition that SCAG has been using for the HQTA is based on the language in SB 375 which defines: Major Transit Stop A site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods (CA Public Resource Code Section 21064.3). HQTC High-Quality Transit Corridor – A corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours. HICOMP Highway Congestion Monitoring Program (Caltrans) – A report that measures the congestion that occurs on urban area highways in California. Home-Based Work Trips Trips that go between home and work, either directly or with an intermediate stop. Home-based work trips include telecommuting, working at home and non- motorized transportation work trips. HOT Lane High-Occupancy Toll Lane – An HOV lane that single-occupant drivers can pay to drive in, also referred to as “Express Lanes.” HOV Lane High-Occupancy Vehicle Lane – A lane restricted to vehicles with two (and in some cases three) or more occupants to encourage carpooling. Vehicles include automobiles, vans, buses and taxis. HPMS Highway Performance Monitoring System – A federally mandated program designed by FHWA to assess the performance of the nation’s highway system. 190 2016 RTP/SCS ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems – Systems that use modern detection, communications and computing technology to collect data on system operations and performance, communicate that information to system managers and users and use that information to manage and adjust the transportation system to respond to changing operating conditions, congestion, or accidents. ITS technology can be applied to arterials, highways, transit, trucks and private vehicles. ITS include Advanced Traveler Information Systems (ATIS), Advanced Public Transit Systems (APTS), Advanced Traffic Management Systems (ATMS), Advanced Vehicle Control Systems (AVCS) and Commercial Vehicle Operations (CVO). JPA Joint Powers Authority – Two or more agencies that enter into a cooperative agreement to jointly wield powers that are common to them. JPAs are a vehicle for the cooperative use of existing governmental powers to finance and provide infrastructure and/or services in a cost-efficient manner. LACMTA Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, also referred to as “Metro” – Agency responsible for planning and funding countywide transportation improvements, administering the county’s transportation sales tax revenues and operating bus and rail transit service. LAWA or LAX Los Angeles World Airports – Aviation authority of the City of Los Angeles. LAWA owns and operates Los Angeles International (LAX), Ontario International, Van Nuys and Palmdale Airports. LCV Longer-Combination Vehicles − Includes tractor-trailer combinations with two or more trailers that weigh more than 80,000 pounds. LEM Location Efficient Mortgage – Allows people to qualify for larger loan amounts if they choose a home in a densely populated community that is well served by public transit and where destinations are located close together so that they can also walk and bike instead of driving everywhere. LRT Light Rail Transit – A mode of transit that operates on steel rails and obtains its power from overhead electrical wires. LRT may operate in single or multiple cars on separate rights-of-way or in mixed traffic. Livable Communities Any location in which people choose may be viewed as “livable.” However, communities that contain a healthy mix of homes, shops, workplaces, schools, parks and civic institutions coupled with a variety of transportation choices, give residents greater access to life’s daily essentials and offer higher quality of life to a wider range of residents. In 2009, the U.S. DOT, EPA and HUD established the following 6 Principles of Livability: 1. Provide more transportation choices 2. Expand location- and energy-efficient housing choices 3. Improve economic competitiveness of neighborhoods 4. Target federal funding toward existing communities 5. Align federal policies and funding 6. Enhance the unique characteristics of all communities Livable Corridors Arterial roadways where local jurisdictions may plan for a combination of the following elements: high-quality bus frequency; higher density residential and employment at key intersections; and increased active transportation through dedicated bikeways. Most, but not all Livable Corridors would be located within HQTAs. Livable Corridor land-use strategies include development of mixed use retail centers at key nodes along corridors, increasing neighborhood- oriented retail at more intersections, applying a “Complete Streets” approach to roadway improvements and zoning that allows for the replacement of underperforming auto-oriented strip retail between nodes with higher density residential and employment. LTF Local Transportation Fund – A fund which receives TDA revenues. MAP Million Annual Passengers – Used to quantify airport activity. MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century – Signed into law by President Obama on July 6, 2012. Funding surface transportation programs at over $105 billion for fiscal years (FY) 2013 and 2014, MAP-21 was the first long-term highway authorization enacted since 2005. To allow more time for development and consideration of a long-term reauthorization of surface transportation programs, Congress has enacted short term extensions of the expiring law, MAP-21. Market Incentives Measures designed to encourage certain actions or behaviors. These include inducements for the use of carpools, buses and other HOVs in place of single-occupant automobile travel. Examples include HOV lanes, preferential parking and financial incentives. MCGMAP Multi-County Goods Movement Action Plan MDAB Mojave Desert Air Basin – Area defined by state law as comprising the desert portions of Los Angeles, Kern, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties. MDAQMD Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District – Local air agency mandated by state and federal regulations to implement and enforce air pollution rules and regulations; encompasses the desert portion of San Bernardino County from the summit of the Cajon Pass north to the Inyo County line, as well as the Palo Verde Valley portion of Riverside County. Measure A Revenues generated from Riverside County’s local half-cent sales tax. Measure D Revenues generated from Imperial County’s local half-cent sales tax. 191GLOSSARY NEPA National Environmental Protection Act – Federal environmental law that applies to all projects funded with federal funds or requiring review