General (09)
Susana Barrios
From:Marc Herbert <fatclaw@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, July 27, 2026 4:53 PM
To:Rudy Emami; Rafael Cobian; Cory Wilkerson; Public Comment
Subject:\[EXTERNAL\] Written Public Comments on the Draft of the City of Anaheim/Dudek
Wildfire Evacuation Study;
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.
Written Public Comments on the Draft of the City of Anaheim/Dudek Wildfire Evacuation Study;
Andrew Winger's written comments on the Draft Anaheim/Dudek Wildfire Evacuation Study were both
informative and detailed. Time and again when the public has been allowed to engage in the Planning
process they have proven to be a strong insightful resource. Anaheim should be encouraging to residents
like Andrew Winger who take the initiative to engage in the process by studying the issue at hand, and
sharing their questions on the process and data involved with the others participating in the process. His
comments deserve to be read and answered; they shouldn’t, as they have been, ignored and
pushed aside. After all, the issue is public safety
Since the last Anaheim Hills fire was in 2017, I am surprised the city hasn't yet started the infrastructure
improvements to address the problem. It has been 9 years since Anaheim received the wildfire wakeup
call from the 2017 wildfires. It has been 1 and 1/2 years since the Pacific Palisades fires in 2025. During
this time residents have heard no news from the city on infrastructure improvements. They have been
shown the Draft of a study that raises more questions than it answers. And the City Council has
approved the Festival Project which will add 447 more units to the Severe High Fire Risk area of Anaheim
Hills. That’s it.
The Anaheim Hills and the Palisades wildfires, like all wildfires, were terribly unpredictable. In each case
we saw what happens when wildfires hit an ill-prepared city. Even the best plans are difficult to
execute. To minimize damage, a city must be responsive, flexible, and adaptive.
Three recent incidents raise questions about Anaheim's responsiveness, flexibility, and adaptability:
1) 10-29-24 Council Meeting- 42:37
Bill Erickson, Anaheim Hills resident and retired engineer, spoke on the falsification of data in SALT's fire
protection study. During the Planning Commission Hearing the SALT developers stated that the 6 homes
planned for the Deer Park project were not to be built. They realized the cost of the grading wasn't worth
it.
Despite canceling their plans, the SALT developers didn't update + delete these 6 homes from their
Planning documents. Since their fire protection plans were reliant on the fire and wind breaks that these
homes provided, the developers neglected to remove them from their plans submitted to the city.
1
In addition, the sprinklers of these homes would create a wet zone. Outside this wet zone there would be
a vegetation clear zone maintained by the HomeOwners Association(HOA) of the 6 homes.
However, without the homes there would be no fire breaks. There would be no wind breaks. There would
be no wet zones. There would not be a HOA to pay for the maintenance of the vegetation free zone. And
without these 6 homes there would be fewer roads to provide additional windbreaks. SALT knew this.
Through their falsification of the records, the city didn’t know this. If resident Bill Erickson hadn’t
stepped forward and engaged in the process, like Andrew Winger is doing this time, both the city and
residents would be none the wiser.
That the planning models were knowingly based on false information came to the attention of the Mayor,
Council, Staff, and residents at the last minute. It surfaced on the night the SALT Deer Canyon
Development was up for final approval by the Council. This falsification of fire protection plans by SALT
was potentially a criminal action. Yet it wasn’t detected earlier in the multi-year Planning process. It was
missed by the Developer, the Developer's Consultants, the Developer’s Lobbyists, the Police Dept., the
Fire Dept., the Planning+Building Dept., Public Works, the Planning Commission, the City Council, and
the Mayor.
Without the efforts of resident Bill Erickson, this breakdown in the planning process and the falsification
of the city's fire protection plans would have remained unknown. Sadly, since this breakdown in the
process, it hasn't been addressed by the city. The Mayor, Council, and City Attorney have ordered no
investigations into these breakdowns in the city's fire safety plans and planning process.
2) At the April 22, 2025 City Council Meeting I submitted a 327 page report that documented the
breakdown in Anaheim's process in drafting its 6th Cycle of the Housing Element. Included were 2
items:
a) 100 pages of 220 public comments dated, timestamped, and which went back 3 years.
b) And an investigation into Anaheim's failure to convene for 3+1/2years, the monthly Housing Element
Update Committee meeting. This Committee was the means by which residents were to have access
and engage in the drafting process.
When Anaheim submitted the final draft of its 6th Cycle Housing Element to Sacramento it included 12
pages of public comments. It didn't send the 327 pages of written and spoken comments. It sent only
4% of the public comments that were submitted to the city.
Again, like in the first incident with Bill Erickson, Anaheim ignored the public's input. There was no two-
way public engagement in the Housing Element Process. As in the first example, there is a
cost. According to the California Department of Housing and Development Anaheim has a shortage of
over 8,700 affordable units.
As can be seen in the process of the city’s current wildfire study it is still stuck in its old ways. The public
is kept at arm’s length. Though public input/participation is a requirement, it has been reduced to a
check box. Rather than attempting to interact and create a meaningful back-and-forth conversation with
the public, Anaheim settles for checking a box. There was not a single public meeting held AFTER the
draft was released during the 30 day review period. There was no opportunity provided for the public to
get their questions answered, obtain clarifications, or have their suggestions considered.
2
Anaheim Residents are left with the option of just submitting their questions. Period. No answers. This
is Anaheim’s version of Public Engagement
3) Finally, there is the case of the Wyndham Hotel where apparently there was a 27 year breakdown in
their fire protection.
The 72 room Wyndham Hotel, on Katella by Disneyland, was built in 1995. In 1997, 35 of its two-
bedroom suites were divided in half in order to add 35 rooms. This brought Wyndham’s total to107
rooms. This was completed without pulling a permit or building to code. Also, they added on the first
floor, a bar, restaurant, and conference rooms totaling 6,400 sq./ft.
The illegal room conversions were discovered 27 years later (in 2024) from a State audit of Anaheim's
hotel room taxes. They weren't discovered by The Anaheim Tourism and Improvement District
board(ATID), the Fire Department, City Staff, Code Enforcement, Public Works, or the Planning and
Building Department.
a) How did the Fire Department fail to discover the extra Wyndham rooms during their fire inspections?
b) If they were discovered, did the Fire Department report their findings?
c) Were their findings documented?
d) If they were, why did the city wait to take action for 27 years?
e) Has the Fire Department or City verified the room counts at the rest of Anaheim's hotels?
f) Since the Fire Department and City had a difficult time managing the fire evacuation plan of a 77 room
hotel, how can residents trust them to design and execute a fire evacuation plan in Anaheim Hills?
In this incident, like the first 2, when unsafe and potentially criminal activity was discovered, no
investigations or prosecutions followed. Apparently accountability isn't listed in the dictionaries at City
Hall.
Sincerely,
Marc Herbert
3