Loading...
25 (099)Date:3/24/2026 1:26:46 PM From:"S R" shelly.n.robbins@gmail.com To: "Public Comment" publiccomment@anaheim.net, "Ashleigh Aitken" AAitken@anahe im.ne t, "Carlos A. Leon" CLeon@anaheim.net, "Ryan Balius" RBalius@anaheim.net, "Natalie Rubalcava" NRubalcava@anahe im.net, "Norma C. Kurtz" NKurtz@anaheim.net, "Kristen Maahs" KMaahs@anaheim.net, "Natalie Meeks" NMe e ks@anaheim.net, "City Clerk" cityclerk@anaheim.net Subject:[EXTERNAL] Supplemental Information & Impartiality Considerations Ahead of Final Vote for the Fe stival Development Proposal (DEV2023-00043) on 3-24-26 Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open attachme nts unle ss you recognize the sender and are expecting the message. Dear Mayor and Council Members, I hope this message finds you well. With the second and final vote on the Festival Development Proposal scheduled for Tuesday, March 24, I am writing to respectfully request clarification on several key issues prior to deliberation. Given the significance of this decision—and its direct impact on public safety, infrastructure, and community trust—having clear, on-the- record responses to these questions would greatly support informed public engagement and confidence in the decision-making process. Evacuation & Traffic Can the Council explain how real-world traffic conditions—not solely modeled scenarios—were incorporated into evacuation planning? What specific analysis demonstrates that existing road capacity can safely support additional evacuation demand? How were known bottlenecks and choke points evaluated under emergency conditions? What assumptions were made regarding resident evacuation behavior, and how do those reflect real-world patterns? Fire Safety & Risk Thresholds What standard is being used to define a “safe evacuation,” and how was that standard applied in this case? How does the City account for worst-case conditions, rather than average scenarios, in its safety analysis? What margin of safety exists if real-world conditions differ from projections? Transparency & Process Can the Council outline how community concerns were incorporated into the final decision-making process? Where can the public access detailed responses to the specific safety concerns that were raised? What factors were considered in this decision, and how were they prioritized? Outstanding Questions & Uncertainty Which concerns raised by residents remain unresolved at this stage? How is uncertainty being accounted for in the decision being made? Can the Council clarify where assumptions were made due to limited or incomplete data? Deliberation & Decision Integrity Can the Council describe the deliberation process that led to this point? How were repeated community concerns weighed against project approval? What conditions or findings would have warranted reconsideration of the project? Impartiality & Public Trust At a prior meeting on 1 -1 3-26, Councilmember Natalie Rubalc av a publicly indicated that her support for this project was contingent on a labor agreement. Following that meeting, an agreement was reached after coordination between project stakeholders. That sequence of events raises concerns about whether factors outside of land use, safety, and planning considerations may be influencing this decision. A detailed request has already been submitted outlining concerns regarding Councilmember [Name]’s impartiality. Based on those concerns, I respectfully request that she recuse herself from this vote to preserve the integrity of the process and maintain public trust. More broadly, this situation highlights the importance of ensuring that decisions of this magnitude are made transparently, based on complete information, and with community safety as the priority. Public Trust & Accountability How can the Council help the public understand how this decision was reached in a way that builds confide nce in the process? What steps were taken to ensure transparency around all factors influencing this decision? How can residents be assured that community safety was prioritized in the final outcome? Additional Consideration Given the volume and consistency of these concerns from residents, addressing them clearly would go a long way toward strengthening public confidence in both the outcome and the integrity of the process. I appreciate your time and consideration in reviewing these questions. Providing clarity on these points—either in advance or during the meeting— would help ensure that the final vote reflects a fully informed and transparent process. Thank you for your service to our community. Respectfully, Shelly Robbins shelly.n.robbins@gmail.com