by a federal agency. NGV Natural Gas Vehicle – Vehicles that are powered by internal combustion engines that burn compressed or liquid natural gas. NIMS National Incident Management System – Nationwide template that enables all government, private-sector and non-governmental organizations to work together during a domestic incident. Nominal Dollars Actual dollars expended/received in a specific year without adjustments for inflation/deflation. Non-Reportable TCM The following de minimis committed TCMs are defined in the Final 2015 FTIP Guidelines as non-reportable TCMs for the purpose of TCM timely implementation reporting: 1. Bus/shuttle/paratransit fleet expansion projects with fewer than 5 vehicles 2. Bus stop improvement projects 3. Bicycle facility less than 1 mile and pedestrian facility less than 1/4 mile 4. Intelligent transportation systems/control system computerization projects with fewer than 3 traffic signals, 5. Changeable message sign projects with fewer than 5 signs 6. Bike parking facilities, new or expansion, with nine or fewer bike lockers/slots 7. Expansion of bus station/shelter/transfer facilities with nine or fewer bike lockers/slots and 8. Rail station expansion with addition of nine or fewer bike lockers/slots. NOx Nitrogen oxides – A group of highly reactive gases, all of which contain nitrogen and oxygen in varying amounts. NOx are a major component of ozone and smog and they are one of six principal air pollutants tracked by the EPA. NMA Neighborhood Mobility Areas – Areas Neighborhood Mobility Areas with roadway networks where Complete Streets and sustainability policies support and encourage replacing single and multi-occupant automobile use with biking, walking, skateboarding and slow speed electric vehicles ( such as e-bikes, senior mobility devices and neighborhood electric vehicles.) Complete Streets strategies can include traffic calming, bicycle priority streets (bicycle boulevards) and pedestrian connectivity to increase physical activity, improve connectivity to the regional bikeway/greenway networks, local businesses and parks. NEV strategies include network identification, signage, intersection treatments and shared NEV/bike lanes to connect low speed roadway areas. NTD National Transit Database – The Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) national database for transit statistics. Measure I Revenues generated from San Bernardino County’s local half-cent sales tax. Measure M Revenues generated from Orange County’s local half-cent sales tax. Measure R Revenues generated from Los Angeles County’s local half-cent sales tax. Los Angeles County has two permanent local sales taxes (Propositions C and A) and one temporary local sales tax (Measure R). Metrolink Regional commuter rail system connecting Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura Counties and operated by SCRRA. MIS Major Investment Study – The preliminary study, including preliminary environmental documentation, for choosing alternative transportation projects for federal transportation funding. An MIS is a requirement, which is conducted cooperatively by the study sponsor and the MPO. Mixed Flow Traffic movement having autos, trucks, buses and motorcycles sharing traffic lanes. Mode A particular form of travel (e.g., walking, traveling by automobile, traveling by bus, or traveling by train). Mode Split The proportion of total person trips using various specified modes of transportation. Model A mathematical description of a real-life situation that uses data on past and present conditions to make a projection. MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization – A federally required planning body responsible for transportation planning and project selection in a region. MTS Metropolitan Transportation System – Regional network of roadways and transit corridors. Multimodal A mixture of the several modes of transportation, such as transit, highways, non-motorized, etc. NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards – Targets established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for the maximum contribution of a specific pollutant in the air. NAFTA North American Free Trade Agreement – An agreement between the governments of Canada, Mexico and the United States to eliminate barriers to trade and facilitate the cross-border movement of goods and services. NCCP Natural Communities Conservation Plan – Program under the Department of Fish and Game that uses a broad-based ecosystem approach toward planning for the protection of plants, animals and their habitats, while allowing compatible and appropriate economic activity. 192 2016 RTP/SCS O&M Operations and Maintenance – The range of activities and services provided by the transportation system and for the upkeep and preservation of the existing system. OCS Overhead Catenary System – A type of wayside power where vehicles may connect to and draw power from overhead wires. OCTA Orange County Transportation Authority – Agency responsible for planning and funding countywide transportation improvements, administering the county’s transportation sales tax revenues and operating bus transit service. OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer. OLDA Orangeline Development Authority – Joint exercise of powers authority developed by the cities located along the Orangeline corridor. OnTrac Orange-North America Trade Rail Access Corridor – Formed in April of 2000 to build and support the Orangethorpe Avenue Grade Separation and Trade Corridor project, a 5-mile- long railroad-lowering project that will completely grade separate 11 rail crossings in the cities of Placentia and Anaheim. Open Space Generally understood as any area of land or water which, for whatever reason, is not developed for urbanized uses and which therefore enhances residents’ quality of life. However, note that each county and city in California must adopt an open space element as part of its general plan. The element is a statement of local planning policies focusing on the use of unimproved land or water for 1) the preservation or managed production of natural resources, 2) outdoor recreation and 3) the promotion of public health and safety. Therefore, open space will be defined by each jurisdiction based on their own unique resources and environment. OWP Overall Work Program – SCAG develops an OWP annually, describing proposed transportation planning activities for the upcoming fiscal year, including those required by federal and state law. Parking Cash-Out Program An employer-funded program under which an employer offers to provide a cash allowance to an employee equivalent to the parking subsidy that the employer would otherwise pay to provide the employee with a parking space. Parking Subsidy The difference between the out-of-pocket amount paid by an employer on a regular basis in order to secure the availability of an employee parking space not owned by the employer and the price, if any, charged to an employee for use of that space. PMT Passenger Miles Traveled – The cumulative sum of the distances ridden by each public transportation passenger. PATH Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways – Joint venture of Caltrans which includes the University of California and other public and private academic institutions and industries. PEIR Program Environmental Impact Report – An information document that analyzes and discloses potential environmental effects of large-scale plans or programs in accordance with provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). PeMS Highway Performance Measurement System – A service provided by the University of California, Berkeley, to collect historical and real-time highway data from highways in the state of California in order to compute highway performance measures. Person Trip A trip made by a person by any mode or combination of modes for any purpose. PEV Plug-in Electric Vehicle – Refers to all vehicles that can be plugged into an external source of electricity in order to recharge an on-board battery which will provide some or all power to an electric engine. PHEV Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle – A vehicle powertrain that combines an electric engine with a traditional internal combustion engine. The two engines can operate in parallel with the electric engine operating at certain speeds, or the engines can operate sequentially, with all power being provided by the electric engine until the battery power is exhausted. PHL Pacific Harbor Line, Inc. PM 10 Particulate Matter – A mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets found in the air 10 micrometers or less in size (a micrometer is one-millionth of a meter). These coarse particles are generally emitted from sources such as vehicles traveling on unpaved roads, materials handling and crushing and grinding operations, as well as windblown dust. PM 2.5 Particulate Matter – A mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets found in the air 2.5 micrometers or less in size (a micrometer is one-millionth of a meter). These fine particles result from fuel combustion from motor vehicles, power generation and industrial facilities, as well as from residential fireplaces and wood stoves. PMD LA/Palmdale Regional Airport – Regional airport located in Palmdale. POLA Port of Los Angeles. POLB Port of Long Beach. PPP Public-Private Partnership – Contractual agreements formed between a public agency and private-sector entity that allow for greater private-sector participation in the delivery of transportation projects. 193GLOSSARY RBN Regional Bikeway Network – A system of regionally interconnected bikeways linking cities and counties in the SCAG region. RC Regional Council – Conducts the affairs of SCAG; implements the General Assembly’s policy decisions; acts upon policy recommendations from SCAG policy committees and external agencies; appoints committees to study specific problems; and amends, decreases or increases the proposed budget to be reported to the General Assembly. RCP Regional Comprehensive Plan – Developed by SCAG, the RCP is a vision of how Southern California can balance resource conservation, economic vitality and quality of life. It will serve as a blueprint to approach growth and infrastructure challenges in an integrated and comprehensive way. RCTC Riverside County Transportation Commission – Agency responsible for planning and funding countywide transportation improvements and administering the county’s transportation sales tax revenues. RGN Regional Greenway Network – A regional system of bikeways physically separate from traffic. It makes use of riverbeds and under-utilized utility corridors. It is part of the Regional Bikeway Network (RBN). RHNA Regional Housing Needs Assessment – Quantifies the need for housing within each jurisdiction of the SCAG region based on population growth projections. Communities then address this need through the process of completing the housing elements of their General Plans. Ridesourcing A generic term coined by researchers at University of California, Berkeley for the act of using a Transportation Network Company such as Lyft or Uber. The term distinguishes this mode from car sharing and from taxi use. A user is “sourcing” a ride from an online community, in exchange for a brokered payment. Riparian Area Habitats, vegetation, and ecosystems adjacent to or part of rivers and streams. Robust Flight Portfolio Providing a range of flight offerings in different haul length categories including short-haul, medium-haul, long-haul and international flights. ROG Reactive Organic Gas – Organic compounds assumed to be reactive at urban/regional scales. Those organic compounds that are regulated because they lead to ozone formation. RSTIS Regionally Significant Transportation Investment Study – Involves identifying all reasonable transportation options, their costs and their environmental impacts. RSTIS projects are generally highway or transit improvements that have a significant impact on the capacity, traffic flow, level of service, or mode share at the transportation corridor or sub-area level. PRC Peer Review Committee – An “informal” committee of technical experts usually organized and invited to review and comment on various technical issues and processes used in the planning process. Proposition 1A Passed by voters in 2006, Proposition 1A protects transportation funding for traffic congestion relief projects, safety improvements and local streets and roads. It also prohibits the state sales tax on motor vehicle fuels from being used for any purpose other than transportation improvements and authorizes loans of these funds only in the case of severe state fiscal hardship. Proposition 1B Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality and Port Security State of California – Passed in November 2006, Proposition 1B provides $19.9 billion to fund state and local transportation improvement projects to relieve congestion, improve movement of goods, improve air quality and enhance safety and security of the transportation system. Proposition A Revenues generated from Los Angeles County’s local half-cent sales tax. Los Angeles County has two permanent local sales taxes (Propositions C and A) and one temporary local sales tax (Measure R). Proposition C Revenues generated from Los Angeles County’s local half-cent sales tax. Los Angeles County has two permanent local sales taxes (Propositions C and A) and one temporary local sales tax (Measure R). PSR Project Study Report – Defines and justifies the project’s scope, cost and schedule. PSRs are prepared for state highway projects and PSR equivalents are prepared for projects not on the State Highway System. Under state law, a PSR or PSR equivalent is required for STIP programming. PTA Public Transportation Account – The major state transportation account for mass transportation purposes. Revenues include a portion of the sales tax on gasoline and diesel fuels. Public Transportation As defined in the Federal Transit Act, “Transportation by a conveyance that provides regular and continuing general or special transportation to the public, but does not include school bus, charter, or intercity bus transportation or intercity passenger rail transportation provided by the entity described in chapter 243 (Amtrak or a successor to such entity).” PUC Public Utilities Commission – Regulates privately owned telecommunications, electric, natural gas, water, railroad, rail transit and passenger transportation companies. Railroad Siding A short stretch of railroad track used to store rolling stock or enable trains on the same line to pass; also called sidetrack. 194 2016 RTP/SCS SB 535 Senate Bill 535 (Chapter 830, De León) – Established that a quarter of the proceeds from the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund must also go to projects that provide a benefit to disadvantaged communities. A minimum of 10 percent of the funds must be for projects located within those communities. The legislation gives the California Environmental Protection Agency responsibility for identifying those communities. SB 974 Senate Bill 974 – Introduced by Senator Alan Lowenthal, SB 974 would impose a $30 fee on each shipping container processed at the Ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland for congestion management and air quality improvements related to ports. SBD San Bernardino International Airport – International airport located in San Bernardino. SCAB South Coast Air Basin – Comprises the non–Antelope Valley portion of Los Angeles County, Orange County, Riverside County and the non-desert portion of San Bernardino County. SCAG Southern California Association of Governments – The metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for six counties including Imperial, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino and Ventura. SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District – The air pollution control agency for Orange County and major portions of Los Angeles, Riverside and San Bernardino Counties in Southern California. SCCAB South Central Coast Air Basin – Comprises San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Ventura Counties. SCIG Southern California International Gateway, a proposed rail near-dock facility for the BNSF adjacent to the SPB ports. SCRIFA Southern California Railroad Infrastructure Financing Authority. Scrip A form of fare payment transferrable among transportation providers, often issued by Dial- A-Ride transit service providers to be used on taxis. SDOH Social Determinants of Health – Includes the circumstances in which people are born, grow up, live, work, play and age. Economic opportunities, government policies and the built environment all play a role in shaping these circumstances and influencing public health outcomes. SED Socioeconomic Data – Population, employment and housing forecast. SFS Sustainable Freight Strategy – A new plan underway by ARB. RSTP Regional Surface Transportation Program – Established by California state statute utilizing federal Surface Transportation Program funds. Approximately 76 percent of the state’s RSTP funds must be obligated on projects located within the 11 urbanized areas of California with populations of 200,000 or more. RTMS Regional Transportation Monitoring System – Internet-based transportation monitoring system. The RTMS will be the source for real-time and historical transportation data collected from local, regional and private data sources. RTP Regional Transportation Plan – Federally required 20-year plan prepared by metropolitan planning organizations and updated every four years. Includes projections of population growth and travel demand, along with a specific list of proposed projects to be funded. RTSS Regional Transit Security Strategy – Strategy for the region with specific goals and objectives related to the prevention, detection, response and recovery of transit security issues. Rural Areas Rural locales consist of all of the areas within the SCAG region that are not within Urban Areas (please see definition). SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act A Legacy for Users – Signed into law by President Bush on August 10, 2005, it authorized the federal surface transportation programs for highways, highway safety and transit for the 5-year period of 2005–2009. SANBAG San Bernardino Associated Governments − The council of governments and transportation planning agency for San Bernardino County. SANBAG is responsible for cooperative regional planning and developing an efficient multimodal transportation system countywide. SANDAG San Diego Association of Governments. SB 45 Senate Bill 45 (Chapter 622, Statutes of 1997, Kopp) – Established the current STIP process and shifted control of decision-making from the state to the regional level. SB 375 Senate Bill 375 (Chapter 728, Steinberg) – Established to implement the state’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emission-reduction goals, as set forth by AB 32, in the sector of cars and light trucks. This mandate requires the California Air Resources Board to determine per capita GHG emission-reduction targets for each metropolitan planning organization (MPO) in the state at two points in the future—2020 and 2035. In turn, each MPO must prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) that demonstrates how the region will meet its GHG reduction target through integrated land use, housing and transportation planning. 195GLOSSARY SOV Single-Occupant Vehicle – Privately operated vehicle that contains only one driver or occupant. SOx Sulfur oxide – Any of several compounds of sulfur and oxygen, formed from burning fuels such as coal and oil. SPB Ports San Pedro Bay Ports. SRTS Safe Routes to School – Part of a nationwide/region-wide program to increase students walking or biking to school. Includes engineering, educational and enforcement activities. Funded through the State Active Transportation Program (ATP). SSAB Salton Sea Air Basin – Comprises the Coachella Valley portion of Riverside County and all of Imperial County. STA State Transit Assistance – State funding program for mass transit operations and capital projects. Current law requires that STA receive 50 percent of PTA revenues. STIP State Transportation Improvement Program – A five-year capital outlay plan that includes the cost and schedule estimates for all transportation projects funded with any amount of state funds. The STIP is approved and adopted by the CTC and is the combined result of the ITIP and the RTIP. STP Surface Transportation Program – Provides flexible funding that may be used by states and localities for projects on any federal-aid highway, bridge projects on any public road, transit capital projects and intracity and intercity bus terminals and facilities. A portion of funds reserved for rural areas may be spent on rural minor collectors. Sustainability The practice of analyzing the impact of decisions, policies, strategies and development projects on the Economy, the Environment and Social Equity (commonly referred to as the three E’s). In the 2008 Agency Strategic Plan, SCAG adopted the following definition of Sustainability as one of its core operational values: “We work with our partners and local governments to achieve a quality of life that provides resources for today’s generation while preserving an improved quality of life for future generations.” TANN Traveler Advisory News Network – Provides real-time traffic and transportation information content to communications service providers and consumer media channels both nationally and internationally. SGC The Strategic Growth Council is a state agency tasked with encouraging the development of sustainable communities. SHA State Highway Account – The major state transportation account for highway purposes. Revenues include the state excise taxes on gasoline and diesel fuel and truck weight fees. Shared Mobility Services Refers to a wide variety of new mobility services and encompasses bike share, car share, app-based transit services and ridesourcing. This term refers to the way in which these modes are offered as services brokered by a mobile application and each vehicle is shared amongst multiple users. SHOPP State Highway Operation and Protection Program – A four-year capital improvement program for rehabilitation, safety and operational improvements on state highways. SHSP Strategic Highway Safety Plan – A statewide, coordinated safety plan that provides a comprehensive framework for reducing fatalities and severe injuries to motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists on all public roads. SHSP goals and objectives are data-driven and results are measured. Actions designed to achieve the objectives are developed by hundreds of safety stakeholders from the four E’s of highway safety: engineering, education, enforcement and emergency medical services. In California, Caltrans coordinates the effort to develop the plan. SIP State Implementation Plan – State air quality plan to ensure compliance with state and federal air quality standards. In order to be eligible for federal funding, projects must demonstrate conformity with the SIP. Smart Growth Principles The following principles developed by the Smart Growth Network, a partnership of government, business and civic organizations created in 1996: 1. Mix land uses 2. Take advantage of compact building design 3. Create a range of housing opportunities and choices 4. Create walkable neighborhoods 5. Foster distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place 6. Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty and critical environmental areas 7. Strengthen and direct development towards existing communities 8. Provide a variety of transportation choices 9. Make development decisions predictable, fair and cost effective 10. Encourage community and stakeholder collaboration in development decisions Social Equity Equal opportunity in a safe and healthy environment. 196 2016 RTP/SCS TOD Transit-Oriented Development – A planning strategy that explicitly links land-use and transportation by focusing mixed housing, employment and commercial growth around bus and rail stations (usually within ½ mile). TODs can reduce the number and length of vehicle trips by encouraging more bicycle/pedestrian and transit use and can support transit investments by creating the density around stations to boost ridership. TP&D Transportation Planning and Development Account – A state transit trust fund that is the funding source for the STA program. TSP Transit Signal Priority – A set of operational improvements that use technology to facilitate the movement of transit vehicles and reduce their dwell time at traffic signals by holding green lights longer or shortening red lights. TSP may be implemented at individual intersections or across corridors or entire street systems. Objectives of TSP include improved schedule adherence and improved transit travel time efficiency while minimizing impacts to normal traffic operations. Trantrak RTIP Database Management System. TSWG Transportation Security Working Group – Advises the operating organizations on transportation safety matters associated with the transfer or shipment of hazardous materials. TUMF Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee – Ordinance enacted by the Riverside County Board of Supervisors and cities to impose a fee on new development to fund related transportation improvements. TZEV Transitional Zero Emissions Vehicles – Terminology used by the Air Resources Board (ARB) to refer to Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles, since these vehicles produce emissions when they are powered by the internal combustion engine. Union Station Los Angeles Union Station is the main railway station in Los Angeles. UPT Unlinked Passenger Trips – The number of passengers who board public transportation vehicles. Passengers are counted each time they board vehicles no matter how many vehicles they use to travel from their origin to their destination. UP Union Pacific Railroad. Urban Areas Urban Areas in the SCAG region represent densely developed territory, and encompass residential, commercial and other non-residential urban land uses where population is concentrated over 2,500 people in a given locale. TAZ Traffic Analysis Zone – Zone system used in travel demand forecasting. TC Transportation Committee – Committee used to study problems, programs and other matters which pertain to the regional issues of mobility, air quality, transportation control measures and communications. TCM Transportation Control Measure – A project or program that is designed to reduce emissions or concentrations of air pollutants from transportation sources. TCMs are referenced in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the applicable air basin and have priority for programming and implementation ahead of non-TCMs. TCWG Transportation Conformity Working Group – Forum used to support interagency coordination to help improve air quality and maintain transportation conformity. TDA Transportation Development Act – State law enacted in 1971 that provided a 0.25 percent sales tax on all retail sales in each county for transit, bicycle and pedestrian purposes. In non- urban areas, funds may be used for streets and roads under certain conditions. TDM Transportation Demand Management – Strategies that result in more efficient use of transportation resources, such as ridesharing, telecommuting, park-and-ride programs, pedestrian improvements and alternative work schedules. TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century – The predecessor to SAFETEA-LU, it was signed into federal law on June 9, 1998. TEA-21 authorized the federal surface transportation programs for highways, highway safety and transit for the six-year period of 1998−2003. TEA-21 builds upon the initiatives established in ISTEA. TEU Twenty-Foot Equivalent Unit – A measure of shipping container capacity. TIFIA Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act of 1998 – Established a new federal credit program under which the U.S. DOT may provide three forms of credit assistance—secured (direct) loans, loan guarantees and standby lines of credit—for surface transportation projects of national or regional significance. The program’s fundamental goal is to leverage federal funds by attracting substantial private and other non-federal co-investment in critical improvements to the nation’s surface transportation system. Sponsors may include state departments of transportation, transit operators, special authorities, local governments and private entities. TNC Transportation Network Companies – This is the technical term for ridesourcing companies used by the California Public Utilities Commission in order to create a new class of mobility provider distinguished from taxi companies and limousines. 197GLOSSARY VRM Vehicle Revenue Miles – The miles that a public transportation vehicle actually travels while in revenue service. Vehicle revenue miles include layover/recovery time, but exclude deadheading, operator training, vehicle maintenance testing and school bus and charter services. VHDD Vehicle Hours of Daily Delay – Hours of delay attributed to congestion for vehicles each day. VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled – On highways, a measurement of the total miles traveled by all vehicles in the area for a specified time period. It is calculated by the number of vehicles times the miles traveled in a given area or on a given highway during the time period. In transit, the number of vehicle miles operated on a given route or line or network during a specified time period. VOC Volatile Organic Compounds – Organic gases emitted from a variety of sources, including motor vehicles, chemical plants, refineries, factories, consumer and commercial products and other industrial sources. Ozone, the main component of smog, is formed from the reaction of VOCs and NOx in the presence of heat and sunlight. ZEV Zero Emissions Vehicles – Vehicles that produce no tailpipe emissions of criteria pollutants. Generally, ZEVs feature electric powertrains. Technically, ZEVs are still responsible for some greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, as the GHG content from the electricity generation must be accounted for. Urban Growth Boundary A regional boundary that seeks to contain outward urban expansion by limiting development outside of the boundary, while focusing new growth within the boundary. Urban growth boundaries lead to the preservation of natural and agricultural lands, redevelopment and infill in existing communities and optimization of existing infrastructure and transportation investments. U.S. DOT U.S. Department of Transportation – Federal agency responsible for the development of transportation policies and programs that contribute to providing fast, safe, efficient and convenient transportation at the lowest cost consistent with those and other national objectives, including the efficient use and conservation of the resources of the United States. U.S. DOT is comprised of ten operating administrations, including FHWA, FTA, FAA and FRA. Value Pricing A user fee applied during peak demand periods on congested roadways to improve the reliability and efficiency of the transportation system and provide travelers with greater choices. VCTC Ventura County Transportation Commission – Agency responsible for planning and funding countywide transportation improvements. Vehicle Hours of Delay The travel time spent on the highway due to congestion. Delay is estimated as the difference between vehicle hours traveled at a specified free-flow speed and vehicle hours traveled at a congested speed. VRH Vehicle Revenue Hours – The hours that a public transportation vehicle actually travels while in revenue service. Vehicle revenue hours include layover/recovery time, but exclude deadheading, operator training, vehicle maintenance testing and school bus and charter services. 198 2016 RTP/SCS LIST OF FIGURES/TABLES/EXHIBITS/FOCUS PAGES FIGURE 2.1 SCAG REGION SHARE OF MULTIPLE/SINGLE BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED 22 EXHIBIT 2.1 HABITAT VALUE 23 TABLE 2.1 2012 HQTA 25 EXHIBIT 2.2 2012 BASE YEAR TRANSIT NETWORK 26 EXHIBIT 2.3 EXISTING BIKEWAYS 2012 30 EXHIBIT 2.4 EXISTING REGIONAL GOODS MOVEMENT SYSTEM 32 FIGURE 2.2 MAKING OUR ROADWAYS SAFER: CALIFORNIA MILEAGE DEATH RATE (1933–2012) 36 FIGURE 3.1 CALIFORNIA POPULATION, TRAVEL AND GAS TAX REVENUE TRENDS 50 TABLE 3.1 PROPOSED 2016–2040 RTP/SCS GROWTH FORECAST 51 EXHIBIT 3.1 RISING TRUCK VOLUMES ON KEY TRUCK CORRIDORS (2012 AND 2040 BASELINE) 54 TABLE 5.1 REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT, ADOPTED 2012 76 EXHIBIT 5.1 HIGH QUALITY TRANSIT AREAS IN THE SCAG REGION FOR 2040 PLAN 77 FIGURE 5.1 SYSTEM MANAGEMENT PYRAMID 85 FIGURE 5.2 PRESERVATION AND OPERATIONS EXPENDITURES 85 TABLE 5.2 SELECTED TRANSIT CAPITAL PROJECTS 90 TABLE 5.3 MAJOR TRANSIT OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PROJECTS AND INVESTMENTS 90 EXHIBIT 5.2 2040 TRANSIT NETWORK PLANNED AND EXISTING 91 TABLE 5.4 TOP SIX MOU PROJECTS 93 EXHIBIT 5.3 REGIONAL BIKEWAY NETWORK 96 EXHIBIT 5.4 MAJOR HIGHWAY PROJECTS 100 TABLE 5.5 SAMPLE MAJOR HIGHWAY PROJECTS COMMITTED BY THE COUNTIES 102 TABLE 5.6 MAJOR HOV LANE PROJECTS 103 TABLE 5.7 REGIONAL EXPRESS LANE NETWORK 104 FIGURE 5.3 PHASES OF TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT AND DEPLOYMENT 108 FIGURE 5.4 TRUCK AND RAIL TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT AND DEPLOYMENT TIMELINE 108 FIGURE 6.1 HISTORICAL INFLATION TRENDS (ANNUAL INFLATION)129 FIGURE 6.2 GROWTH IN HIGHWAY CAPITAL COSTS (INDEX VALUE)129 FIGURE 6.3 STATUS OF THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY TRUST FUND ($ BILLIONS) 129 FIGURE 6.4 STATUS OF THE STATE HIGHWAY OPERATION AND PROTECTION PROGRAM (SHOPP) ($ BILLIONS) 129 FIGURE 6.5 CORE REVENUES (IN NOMINAL DOLLARS)132 TABLE 6.1 CORE REVENUE FORECAST FY 2016–2040 132 FIGURE 6.6 FY 2016–2040 SUMMARY OF REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES (IN NOMINAL DOLLARS) 133 TABLE 6.2 NEW REVENUE SOURCES AND INNOVATIVE FINANCING STRATEGIES 134 TABLE 6.3.1 CORE AND REASONABLY AVAILABLE REVENUE PROJECTIONS— LOCAL REVENUE SOURCES 136 TABLE 6.3.2 CORE AND REASONABLY AVAILABLE REVENUE PROJECTIONS— STATE REVENUE SOURCES 137 TABLE 6.3.3 CORE AND REASONABLY AVAILABLE REVENUE PROJECTIONS— FEDERAL REVENUE SOURCES 138 TABLE 6.3.4 CORE AND REASONABLY AVAILABLE REVENUE PROJECTIONS— INNOVATIVE FINANCING AND NEW REVENUE SOURCES 139 TABLE 6.4 FY 2016–2040 RTP/SCS REVENUES 140 TABLE 6.5 FY 2016–2040 RTP/SCS EXPENDITURES 141 TABLE 7.1 2016 RTP/SCS EMPLOYMENT IMPACT FROM CONSTRUCTION, OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE SPENDING 147 TABLE 7.2 2016 RTP/SCS JOBS FROM ENHANCED ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS, REMI ESTIMATES OF JOBS FROM NETWORK EFFICIENCY PLUS AMENITIES AND OPERATIONS 148 TABLE 8.1 2016 RTP/SCS PERFORMANCE MEASURES AND RESULTS (IN THOUSANDS OF HOURS) 156 TABLE 8.2 2016 RTP/SCS KEY BENEFITS 159 199 TABLE 8.3 TRANSIT MODE SHARE BY COUNTY 160 FIGURE 8.1 DAILY PERSON-HOURS OF DELAY BY FACILITY TYPE (IN THOUSANDS)162 FIGURE 8.2 RECURRENT AND NON-RECURRENT CONGESTION (2011)162 FIGURE 8.3 WORK TRIPS COMPLETED WITHIN 45 MINUTES 162 TABLE 8.4 2016 RTP/SCS PERFORMANCE MEASURES: ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE 167 TABLE 9.1 MAJOR STRATEGIC PLAN PROJECTS 178 FOCUS THE RTP/SCS: WHAT’S REQUIRED AND WHAT’S INCLUDED 17 FOCUS TRANSIT 24 FOCUS HOW WE GET TO WORK 29 FOCUS GOODS MOVEMENT 34 FOCUS MAP OF AIRPORTS 37 FOCUS DEMOGRAPHICS 48 FOCUS IMPORTANCE OF SYSTEM PRESERVATION 52 FOCUS PEAK DAY TRAIN VOLUME BY SEGMENT 56 FOCUS AFFORDABLE HOUSING TOOLBOX FOR LOCAL JURISDICTIONS 58 FOCUS 2016 RTP/SCS GOALS 64 FOCUS 2016 RTP/SCS GUIDING POLICIES 65 FOCUS OUR COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONS 66 FOCUS CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION PLAN 2040 67 FOCUS 2016 RTP/SCS STRATEGY: LIVABLE CORRIDORS 80 FOCUS 2016 RTP/SCS STRATEGY: NEIGHBORHOOD MOBILITY AREAS 82 FOCUS BENEFITS OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT/ TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TSM/TDM) 88 FOCUS ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION 98 FOCUS REGIONAL EXPRESS LANE NETWORK 106 FOCUS 2040 AIR PASSENGER FORECAST 110 FOCUS MULTIMODAL SYSTEM PRESERVATION & MAINTENANCE NEEDS 131 FOCUS CREATING JOBS IN THE SCAG REGION 149 FOCUS PLAN PERFORMANCE RESULTS 152 FOCUS PLAN PERFORMANCE RESULTS IN THE SCAG REGION 155 FOCUS RTP/SCS GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTIONS 165 Active Transportation Aviation & Airport Ground Access Congestion Management Demographics & Growth Forecast Economic & Job Creation Analysis Environmental Justice Goods Movement Highways & Arterials Mobility Innovations Natural & Farm Lands Passenger Rail Performance Measures Project List Public Health Public Participation & Consultation SCS Background Documentation Transit Transportation Conformity Analysis Transportation Finance Transportation Safety & Security LIST OF APPENDICES 200 2016 RTP/SCS Transportation Courtney N. Aguirre | Daniel M. Tran Aviation Ryan N. Hall Goods Movement & Transportation Finance Annie Nam, Manager | Mike Jones | Rajeev Seetharam Warren Whiteaker | Alison Linder Wilkinson | Akiko Yamagami Transit/Rail Philip Law, Manager High Speed Rail Stephen G. Fox Transit Matthew Gleason Federal Transportation Improvement Program Maria I. Lopez, Manager | John Asuncion | Agustin Barajas Stephanie Chin | Pablo Gutierrez | Mariana Peterson | Kurt Walker Interns David Christie | Jacqueline Martinez | Sheng’ao Xie ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Executive Director Hasan Ikhrata Deputy Executive Director, Administration Debbie Dillon Chief Financial Officer Basil Panas Chief Counsel/Director of Legal Services Joann Africa EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT Chief Information Officer Information Technology Catherine Kirschbaum Director of Land Use and Environmental Planning Huasha Liu Director of Strategy, Policy & Public Affairs Darin Chidsey Acting Director of Transportation Planning Naresh Amatya TRANSPORTATION PLANNING Naresh Amatya, Acting Director | Ed Rodriguez 201ACKNOWLEDGMENTS STRATEGY, POLICY & PUBLIC AFFAIRS Darin Chidsey, Director | Jane Embry Legislation Jeff Dunn | Houston Brooks Laney Regional Services Mark Butala, Manager | Linda Jones | Arnold San Miguel Joseph A. Briglio | Kevin J. Gilhooley | Tomas Oliva | Javiera Cartagena Joseph B. Cisneros Media & Public Affairs Jeff W. Liu, Manager Ludlow Brown | Diana Chamberlain Margaret de Larios | Carolyn Hart | Denise Marie Silva Office of Regional Council Support Tess Rey-Chaput, Acting Clerk of the Board | Kristen Pun Interns Eduardo Reyes | Lu Tian Agency Staff Rene Dominguez | Lon Levy | Miyuki Sena LEGAL SERVICES Joann Africa, Chief Counsel | Justine Block, Deputy Legal Counsel LAND USE & ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING Huasha Liu, Director | Cathy Alvarado Compliance & Performance Monitoring Ping Chang, Acting Manager | Anita Au | Michael F. Gainor Ma’Ayn Johnson | Rongsheng Luo | Roland H. Ok | Lijin Sun Modeling & Forecasting Guoxiong Huang, Manager | Cheryl Leising Transportation Models Hao Cheng | Hsi-Hwa Hu | Kihong Kim Mana Sangkapichai | Yang Wang Land Use Model Bayarmaa Aleksandr Data Analysis & Dissemination Sreedhar Nambisan Small Area Forecasting Sungbin Cho | Cheol Ho Lee | Sung Ho Ryu Ying Zhou Air Quality /Conformity Modeling JungA Uhm | Sung Su Yoon Sustainability Jason Greenspan, Manager Sustainability Land Use Planning Marco Anderson | Chris Tzeng Green Region/Climate Action Plans Grieg Asher Natural/Farm Lands India Brookover | Kristen Pawling Active Transportation & Special Programs Department Sarah J. Jepson, Manager | Rye D. Baerg | Alek Bartrosouf Julia Lippe-Klein | Stephen T. Patchan | Alan Thompson Research & Analysis Department Frank Wen, Manager | Javier Aguilar | Joongkoo Cho | Simon Choi Kimberly S. Clark | Derek Hung | Jung H. Seo | Tom M. Vo | Ping Wang Interns Marc Caswell | Neha Ganesh | Steven Counts Imara | JiSu Lee Sean O. Calvin | Yunsheng Luo | Andrew Matsas | Xing Ming Michael Mroczek | Olivia Offutt | Andrew Pasillas | Tuo Sun Dongwoo Yang | Siyuan Yin | Yuan Zeng | Yanlin Zhou 202 2016 RTP/SCS ADMINISTRATION Debbie Dillon, Deputy Executive Director | Tonia Reeves Jackson Finance Basil Panas, Chief Financial Officer | Richard Howard Joshua D. Margraf Carmen Summers Accounting Joan Chen, Manager | Debbie Chen | Judith Kim Jimmy J. Lim | Carol Ng Nino O. Ocampo | Marion D. Russell Anthony Taylor | Yichin Wu Budget & Grants Erika Bustamante, Manager | Karen J. Aceves Alfonso Hernandez | Fiona L. Ly | Andrew Mora Contracts Leyton Morgan, Manager | Laura Aguilar | Ted Dorjee Sandee Scott | Lori Tapp Ranjini Zucker Information Technology Catherine Kirschbaum, Chief Information Officer | Modesto Tojin IT Projects Leigh Guannu, Project Manager | Ruth Abney Hamlet Garibyan IT Application Development Alex Yu, Manager | Gurpreet Kaur Jianhong Sun IT Services David Milner, Operations Supervisor | John D. Barrett Patricia Camacho Jennifer M. Martinez | Edward Venegas Human Resources Carmen Flores, Manager | Felicia Durrah | Adriana Madrigal-Muñoz Corine Milner Interns Amanda N. Tsao | Erick D. Vasquez The information and content contained in this publication is provided without warranty of any kind, and the use of or reliance on any information or content contained herein shall be at the user’s sole risk. In no event shall SCAG be responsible or liable for any consequential, incidental or direct damages (including, but not limited to, damages for loss of profits, business interruption, or loss of programs or information) arising from or in connection with the use of or reliance on any information or content of this publication. REGIONAL OFFICES Imperial County 1405 North Imperial Avenue, Suite 1 El Centro, CA 92243 Phone: (760) 353-7800 Fax: (760) 353-1877 Orange County OCTA Building 600 South Main Street, Suite 1233 Orange, CA 92868 Phone: (714) 542-3687 Fax: (714) 560-5089 Riverside County 3403 10th Street, Suite 805 Riverside, CA 92501 Phone: (951) 784-1513 Fax: (951) 784-3925 San Bernardino County Santa Fe Depot 1170 West 3rd Street, Suite 140 San Bernardino, CA 92410 Phone: (909) 806-3556 Fax: (909) 806-3572 Ventura County 950 County Square Drive, Suite 101 Ventura, CA 93003 Phone: (805) 642-2800 Fax: (805) 642-2260 MAIN OFFICE 818 West 7th Street, 12th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 (213) 236-1800 www.scag.ca.gov please recycle 2347 2016.03.31 ADOPTED | APRIL 2016 WWW.SCAGRTPSCS.NET Public Comments Distributed to the Anaheim City Council June 9, 2020 Council Meeting Updated 4:00 P.M. – Wednesday, June 10, 2020 1 Public Comment From:buddyfitz Sent:Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:30 PM To:Public Comment Cc:mgoodman@aclusocal.org Subject:Public Comment for June 9 Meeting and Each Public Hearings Attachments:Anaheim Comments.pdf Attached is the comment for the June 9 meeting and each public hearing. Please note that you can not have a legal Public Hearing where the Public are not allow to attend and speak by phone or in person. They will not be Public Hearings if the only public comments must be made in writing prior to the Hearings. Anaheim Council Public Comments for June 912020, And Each Public Hearing Comment for Agenda Items # 32,33,34,35, & 36 VIA EMAIL TO: publiccomment@anaheim.net FROM: Home Owners Maintaining our Environment ,l|'* It is outrageous to have Pubtic Hearings without first allowing pubtic speakers the rights to there to listen to the opening hearing presentatironsr glq to their public comments. \ilithout the public allowed to speak by phone o" io person, the Public Hearings would not be legal. Having the Public Hearing Comments made in writing prior to the Anaheim council meeting is ridicules. At the start of a legitimate Public Hearingo the moving party is allowed to give argument before the Public Comments. Based on those opening arguments, if given or not, indications for comments are made if the matter is to benefit the City of Anaheim, or only to benefit the moving parties and the financial wealth* of the council members. At the beginning of a legitimate Public Hearing, each voting council member must disclosed by law to the pubtic if they had prior contact and discussions with the moving party concerning the matter of.the Public Hearing. This state law was made to alert the public of the possibilities of secret future bribes, kickbacks, or other deals being made to entice a favorable vote from a council member. When all the council members are able to state they did not meet with any of the moving parties, the public can be assured that the hearing matter should be taken as a whole to benefit the City of Anaheim. That would make taking the time to speak at a Public Hearing almost unnecessary. Therefore. Comments must be made during the Hearins. not prior in writing. Another indication of corruption is why there were five Pubtic Hearings scheduled all at once for this possible last council meeting where the public are not allowed to speak in person. These five Public Hearings should be continued to the council meeting on June 23,2020 or later, that may be open to the public. *Past Anaheim councilmembers had questionable increases in their personal wealth from serving on the Anaheim City Council. Examples are Tom Tait with his promoting the 1998 $500 million rebate of our tax money to Disneyland for California Adventureo and the current mayor in the 2012 hotel rebate deal of about $156 million for his fellow countryman, Mr. Patel.